Uncategorized
One lesson of NYC’s mayoral election: Rabbis’ political endorsements come with a cost
The Book of Exodus begins with a sudden shift in fortunes. Joseph, the Jewish leader who rose to power in Pharaoh’s court, dies. The Pharaoh who favored him dies. And then: “A new king arose who did not know Joseph.” What follows is not just a story of oppression and liberation; it’s a reminder that although values may be durable, political power is temporary. When we tie ourselves too closely to rulers rather than to enduring principles, we live at the mercy of their rise and fall.
That warning feels newly relevant. In the lead-up to the New York mayoral election, many rabbis around the country felt a powerful pull to speak publicly about the race. Following a recent IRS policy change that undermined barriers to clergy endorsements, some rabbis chose to sign open letters supporting or opposing candidates. Most did so out of a sincere sense of responsibility; after all, leaders are called to speak out when they fear their community is at risk. Many others felt torn about this kind of endorsement and wrestled with what moral leadership looks like in a moment of such political intensity.
Now that the votes have been cast and the ballots have been counted, it’s worth reflecting on what we’ve learned, and whether rabbis should embrace or avoid these kinds of endorsements in the future.
As the founder and Executive Director of A More Perfect Union, a nonpartisan organization mobilizing the Jewish community to protect and strengthen American democracy, here’s my take: Even though publicly supporting a particular candidate might feel urgent in the moment, endorsements cost us something essential. They oversimplify moral leadership. They divide communities. And they come with political pressures that erode trust and integrity.
First, endorsements flatten what should be nuanced and expansive. Rabbinic leadership involves a great deal of complexity. Rabbis wrestle with difficult questions, navigate complicated ideas, and make room for compelling arguments and competing truths in a world that is constantly changing.
It’s a tough gig.
But endorsements, by design, are binary. They elide complicated thought processes into a single, stark political statement, and erase the ability to emphasize values over individuals. No candidate is a perfect embodiment of our – or any – community’s views on all issues, and an endorsement can make it seem like a rabbi agrees with every part of a candidate’s views or platform, even if that’s not the case. As a result, rabbis can end up associated with ideas or individuals they never intended to support. When we align with individuals instead of ideals, we become vulnerable to their whims. Even if our chosen candidate is successful, they may change their minds on critical issues, or find themselves soon swept out of power. Values endure; leaders do not.
Second, endorsements divide the congregations rabbis are called to hold together. Even in an era when our communities tend to sort by ideology, synagogues are some of the last places where people who vote differently can still sit side by side – to celebrate, to mourn, to pray, and to search for meaning. Endorsing or opposing a candidate from the bimah risks turning that sacred space into one more battlefield in an already divided nation. It replaces curiosity with certainty, and leaves some feeling that their place in the community depends on how they vote. Our communities are too important, and rabbis’ responsibilities are too great, to compromise them with a single act of politics.
Third, endorsements invite political pressure and exploitation. Once clergy are seen as political actors, politicians will treat them as political assets. Synagogue donors, board members, and officeholders will begin to link support to public positioning. It’s easy to imagine a rabbi feeling pressured to publicly endorse a donor’s preferred candidate in order to secure funding for a food pantry or security needs. Whether that pressure is explicit or implicit, the potential for exploitation undermines moral leadership, casts doubt on rabbis’ motives, and makes it harder to serve the community with integrity.
Now, refusing to make endorsements doesn’t mean withdrawing from public life. Quite the opposite. Rabbis can – and must – speak to the moral dimensions of politics without becoming partisan actors. Rabbis can preach values without preaching partisanship. They can support those in need without supporting a particular campaign. They can model disagreement without division. They can create spaces for civic learning, honest dialogue, and pluralism.
Most of all, they can remind their communities through words and deeds that democracy itself is a moral achievement; one that allows us to keep talking, to keep learning, and to keep trying to get it right. They can speak up for enduring values – and not temporary pharaohs.
In the days following a hard-fought election, New York — and the rest of this country — will need voices of healing. We’ll need rabbis who can bring people back together across divides; who can remind us that belonging is bigger than partisanship and that our covenant with one another endures longer than any term in office. If we can remember that, we can reclaim something that feels radical in this polarized moment: the possibility of conversation, deliberation, and principled debate, even among those who disagree.
That, more than any endorsement, is what moral leadership looks like.
—
The post One lesson of NYC’s mayoral election: Rabbis’ political endorsements come with a cost appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Mamdani’s first statement on antisemitism as mayor-elect got some weird pushback
The morning after Zohran Mamdani won New York’s mayoral election, someone spraypainted swastikas on a Syrian Jewish yeshiva’s windows and walls.
“This is a disgusting and heartbreaking act of antisemitism, and it has no place in our beautiful city,” Mamdani wrote on X that morning. “As Mayor, I will always stand steadfast with our Jewish neighbors to root the scourge of antisemitism out of our city.”
It seemed like a perfect moment for Mamdani, whose campaign was dogged by assertions that he would be soft on antisemitism to reassure the city’s Jewish population that he will have their back — perhaps too perfect.
