Uncategorized
Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel
(JTA) — In the lead-up to New York City’s mayoral election last month, Elliot Cosgrove emerged as one of the most outspoken rabbinic critics of Zohran Mamdani, the anti-Zionist activist who is now the mayor-elect.
On Monday, speaking to a convention of Zionists, Cosgrove turned his critique toward U.S. Jews, saying that supporters of Israel “shouldn’t be surprised” by Mamdani’s roughly 33% tally among Jewish voters.
“For a liberal Zionist disillusioned by the Israeli government, Mamdani’s anti-Zionism is a difference of degree, not of kind,” said Cosgrove, who leads Park Avenue Synagogue on the Upper East Side. “He understood the fissures of our community better than we ourselves did, and the question we face now is, what are we going to do about it?”
Speaking at the the convention of the American Zionist Movement, Cosgrove laid out a vision for a “new chapter of American Zionism,” calling for his audience to “avoid the reductive and destructive tactic of labeling people with whom we disagree either as self-hating Jews or colonialist aggressors.” He said a rigid vision of what Zionism should look like had been damaging for the Jewish people.
“By making unconditional support for the Israeli government a litmus test for Jewish identity,” Cosgrove said, “we ourselves have inflicted harm on the Jewish future.”
Cosgrove’s speech capped a two-day conference for the AZM, an umbrella organization for 51 U.S. Zionist groups that also serves as the American affiliate to the World Zionist Organization. Tensions were running high at the national assembly as Cosgrove took to the podium to call for the Zionist movement to widen its tent.
Speaking to the conference’s roughly 250 attendees in the East Village, Cosgrove lamented what he described as the increasing ideological divide between American and Israeli Jewry as a result of the war in Gaza. He criticized some Israeli policies in laying out why many in the liberal Jewish majority are feeling distanced from Israel.
“Leaving aside the role of historical revisionism and progressive identity politics, the unresolved status of the Palestinians, lacking as they are in freedom of movement and access, self determination and other accoutrements of sovereignty, forms a wedge issue between an increasingly liberal-leaning American Jewry and an increasingly right-leaning Israeli Jewry,” said Cosgrove.
During his address, Cosgrove also criticized the lack of recognition of the Conservative and Reform movements in Israel, adding that the country “neither supports, defends nor recognizes Judaism as I teach it and preach it.”
“The fact that the same government that fails to recognize American Jews also fails to recognize the Palestinian right to self determination only serves to increase American Jews’ sense of estrangement,” said Cosgrove.
The AZM Biennial National Assembly, which was titled “Zionism: Many Visions, One Dream,” brought together representatives from a wide range of U.S. Zionist groups. An hour before Cosgrove’s remarks, Israeli President Isaac Herzog also gave a talk where he lamented growing antisemitism within the United States.
In a Jewish environment shaped by the Oct. 7 attacks and the war in Gaza that followed, Jews have been buffeted by intense criticism on the left, a rise in antisemitism and internal fissures. Cosgrove both referenced and reflected these divisions, which often pit Jews offering full-throated support for Israel, its military and its government, against those like Cosgrove who are committed Zionists but expressed doubts about the conduct of the war and Israel’s political direction. Far to the left of both groups are increasingly visible Jewish anti-Zionists and younger Jews deeply disillusioned with the Jewish state, whom Cosgrove also referenced in his talk.
To address the growing divide within American Jewry over support for Israel, Cosgrove called for “heshbon hanefesh,” or a “self audit.” But the onus for “heshbon hanefesh,” Cosgrove added, “goes both ways” — and he reinforced red lines that he laid out in a October sermon against Mamdani and his Jewish supporters that spurred a rabbinic statement that drew more than 1,300 signatures.
“For such a time as this, when Israel is surrounded by enemies, Jewish critics of Israel need to be judicious in how they voice their dissent,” continued Cosgrove. “It’s one thing to attend a pro-democracy rally in a sea of Israeli flags that begins and ends with the singing of ‘Hatikvah.’ It’s another thing to stand in an encampment next to someone calling for global intifada.”
But within the broad Zionist tent, Cosgrove argued, all views should be taken seriously in the quest to build a future for Zionism while it is under attack..
“The future dream of American Zionism depends not on my vision or yours, not on the right or the left, religious or the secular,” said Cosgrove. “It’s a dream that depends on all of us together, an American Zionism for such a time as this, bold enough to embrace the voices, complexities, paradoxes and even contradictions of our age.”
At the conclusion of his speech, dozens of audience members stood to applaud, though a couple of “boos” could be heard across the room.
During a brief Q&A following the keynote speech, Marc Jacob, a member of the Haredi Orthodox slate Eretz HaKodesh, said he felt “ostracized” by Cosgrove for “wanting to open the door to those who are sitting in camps that are against the Jewish state.”
In response, Cosgrove clarified that he was “trying to stand firm in my convictions, but also embrace those views to the left of me who don’t represent my views.”
