Uncategorized
NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther.
I first declared myself a Zionist when I was 10 years old in 1981, singing the song of Camp Young Judaea Sprout Lake, which went like this: “We are Young Judaeans, we have a story to tell. Too young for Tel Yehudah, but Zionists just as well.” Tel Yehudah was the high school age camp of Young Judaea, the year-round, non-denominational Zionist “movement” founded in 1909.
I was deeply involved in Young Judaea through my high school graduation in 1988. At the time, 40 years after the creation of the state of Israel, being a Zionist was not controversial. But Zionism as a “‘movement” felt fossilized. Its main goal had been achieved generations earlier, but we were still learning about the pre-state ‘Zionist thinkers.” The question of Jewish political autonomy in our ancient homeland had long since been settled. Some Israelis laughed at us. Israel was their country, not a movement.
Flash forward another 35 years and Zionism is very far from being a consensus ideology. We have seen anti-Zionism rise to prominence in New York City with the election of Zohran Mamdani. But it has arguably has reached its highest pitch here in my current city of Somerville, Massachusetts, where 55% of the electorate recently answered “yes” to the following non-binding ballot measure:
“Shall the Mayor of Somerville and all Somerville elected leaders be instructed to end all current city business and prohibit future city investments and contracts with companies as long as such companies engage in business that sustains Israel’s apartheid, genocide and illegal occupation of Palestine?”
This is possibly the most vociferously anti-Israel ballot measure that has been passed by any municipality in the country, making Somerville the unofficial capital of anti-Zionism. Many may criticize this as radically outside the mainstream, but the leaders of Somerville for Palestine, who spearheaded the measure, would take such criticism as a badge of honor. They call it leading on the issue.
Since my high school days, until Oct. 7, 2023, I hadn’t given much thought to Zionism. I never had a great urge to move to Israel. I lived there for a year before and after college. I turned my Jewish engagement into more of a religious enterprise than a political one. But, like many Jews, I have a wide group of friends and family there, and Oct. 7 and its aftershocks rekindled my convictions that Jews cannot rely on anyone else to secure our own safety. I am once again an active Zionist.
But, being a Zionist in Somerville is, frankly, exhausting. My post-Oct. 7 “Stand with Israel” sign was repeatedly stolen and vandalized just a few months into the war. This included a note from someone taped to the sign that ended in “Heil Hitler.”
In Somerville, there have been an ongoing parade of actions meant to isolate Israel and label it as the sole aggressor in the conflict. This included a hastily organized ceasefire resolution in January 2024 that originally did not condemn Hamas’ original attack. Following some last-minute scrambling that led to some improvements in the text, such as condemning Hamas, the measure passed 9-2.
Brian Sokol holds a sign opposing an Israel boycott ballot initiative in Somerville, Massachusetts, in 2025. (Courtesy Sokol)
In response, a group called “Shalom Somerville” was formed. This group counters the anti-Zionist narrative and actions and shares a more nuanced view of the conflict. It includes people from across the religious and political spectrum, all of whom agree on the basic idea that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. Within that framework, a large majority of the group does not support the current Israeli government or how Israel conducted the war.
Shalom Somerville has had its work cut out for it.
There has been a “standout” for Palestine outside the high school nearly every day. Throughout 2024 and 2025, many city community events have been disrupted by Palestinian activists. This includes Pride events, Disability events, film screenings, local markets, and festivals and an endless stream of graffiti. My own appointment to Somerville’s Human Rights Commission was also opposed by a letter-writing campaign on the basis of my professed Zionism. Protesters — Jewish and not — even showed up to the city’s Hanukkah celebration.
One additional key feature of local anti-Zionism is the extent to which it has divided the Jewish community itself. Somerville for Palestine has amplified the voices of Jews who agree with them. Several editorials signed by lists of self-identifying Jews have appeared in local newspapers. Local synagogues have had to struggle not to alienate either side in order to sustain their membership and some modicum of Jewish unity, with at least one issuing a formal non-statement that left frustrated people on both sides of the issue. Our sanctuaries are no longer sanctuaries.