But immediately after Mamdani made that statement, conspirac y theories began to swirl around the graffiti alleging that it was a “false flag” — an incident that is not, in fact, carried out by the apparently responsible party. In this case, the conspiracy theory implied that the swastikas were painted by pro-Israel supporters trying to prove that Mamdani will encourage violence against Jews.
“Don’t fall for it until you find out who did it. They’re famous for these false flags,” argued one viral reply. “Anything to keep the victim spotlight on them to keep Israel’s stranglehold on the West.”
Others criticized Mamdani’s statement — for overemphasizing the gravity of the incident, and being too friendly to Jews. Some posted that Mamdani had already betrayed his voters. Others urged him to focus instead on Islamophobia.
“There’s no ‘scourge of antisemitism’ in NYC. Acts like these, while reprehensible, are often weaponized to justify Zionist narratives and repression of Palestine solidarity,” wrote Nerdeen Kiswani, the founder of pro-Palestinian activist group Within Our Lifetime. “Mamdani shouldn’t be validating this framing.”
Many people also lauded Mamdani’s statement as reassuring and necessary. But the immediate uproar over what seemed to be a very basic condemnation of Nazi imagery — a condemnation that did not name or blame any particular group for the act, whether pro-Palestinian activists, neo-Nazis or false flag attackers — encapsulates the tricky position the new mayor-elect occupies, particularly when addressing antisemitism.
Part of Mamdani’s new constituency is desperately nervous that he won’t hear them or protect them; the other is worried he will overcompensate by emphasizing Jewish concerns over their own. And judging by the conspiratorial tenor to the response, some feel emboldened to lean into their own antisemitism, even when he is speaking out against it.
But Mamdani’s statement did not rank antisemitism above — or below — other priorities. The controversy around his words calls to mind a famous post from the old days of Twitter, which is still regularly passed around in meme form. It calls the site “the only place where well-articulated sentences get misinterpreted. You can say ‘I like pancakes’ and someone will say ‘So you hate waffles?’”
The post Mamdani’s first statement on antisemitism as mayor-elect got some weird pushback appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
On the trail of a priceless dove, a group of Palestinians and Israelis find that peace is for the birds
When Yaki, a struggling Israeli musician, learns his late father’s beloved dove is worth tens of thousands of dollars, he knows he’s found the key to supporting his fledgling career. There’s just one problem: Yaki has given the dove away.
Bella, co-directed by Israeli filmmakers Jamal Khalaily and Zohar Shachar, chronicles the tumultuous road trip Yaki embarks on to retrieve the prized bird, with the assistance of his girlfriend Limor, and a Palestinian couple, Bilal and Najris. Although the conflict over the ownership of the dove occasionally feels like a heavy-handed metaphor for the struggle for peace in the region, the story balances funny and heartfelt moments.
It’s virtually impossible for a film about Israel to avoid mentioning Israeli-Palestinian relations, but at first, the tensions are only acknowledged in offhand ways. A representative of the Israeli Pigeon Fanciers’ Administration casually tells Yaki that Bilal can’t have the bird because “Arabs eat them.” But as the group encounters military checkpoints and ethnic profiling along their journey, the disparities in Israeli society become impossible to ignore.
The film refutes a popular misconception of Israeli-Palestinian relations that has not been addressed much in other media: that the dynamics can be understood as operating exactly the same as white-Black racism in America.
A narrative common among the American left is that Israeli society is white and Palestinians are brown, therefore the system of oppression can be approached using the same analytical and political tools of racial justice movements in America. But it would not be appropriate to categorize Israelis and Palestinians into the American racial framework, as both of these ethnic groups are incredibly racially diverse. There also aren’t definite phenotypical distinctions between the two groups. When Limor tells the Israeli soldiers guarding a checkpoint that Bilal and Najris are Israeli, they don’t argue with her.
The film exposes the fact that the prejudices have less to do with appearance or actions, and more with the assumptions made about specific ethnic groups.
At one point, the group has to travel to Area A of the West Bank for a wedding. A sign warns that it is illegal and dangerous for Israelis to be there, but Bilal tells the Palestinian Authority guards that Yaki and Limor are from Brussels. He brings them to the wedding where they are greeted warmly. The wedding singer even includes them in his song praising the various guests.
But when Bilal’s son Omar accidentally exposes their true identities, the mood sours, despite the fact that Yaki and Limor haven’t acted in any way that would warrant criticism. Bilal and Najris rush the couple out of the wedding for their safety, as Bilal’s brother in law berates him for “bringing Jews to the wedding.”
From what the film shows, peace among Israeli and Palestinians should seemingly be easy. Without the labels and preconceived notions, these two groups of people would be able to enjoy life together. But reality is never that simple and peace, like the dove, seems way out of reach.
Bella is having its United States debut at the Other Israel Film Festival at the Marlene Meyerson JCC on Thursday, November 13.