“I was not speaking about those outside of the camp who seek the ill will and destruction of the Jewish people,” said Cosgrove. “I was speaking about the ability of those within the tent to find an opportunity, a platform to support Israel in a way that need not be aligned with every policy of this or that Israeli government.”
The post Prominent rabbi and fierce Mamdani critic turns his criticism toward Jews and Israel appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America
The new documentary Immigrant Songs: Yiddish Theater and the American Jewish Experience, produced by the Milken Archive of Jewish Music, is fast, entertaining and a good introduction to the topic.
Focusing mainly on the musical side of the story, but covering ‘straight plays’ as well, the film opens with a superb ‘warm-up act’: “Hu Tsa Tsa,” a stock Yiddish vaudeville number performed by the widely mourned Bruce Adler, who died in 2008 at age 63. Bursting with charm and talent, Adler, scion of a top Yiddish vaudeville family, demonstrates that Yiddish theater used to be pretty damned lively.
What follows is the oft-told story of the rise and decline of the American Yiddish theater, beginning with its prehistory in the Purimshpiels — the annual performances that for centuries served as the only secular entertainment in the Ashkenazic world. From there the film takes us to Yiddish theater’s 1876 birth in Romania, courtesy of Avrom Goldfadn, a.k.a. “The Father of Yiddish Theater.”
The film also describes Yiddish theater’s arrival in America, which, thanks to massive Jewish immigration, quickly became its capital. We learn of its influence on American theater’s styles of acting and set design. And the film describes the decline of its audience, due to assimilation and the immigration quotas of the 1920s.
There’s an excellent section on “The Big Four” Yiddish theater composers — Joseph Rumshinsky, Alexander Olshanetsky, Abe Ellstein, and Sholom Secunda. All in all, the documentary does a fine job of teaching the aleph-beyz, the ABCs, of the history of Yiddish theater to the uninitiated.
The most impressive aspect of Immigrant Songs is its well-crafted pace. Though there are a few snippets of vintage Yiddish cinema (Yiddish theater’s “kid brother”), most of the film consists of recent concert footage, some well-selected photographs and ephemera, and a lot of talking heads. Almost every prominent Yiddish theater historian was interviewed for it, along with several musicologists, an archivist, Yiddish actors, directors, producers, etc. (Full disclosure: I am one of them.) Director Jeff Janeczko cuts between the interviewees so smoothly — sometimes in mid-sentence — that it feels like they’re in the same room and feeding off each other’s energy. The movie just flies by.
There are a few errors. Marc Chagall is described as an important designer of Yiddish theater; actually he designed one minor production in Russia in 1921, and never did another. In a bizarre, and biblically illiterate, statement, one interviewee claims that Jews hadn’t developed a theater culture earlier because the Second Commandment’s prohibition of “graven images” forbade the construction of sets. (Actually it’s about idol worship.)
Another interviewee claims that the Yiddish play Der Yeshiva Bokher; oder, Der Yudisher Hamlet — The Yeshiva Student; or, The Jewish Hamlet (Yiddish plays then often had subtitles), is closely patterned on Shakespeare’s tragedy. In truth, the play — written by Isidore Zolotarevski, the prolific writer of shund (“trash”) melodramas — is not only awful, but is as close to Shakespeare as baked ham is to your grandmother’s kreplach.
The film’s biggest fault, however, is its short running time (45 minutes). This is a rich topic, and too much is left by the wayside in the interest of brevity. There’s nothing about what shund melodramas felt like, why they appealed to their audiences, and why they became the only thing a lot of people know about Yiddish theater.
There’s also nothing about the World War I-era wave of shtetl plays, which reflected immigrants’ homesickness without indulging in nostalgia, and provided some of Yiddish theater’s shining moments with plays like Green Fields, The Empty Inn and Tevye. And the most important play in the Yiddish canon, The Dybbuk, is never mentioned.
Perhaps most surprisingly, considering the film’s emphasis on music, there is no examination of Yiddish theater’s influence on Broadway’s music. (Cole Porter — ironically, the only gentile among the major composers of Broadway’s Golden Age — had a pronounced Jewish lilt in a number of his songs, and he actually attended Yiddish theater regularly.)
The film’s last section is about the renewed interest in Yiddish that began in the 1970s and ’80s with the klezmer revival. Much of it focuses on the 2018 Yiddish production of Fiddler on the Roof in Yiddish, whose success was predetermined the moment the production was announced.
For the overwhelming majority of American Jews, from the Orthodox to the unaffiliated, Fiddler is all they know about the lives of their ancestors. And though it’s a world-class piece of musical theater, as a work of social history Fiddler is as phony as a glass eye. Nevertheless, for American Jews it’s a sacred text.