But the biggest skirmish was the ballot measure. It was originally proposed in March 2025. The City Council meeting that voted whether the question could go directly to the ballot was attended by Somerville for Palestine activists, with their keffiyehs, signs, songs and chants. The City Council decided not to send the measure directly to ballot, but to require ballot supporters to gather the requisite number of signatures (approximately 5,800). As those opposing the ballot passed the chanting crowds while leaving the meeting, some were insulted and spat upon. The local head of the New England ADL, a Somerville resident who also spoke at the meeting, had to be escorted to her car by police officers. Thus began months of canvassing where the ballot measure was peddled in every major town square.
Meanwhile, Shalom Somerville focused on preparing for the November vote. We decided to highlight the impact of the measure on Somerville, while also noting that the measure would not have any real effect on Palestinians in Gaza. Despite our objections to the language of the measure, we did not want to be litigating the war. We wanted our local officials to “focus on Somerville,“ not Israel and Palestine. For example, we emphasized that boycotting the construction equipment giant Caterpillar would make it much harder to rebuild our schools and roads, and that boycotting HP, the supplier of laptops for our schools, would cost the schools more money and negatively affect local students and teachers.
We spent the summer organizing and raising funds. When we did start sending out mailers and creating social media ads and posts, we were called carpetbaggers. The campaign also raised several legal issues with the ballot approval process, including the lack of a 150-word pro and con discussion on the ballot itself. Lacking this, less engaged voters were more likely to see it as a simple vote for or against genocide, which the text proclaims as if this were a non-controversial, established fact. These court challenges were called anti-democratic. Both the outside influence and undemocratic charges also tapped into myths of hidden Jewish wealth and power.
The final election result should be understood as a split decision. The ballot passed, but not by a landslide. More importantly, Jake Wilson, the mayoral candidate who said he would not implement the measure, beat Willie Burnley, Jr., who pledged to enact it. This could be taken to mean that the majority of voters either were comfortable with the “statement of conscience” but not with the prospect of implementation. Or, more likely, voters simply had higher priorities in their choices for city government. Voters were focused on Somerville after all.
At left: Somerville for Palestine supporters celebrate a projected win for Question 3, a non-binding resolution imploring the Boston suburb to divest from companies that do business with Israel, Nov. 4, 2025; a still from an ad opposing the measure paid for by a local Jewish group. (Screenshot via Instagram; Screenshot via YouTube)
The ballot measure was just a beginning. The proponents will now push at every turn to implement it. And Shalom Somerville will push back. All of this, will happen regardless of events on the ground in the Middle East or issues we could be working on together in Somerville. The ceasefire currently in place made barely a ripple in the local political climate. Shalom Somerville is also exploring ways to not just react to anti-Israel efforts but to engage positively in creating spaces for dialogue and deeper understanding of Israel and Palestine.
As one of the leaders of Shalom Somerville said after the election, Jews know how to be in the minority and continue to fight for our own dignity. We have done that throughout history. We had grown unaccustomed to this need here in America, but we have tapped back into that deep, generational knowledge. As a first step, we have found each other, learned to support each other, disagreed civilly, relied on each other’s skills, built coalitions, and fought back. Like the first Young Judaeans way back in 1909, we have started a new movement.
—
The post NYC voters elected a BDS mayor. Voters in my city went much farther. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
This isn’t Mark Ruffalo’s first antisemitism controversy
Mark Ruffalo is in the spotlight after facing accusations of antisemitism for his criticism of the Ellison family — but this isn’t the first time the actor has been caught in controversy on this topic.
Last Friday, the actor connected the merger of David Ellison’s Paramount with Warner Bros. Discovery to Israel’s war with Hamas. He called Larry Ellison an “oligarch” due to his financial backing of his son David’s merger using wealth earned from his time at Oracle, which created technology used by the Israeli military. His statements immediately drew criticism, with Paramount leaders accusing Ruffalo of invoking antisemitic tropes.
Ruffalo, a four-time Academy Awards nominee best known for playing the Hulk in Marvel movies, has long been an outspoken advocate for progressive causes — including the Palestinian one.
In 2014, Ruffalo made his first public statements about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, posting criticisms of Israel’s Operation Protective Edge military operation against Hamas.
He criticized Israel for striking Gaza’s el-Wafa hospital, writing that, “Sorry, I thought blowing up Hospitals [sic] was something that all human beings could agree was off limits.”
Ruffalo also questioned the claim that Hamas used civilians as “human shields.”
