Uncategorized
The Israeli origins of Amitai Etzioni’s big ideas about community
(JTA) — “Although I was born in Germany, my formative years were spent in the early, idealistic days of the cooperative Jewish settlements, in pre-Israel, Palestine,” wrote Amitai Etzioni in his 2003 memoir, “My Brother’s Keeper.”
In writing about his early years in a cooperative settlement called Kfar Shmaryahu, the Israeli-American sociologist and polymath provided the origin story for the big idea that made him famous: communitarianism.
When Etzioni died May 31 at age 94, the obituaries noted how he came to Israel as a young refugee from Nazi Germany and fought in Israel’s war for independence. But few noted his early life in Israel shaped his life’s work. Nor did they note how far Israel had come — for better and for worse — in the years since he lived on a kibbutz, battled as a Palmach commando and studied at the Hebrew University.
Communitarianism is a social philosophy that emphasizes the importance of society, as opposed to the individual, in articulating the good.”[W]hile individual rights surely matter, these rights must be balanced with commitments to the common good — for instance, by protecting the environment and public health,” Etzioni explained.
He also held that the various liberation movements of the 1960s went too far in undermining authority figures and what he called “the accepted standards of upright conduct.”
Because it proposed a “third way” between liberalism and conservatism, communitarianism was also embraced — and ridiculed — on both sides of the aisle. Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were fans. Some labeled George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” communitarian.
Etzioni left Israel in his mid-twenties for a teaching job at Columbia University. He opposed the Vietnam War and the nuclear arms race, activism that propelled him beyond the academy and into the role as a “public intellectual.” He taught ethics for two years at the Harvard Business School before launching into a hybrid discipline he called “socio-economics.” Hired by the Carter administration in 1979 as a senior adviser, he joined the faculty at George Washington University, where he taught international affairs for more than 30 years.
The theories behind communitarianism weren’t new, but Etzioni’s articulation came to wide public attention on the eve of the Clinton presidency, when, according to one profile, it was “supposed to be the Big Idea of the ‘90s, the antidote to ‘Me Generation’ greed and the cure for America’s cynicism, alienation and despair.”
“We need an awakening of values, of caring and commitment,” Etzioni told an interviewer in 1992. “The Communitarians are saying this is possible; in fact, it is inevitable.”
“It was as if I were growing up in a high school of communitarian theory and practice,” wrote Etzioni about his youth spent on an agricultural cooperative in Israel. (Courtesy of Yad Yitzhak Ben Zvi)
Although communitarianism never did live up to the hype, Etzioni became a reliable commentator and theorist in a host of fields and causes, including just war, bioethics, national security and privacy.
Although he occasionally wrote about Israel, his roots there were rarely front and center in his work or public image. In his memoir he notes that a lot of readers thought he was Italian. (“Amitai” comes from the Hebrew word for truth; he took “Etzioni” from a folk tale about a boy who learns to protect nature from a tree – “etz” in Hebrew.)
In his memoir, however, he delves deeply into his youth in Israel. “In those days, the country was quite different from what it has since become,” he writes. “[I]t was strongly imbued with the spirit of community (from which the term communitarian arises); most people were dedicated to serving the common good and to erecting a home for Jews escaping Nazi-dominated Europe. It was in that pre-Israel that I first knew the high that one gains when serving a cause greater than oneself.”
His parents were among the founders of the small farming community; a young Etzioni would attend co-op meetings with his father, where members would debate how cooperative they needed to be – a question, he writes, that was never settled.
“It was as if I were growing up in a high school of communitarian theory and practice,” wrote Etzioni.
He also discovered the limits of that practice after a year as a teen on Kibbutz Tel Joseph. He found the kibbutz “excessively communal,” with little tolerance for individuality or privacy. Communitarianism itself would often be attacked on the same grounds: Etzioni would later have a fierce antagonist in the American Civil Liberties Union, which felt some of his calls for limiting privacy and suspending individual rights in the name of the common good went too far.
Etzioni wrote movingly about watching friends die in the fighting for Israel’s independence. Although he never wavered in feeling the war was justified, he lamented that the Jews and Arabs might have avoided the bloodshed had they agreed to the two-state partition that, in 2003, he still felt was inevitable. Nor did he regret Israel’s founding: “The Jewish people require a homeland to protect them not merely from physical annihilation, but also from cultural devastation,” he wrote in 1999.
But perhaps the most fascinating influence on Etzioni’s thinking was the year he spent in a Jerusalem institute set up by Martin Buber, the Vienna-born social philosopher. The formidable faculty included Gershom Scholem on Kabbalah, Yeshayahu Leibowitz on biology and Nechama Leibowitz on Bible.
Etzioni imbibed Buber’s ideas about “I and Thou” relationships – the “unending struggle between the forces that pushed us to relate to other human beings as objects, as Its, rather than as fellow humans, as Thous.”
Etzioni would call this “moral dialogue,” as in his definition of democracy: “[O]ur conception of right and wrong are encountered through moral dialogues that are open and inclusive. It is a persuasive morality, not a coercive one.”