Fiddler was a huge hit, but it was a gimmick, a one-off, whose success does very little for the future of Yiddish theater. Worse, the Yiddish — not the text, but the lines spoken by most of the actors — was often mispronounced and had the wrong intonation. (One elderly gentleman of my acquaintance, a native Yiddish speaker from Czechoslovakia, told me he didn’t understand a word the actors said, and spent the whole evening reading the English supertitles.)
What follows the Fiddler section in Immigrant Songs is mostly bromides. But the best current Yiddish theater reflects the kind of fresh thinking that keeps the form alive.
An occasional well-presented museum piece, like the Folksbiene’s 2016 revival of Rumshinsky’s operetta The Golden Bride, is a very worthwhile project (though it, too, suffered from poorly spoken Yiddish). But the most dynamic contemporary Yiddish theater is, in Jeffrey Shandler’s apt phrase, “post vernacular” — i .e., the use of Yiddish is self-conscious, a deliberate choice rather than something that’s done automatically, as it would have been a century ago when there were a lot more Yiddish speakers in the world.
An example of this is the 2017 neo-realist film Menashe, which could far more easily and conventionally have been made in English. Or a well-known piece done in Yiddish translation, like Shane Baker’s stunning Yiddish translation of Waiting for Godot, can become something much more valuable than a mere stunt. The Yiddish version, under Moshe Yassur’s straightforward direction, humanized the play, stripping it of the encrusted pretentiousness that had hidden its soul. (When it was presented in the International Samuel Beckett Festival in Ireland, multiple audience members approached the cast afterwards with the same reaction: “I don’t speak a word of Yiddish. But I’ve seen Godot five or six times, and this is the first time I understood it.”)
There’s a lot to be learned from Immigrant Songs. If you find yourself hungry for more, you couldn’t do better than to seek out YIVO’s online Yiddish theater course “Oh, Mama, I’m in Love!” But by all means, start with Immigrant Songs. It’s a very entertaining and informative appetizer.
The post New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
UK PM Starmer Says There Could Be New Powers to Ban Pro-Palestinian Marches
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer gives a media statement at Downing Street in London, Britain, April 30, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Jack Taylor/File photo
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the government could ban pro-Palestinian marches in some circumstances because of the “cumulative effect” the demonstrations had on the Jewish community after two Jewish men were stabbed in London on Wednesday.
Starmer told the BBC that he would always defend freedom of expression and peaceful protest, but chants like “Globalize the Intifada” during demonstrations were “completely off limits” and those voicing them should be prosecuted.
Pro-Palestinian marches have become a regular feature in London since the October 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel that triggered the Gaza war. Critics say the demonstrations have generated hostility and become a focus for antisemitism.
Protesters have argued they are exercising their democratic right to spotlight ongoing human rights and political issues related to the situation in Gaza.
Starmer said he was not denying there were “very strong legitimate views about the Middle East, about Gaza,” but many people in the Jewish community had told him they were concerned about the repeat nature of the marches.
Asked if the tougher response should focus on chants and banners, or whether the protests should be stopped altogether, Starmer said: “I think certainly the first, and I think there are instances for the latter.”
“I think it’s time to look across the board at protests and the cumulative effect,” he said, adding that the government needed to look at what further powers it could take.
Britain raised its terrorism threat level to “severe” on Thursday amid mounting security concerns that foreign states were helping fuel violence, including against the Jewish community.
“We are seeing an elevated threat to Jewish and Israeli individuals and institutions in the UK,” the head of counter-terrorism policing, Laurence Taylor, said in a statement, adding that police were also working “against an unpredictable global situation that has consequences closer to home, including physical threats by state-linked actors.”
Uncategorized
War Likely to Resume After Trump’s Rejection of Latest Proposal, Says IRGC General
Iranians carry a model of a missile during a celebration following an IRGC attack on Israel, in Tehran, Iran, April 15, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
i24 News – A senior Iranian military figure said that fighting with the US was “likely” to resume after President Donald Trump stated he was dissatisfied with Tehran’s latest proposal, regime media reported on Saturday.
The comments of General Mohammad Jafar Asadi, one of the top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, were relayed by the Fars news agency, considered as a mouthpiece of the the powerful paramilitary body.
“Evidence has shown that the Americans do not not adhere to any commitments,” Asadi was quoted as saying.
He further added that Washington’s decision-making was “primarily media-driven aimed first at preventing a drop in oil prices and second at extricating themselves from the mess they have created.”
Iranian armed forces are ready “for any new adventures or foolishness from the Americans,” he said, going to assert that the Iran war would prove for the US a tragedy comparable with what was for Israel the October 7 massacre.
“Just as our martyred Leader said that the Zionist regime will never be the same as before the Al‑Aqsa Storm operation [the name chosen by Hamas leadership for the October 7, 2023 massacre in southern Israel], the United States will also never return to what it was before its attack on Iran,” he said. “The world has understood the true nature of America, and no matter how much malice it shows now, it is no longer the America that many once feared.”