The post On the trail of a priceless dove, a group of Palestinians and Israelis find that peace is for the birds appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Eleven Arrested Amid Heavy UK Police Presence at Soccer Match Between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Aston Villa
Soccer Football – UEFA Europa League – Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv – Villa Park, Birmingham, Britain – Nov. 6, 2025, Aston Villa’s Ian Maatsen scores their first goal. Photo: Action Images via Reuters
British police said 11 men were arrested during protests outside Maccabi Tel Aviv’s UEFA Europa League game on Thursday night against Aston Villa in the United Kingdom, a match in which the Israeli team lost and also had its fans banned from attending.
West Midlands Police said a 63-year-old man was arrested for a racially aggravated public order offense after he was heard shouting a racist remark during a road rage incident near Villa Park, the arena where the match was taking place. A 21-year-old man was arrested for failing to comply with an order to remove a face mask, and a 17-year-old boy was arrested for failing to comply with a dispersal order.
Three other people were arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated public order offenses, including a 34-year-old and 29-year-old who both shouted abuse toward pro-Israel demonstrators. The latter was also arrested for possession of an illegal drug, and a 67-year-old was arrested for shouting racist abuse at a police officer.
A 32-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offense after shouting racist abuse toward a pro-Palestinian group. Meanwhile, a 21-year-old man was arrested after trying to throw fireworks on the ground, and another was arrested on suspicion of possession with intent to supply drugs.
West Midlands Police maintained a “high-visibility police presence” around Villa Park throughout the night, the police department said. Roughly 700 officers were dispatched to keep order outside the arena amid planned protests by pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli groups. There were also police horses, police dogs, a drone unit, roads policing unit, and protest liaison officers.
“This has definitely been one of the most contentious and controversial matches we’ve hosted for some time, but our priority, really clearly, is public safety,” said Birmingham Police Commander and Chief Superintendent Tom Joyce. “It’s about protecting the communities that live in and around Aston Villa, and reassuring those communities who are potentially affected by the match tonight.”
Aston Villa beat Maccabi Tel Aviv 2-0 in the league phase match taking place at Villa Park, which located in the city of Birmingham in central England. At the end of the match, lines of police officers made sure soccer fans leaving the stadium were separated from the anti-Israel protesters who remained outside the area and there were no confrontations, according to The Independent. Police officers also pushed back protestors outside Villa Park during the game.
Before the start of the game, hundreds attended a protest outside of Villa Park, organized by the group Palestine Solidarity Campaign, to demand Israel be excluded from all international soccer competitions. Attendees held signs with anti-Israel messages and Palestinian flags, and chanted “Free, free Palestine.” A smaller counter-protest took place in solidarity with the Israeli club and its fans, who had been banned from attending the game.
Maccabi Tel Aviv fan and Arab-Christian activist Yoseph Haddad traveled from Israel to express support for Maccabi Tel Aviv at the venue and protest the ban against the club’s supporters.
“You have a problem with us and not the fact that people cannot come to Britain and watch a football game because you have extremists here who don’t want certain people to be here? You should check yourself,” he said in a video shared on X. “We’re not in Nazi Germany. This is not the 1940s. And I promise you we will not be silent. We will be here, and show the truth of the Israeli society, and we will scream it and shout it as loud as possible. Stop the hate.”
I’m here in Birmingham outside Aston Villa’s stadium standing proudly.
Because we have nothing to be ashamed of and no reason to be afraid – it’s the terror supporters who need to hide, not us! pic.twitter.com/lzs3C6fW8l— יוסף חדאד – Yoseph Haddad (@YosephHaddad) November 6, 2025
The ban against Maccabi Tel Aviv fans was imposed by Birmingham’s Safety Advisory Group and police, which deemed the match as “high risk” and said the ban was necessary “to mitigate risks to public safety.” Government officials in Israel and the UK, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, condemned the decision. The UK government said it was taking steps to try to reverse the move, but Maccabi Tel Aviv then announced it would decline to accept any allocated tickets for its fans due to its own safety concerns.
Joyce told Sky News that “significant levels of hooliganism” among Maccabi Tel Aviv fans is the reason they were banned from Thursday’s match.
“We are simply trying to make decisions based on community safety, driven by the intelligence that was available to us and our assessment of the risk that was coming from admitting traveling fans,” Joyce said ahead of the match. “I’m aware there’s a lot of commentary around the threat to the [Maccabi] fans being the reason for the decision. To be clear, that was not the primary driver. That was a consideration. We have intelligence and information that says that there is a section of Maccabi fans, not all Maccabi fans, but a section who engage in quite significant levels of hooliganism.”
Maccabi Tel Aviv’s Chief Executive Jack Angelide criticized the “blatant falsehoods” about the club’s supporters.
“We have not been given a clear reason,” he told Sky News. “I have seen people coming up with all sorts of stories about our fans, especially in Amsterdam, where there was, what the Amsterdam authorities themselves classified as “a Jew hunt,” being portrayed as organized fighters, soldiers, etc., etc. It’s just blatant falsehoods, and people who say those things know that they’re false and shame on them.”