“Do you honestly think these people, these fellow human beings, would use their own children as shields?” he wrote. “Use your heart.”
Around the same time, Ruffalo also disputed whether Hamas had actually kidnapped three Israeli teenagers, one of the incidents that sparked the 2014 hostilities — an incident that the terrorist group later admitted to.
Ruffalo received criticism for his posts, but stood by his perspective. “Empathizing w/ Gaza does NOT make me anti-Semitic, nor pro-Hamas or anti-Israel,” he wrote in 2014. “It makes me human.”
As clashes between Israel and Hamas sprouted up again in 2021, Ruffalo once again took to Twitter to denounce Israel, likening the situation to South Africa and calling “for sanctions to free Palestinians.”
Soon after, Ruffalo wrote another tweet apologizing for his rhetoric.
“I have reflected & wanted to apologize for posts during the recent Israel/Hamas fighting that suggested Israel is committing ‘genocide,’” he wrote. “It’s not accurate, it’s inflammatory, disrespectful & is being used to justify antisemitism here & abroad. Now is the time to avoid hyperbole.”
Following the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attack in 2023 and Israel’s military response, Ruffalo returned to pro-Palestinian activism. Less than two weeks after the attack, on Oct. 20, Ruffalo — along with more than 50 others creatives through the organization Artists for Ceasefire — sent a letter to President Joe Biden demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. At the following Academy awards, Ruffalo wore a pin from the organization.
In Sept. 2025, Ruffalo, and along with more than 5,500 others in the film industry, signed a letter pledging to boycott “Israeli film institutions” that they believed were “implicated in genocide and apartheid against the Palestinian people.”
Ruffalo has publicly aligned himself with the Boycott Divest Sanction (BDS) movement, calling to “boycott, divest, sanction and prosecute” Israel, on a podcast with Mehdi Hasan. During the same interview, he said that he has stopped talking to former friends who don’t agree with his perspective on the issue.
“I can’t talk to them anymore,” he said. “They’re either trying to convince me that the Palestinian people are all terrorists and they all deserve to die, or in the same breath will tell me that they’re actually human shields, and they deserve to die because they’re human shields.”
Now, after making statements connecting the Paramount-Discovery merger to Israeli military technology, Ruffalo has been accused of antisemitism by numerous Jewish organizations including the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Weisenthal Center.
The actor has now taken to social media to denounce the accusations of antisemitism, calling the accusation “appalling and fundamentally dishonest,” and saying that criticizing “the actions of the Israeli prime minister, a military technology contract, or the executives who supply it is not the same as criticising Jewish people.”
He added, “Everything I know about acting, activism, and humanism has been profoundly shaped by the Jewish friends, colleagues, and loved ones who have been integral and family throughout every point of my life.”
The post This isn’t Mark Ruffalo’s first antisemitism controversy appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
American synagogues are spending more than ever on security. How much is enough?
At Temple Israel in Bloomfield, Michigan, which was attacked in March by a gunman, getting ready for the High Holidays this year means more than preparing for crowds of worshippers.
The synagogue is spending millions of dollars on security upgrades, including a new gatehouse, artificial intelligence technology and physical and ballistic hardening of its building.
“There are major changes coming,” Rabbi Josh Bennett of Temple Israel said in an interview. “I think that extends then to many of the other places of worship in town, and then, by extension, the entire Jewish community around the country.”
But as congregations install barriers, hire guards and tighten access to their buildings, Jewish leaders are struggling to balance budgets and keep their synagogues welcoming.
Bennett fears fortressing the Jewish community through ever-expanding security upgrades is “unsustainable at all levels,” from the emotional to the financial.
The Secure Community Network, a Jewish security organization that provides threat intelligence and safety training to Jewish institutions across the country, told the Forward that the American Jewish community now spends between $765 million and $1 billion annually on security and safety.
CEO Michael G. Masters said that figure is dramatically higher than it was several years ago, when it was the exception, rather than the rule, for a Jewish institution to have a security plan, let alone layers of cameras, guards, and coordination with law enforcement.
The spending reflects what Mitchell Silber, CEO of the Community Security Initiative, a New York-focused Jewish counterterrorism and security organization, described as “the most complicated threat picture that the Jewish community in the United States has ever faced.”
According to the FBI, Jews were the victims of nearly two-thirds of religion-based hate crimes in the United States in 2025. And these days, Silber’s analysts are tracking threats from white supremacists and neo-Nazis, Islamist extremists and actors inspired by or connected to Iran and Hezbollah, and left-wing violence connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“That’s taking a tremendous toll just financially on our Jewish institutions,” Silber said.
The growing costs have pushed Temple Israel to lobby Congress in support of the bipartisan Jewish American Security Act, which would increase federal funding available to protect Jewish institutions. Last week, members of Congress, including the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. John James of Michigan, visited the Temple to see the security updates.
When congregants help screen for danger
But as congregations pour money into keeping potential attackers out, another question looms: At what point does protecting a synagogue begin to change the experience for those coming in?
“The more you build, there’s, I think, an inverse proportion to how safe people will actually feel when they’re coming in,” said Bennett, whose congregants have been emotionally rattled since the March attack, during which a gunman rammed a truck loaded with gasoline and fireworks into the synagogue. “Nobody wants to walk into a building where you walk by loaded semi-automatic machine guns.”
A person arriving at a synagogue for the first time could have harmful intentions. They could also be new to town, exploring Judaism, or simply looking for a place to spend Shabbat. Distinguishing between those is an important challenge.
Unlike an outside guard, a longtime congregant may know who normally attends services, which unfamiliar face is expected for a wedding or bar mitzvah, and when someone’s behavior genuinely seems out of place. That’s why organizations like SCN and the Community Security Service train community members to serve as additional protection at their own institutions.
In 2026 alone, SCN has conducted close to 1,000 in-person safety trainings, reaching roughly 25,000 people. For the High Holidays, they are offering Zoom Webinars for Jewish institutions across the country, as synagogue-goers who ordinarily recognize most people walking through their doors may suddenly welcome hundreds of unfamiliar worshippers.
Preparation was put to the test at Central Synagogue in Manhattan last Friday, when a man stormed the temple, punched a congregant, and headbutted and spat on a security guard while directing a racial slur at him.
Silber described the response as a “tactical success.”
“Their security team had drilled. Their clergy and staff had drilled. And when the moment came, within less than 60 seconds, they had this individual moved outside of the sanctuary.”
At Temple Israel, the congregation has been fundraising specifically for security. After the March attack, Bennett said, some congregants would like to see “a moat and a full army around our buildings.”
He understands the impulse. But he worries there may be no end to what a synagogue can spend in pursuit of safety.
“How do you do this with the knowledge that it’s financially unsustainable?” Bennett said. “This is not the way we should be spending dollars.”
The post American synagogues are spending more than ever on security. How much is enough? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The far right is more dangerous to Jews than the far left. A historian explains why.
When Jewish leaders speak out these days, it’s often to blast the anti-Israel actions of one Democratic Socialists of America politician or another. Given all the attention — and the millions of dollars raised within the Jewish community to help defeat these candidates — you’d think the greatest existential threat to American Jews was coming from the left.
But a new book by historian Steven Ross is here to tell you: You’d be mistaken.
“What you’ve seen seeping in on the far left is more anti-Israel and some antisemitism,” Ross told me in a phone interview. “But here’s the thing: the left has never called for death to people, the right has.”
Right-wing extremist groups have spent 80 years calling for the death and deportation of Jews and minorities — and sometimes acting upon those calls. The far left, whatever its failures on antisemitism, has not. And unlike in previous years, the far right today has found the two things it lacked: a single leader to unite behind, and a technology to reach millions.
In The Secret War Against Hate: American Resistance to Antisemitism and White Supremacy, Ross, a professor of history at University of Southern California, tracks the continuous, noxious activity of hate groups in the United States from the end of World War II to the present day — and the brave and secretive men and women who sought to thwart them.
The book reads like a great suspense novel, except, unfortunately, it’s nonfiction. And its conclusion — spoiler alert — is that the threat is only growing more dangerous.
Uncannily, in his research, Ross found that Jewish leaders predicted as much — in 1945.
Even before the Allies declared victory in Europe, leaders of the Anti-Defamation League, American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Nazi League, who had launched undercover operations to infiltrate and disrupt hate groups, had come to a disturbing conclusion. They could defeat any hate group, even the Ku Klux Klan, unless the disparate groups could one day “communicate on an instantaneous basis,” and unless the far right figured out a way to make it into one of the two mainstream political parties.
“Here we are,” Ross said. “Everything has come true.” Social media has enabled hate groups to communicate and organize at scale, and President Donald Trump’s pardon of the Jan. 6 rioters — direct ideological descendants of the postwar far right, Ross says — was but one example of the Republican flirtation with extremist and violent groups.
Descendants of the ‘Betrayed Generation’
In the early 1940s, Jewish leaders also predicted that when the war ended, antisemitism and racism would increase — despite Americans having just fought a savage battle against prejudice and fascism.
The Greatest Generation also birthed what Ross calls “the Betrayed Generation,” men and women who returned to a changed America in which liberals, Blacks and Jews were mobilizing and upwardly mobile.
“The Founding Fathers, they insisted, had created a nation based on white Christian rule and they would not allow traitors or people of color to change that,” Ross writes.
Groups like the American Nazi Party, the Columbians and the National States Rights Party warned that Jews were behind “race suicide,” plotting to replace white people with non-white immigrants. They accused Jews of being secret Communists and undermining the cause of “America First.”
“I will solve the Jewish problem once and for all,” James Madole, founder of the fascist National Renaissance Party, told a boisterous rally in Manhattan’s Yorkville neighborhood in February 1953. “I will finish the job that Hitler started.”
During this period, there were an estimated 3,114 right-wing organizations and periodicals that reached a combined membership of over 10 million Americans, says Ross.
The groups carried out a series of bombings against synagogues and Black churches that were, Ross writes, “unrelenting, unpredictable, and unnerving.”
How to fight back
J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI, which should have been tracking these groups, was far more concerned with persecuting potential communists. So the ADL, AJC and the ANL fielded undercover agents to infiltrate and disrupt these groups, often at the risk of their lives.
One of them, a 19-year-old Columbia University student named William Goring, rose to the head of the National Renaissance Party’s leadership. In a memo to his handlers, Goring described the far-right members he encountered as “the failures, the lonely,” who feel “abandoned by their government and gain a strong internal feeling of camaraderie” from the far-right parties.
“To ease their lack of self-respect they make up excuses and find scapegoats. Some fix upon the Jews, others on the Blacks,” Goring wrote.
By the 1970s, this spy network as well as internal strife had weakened these hate groups, their memberships dwindling to hundreds.
Jewish groups “thought they had won the battle against hate,” wrote Ross, and turned their attention to the causes of civil rights and Israel.
But the ideology and organizations festered and regrouped, manifesting in the anti-government militia movement, the white supremacist march in Charlottesville and the Jan. 6 riots. Between 2008 and 2016, the number of militia and anti-government groups rose to 1,400.
Media personalities with millions of followers, like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, push warnings against shadowy Jewish influence and the “great replacement theory,” the new term for “race suicide.”
The bombings that wracked Jewish communities in the postwar period have declined, Ross acknowledged. What’s replaced them is a constant stream of hate pushed into people’s social media feeds. Social media has made it harder to infiltrate and disrupt hate networks, while making it easier to constantly find new recruits.
“You don’t have to bodily harm someone,” he said. “Creating a life where they’re afraid, whether it’s Muslim, Jew, immigrant — that’s terrorism, that’s domestic terrorism.”
Meanwhile, Trump and others in his administration openly engage with Holocaust deniers and antisemites. In Florida’s Republican primary races earlier this month, two candidates, Dan Bilzerian and Jake Lang, spouted raw antisemitism. Bilzerian, who lost to a Jewish congressman, had asked his 30 million online followers if Hitler “was a good person.”
Ross, whose father survived the Warsaw Ghetto and Dachau and whose mother survived Auschwitz, said he believes the answer is better education, but that’s “long term.”
I asked him what the short-term solution is.
“Take two people to the polls,” he said. “Get two people in their young 20s who aren’t used to voting, and get them out to the polls. That will change things right now.”
Bilzerian lost badly, but he’s not going away, and neither is the ability to infect minds and harvest hate. The question isn’t whether the far right is more dangerous — Ross has answered that. It’s whether we’re paying attention.
The post The far right is more dangerous to Jews than the far left. A historian explains why. appeared first on The Forward.