Etzioni’s memoir and his obituaries recall a more hopeful political climate, when right and left could briefly imagine common ground around the common good. They also recall a different Israel, before it largely embraced the free-market economics of the West and let go of many of its communitarian values.
In 2013 Etzioni wrote about his own seeming irrelevance – he called it his “gradual loss of a megaphone” — after his brief flurry of influence. He had no regrets, nor loss of confidence: “Until I am shown that my predictions or prescriptions are ill-founded, or not of service, I will try to get out what must be said. I’ll keep pulling at the oars, however small my boat, however big or choppy the sea.”
—
The post The Israeli origins of Amitai Etzioni’s big ideas about community appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Saul Rubinek plays a version of himself in ‘Playing Shylock’
דער מאָנטרעאַלער אַקטיאָר סאָל רובינעק האָט אַ סך װאָס צו דערציילן.
ער איז דערצו אויך אַ גרויסער מאמין אינעם כּוח פֿון דערציילן.
„דערציילן איז אַלץ,“ זאָגט ער.
טאַקע די פֿראַזע האָט רובינעק, בעת אַן אינטערװיו מיט מיר, אויסגעקליבן װי אַ פּרוּװ איבערצוזעצן דעם טיטל פֿון זײַן אויטאָביאָגראַפֿישן ראָמאַן, All in the Telling. אַרויס פֿון דרוק אין 2025, איז דער ראָמאַן אַ האַלב־פֿיקטיװע כראָניק פֿון זײַנע עטלערן, ביידע פֿון דער שארית־הפּליטה, און זײַנע פֿאַרװיקלטע באַציִונגען מיט זיי און מיט זייערע טראַװמאַטישע לעבנס־געשיכטעס.
דער טיטל װאָלט זיך אויך גוט צוגעפּאַסט צו זײַן אויפֿטריט אין דער מאָנאָדראַמע Playing Shylock („דאָס שפּילן שײַלאָק“), געשריבן פֿונעם קאַנאַדער דראַמאַטורג מאַרק לירין־יאָנג. די פּיעסע וועט מען שפּילן ביזן 7טן דעצעמבער אין פּאָלאָנסקי־שעקספּיר־צענטער אין ברוקלין.
במשך פֿון דער פּיעסע, דערציילט ער, פֿאַרציילט ער, רעדט ער זיך אַראָפּ פֿון האַרצן. און דער אינהאַלט פֿון זײַנע שפֿעדיקע רייד? אַ פֿיקטיװע, אַנולירטע אויפֿפֿירונג פֿון שעקספּירס „דער קויפֿמאַן פֿון װענעדיג“. במשך פֿון זײַנע צװיי שעה אויף דער בינע הערן מיר די צרות פֿון אַן אַקטיאָר, װאָס האָט געדאַרפֿט שפּילן די ראָלע פֿון שײַלאָק אין דער דאָזיקער פּראָדוקציע: צרות מיט די פּראָדוצענטן, מיטן הײַנטצײַטיקן אַנטיסעמיטיזם און שמאָלקעפּיקײט, און צרות מיט זיך אַליין — װײַל רובינעק שפּילט טאַקע אַ װערסיע פֿון זיך אַליין אין דער אויפֿפֿירונג.
די דראַמע איז אַ רעװידירטער נוסח פֿון אַ פּיעסע, „שײַלאָק“, װאָס לירין־יאָנג האָט צוערשט אָנגעשריבן אין 1996. (אַגבֿ, יוסף באָװשאָװערס באַקאַנטע ייִדישע איבערזעצונג פֿון דער פּיעסע, װאָס מען האָט אַ מאָל געשפּילט אויף דער צווייטער עװעניו, הייסט אויך „שײַלאָק“.) אינעם נײַעם נוסח פֿון לירין־יאָנגס װערק, שפּיגלט די פּיעסע אָפּ פֿאַרשיידענע פֿאַקטן פֿונעם הויפּט־אַקטיאָרס לעבן, און דער עולם װייסט קיין מאָל נישט װאָסער פּרט איז אַן אויסגעטראַכטער און װאָסערער איז טאַקע אַ טשיקאַװעס פֿון רובינעקס לעבן. אין דעם ליגט אַ סך פֿון דער פּיעסעס שפּאַנונג און אומזיכערקייט.
אין עטלעכע מאָמענטן, דעקלאַמירט רובינעק שײַלאָקס מאָנאָלאָגן אין דער שטים פֿונעם טאַטן — אַפֿילו אַ מאָל מיט אַ גמרא־ניגון („װער דען װאָלט געשפּילט שײַלאָק אַזוי?“ האָט ער מיך שפּעטער רעטאָריש געפֿרעגט). בײַם סוף פֿון דער פּיעסע, װאָס איז כּמעט אין גאַנצן אויף ענגליש, הערן מיר די באַרימטע רעדע „האָט דען אַ ייִד ניט קיין אויגן?“, דװקא אויף מאַמע־לשון.
„אין זײַן ספּעציפֿישקייט, װערט ייִדיש אוניװערסאַל,“ זאָגט רובינעק, װאָס האָט אויך געשפּילט אויף ייִדיש אינעם פֿילם Shttl („שטטל“, 2002) און די ראָלע פֿון הירש ראַסיינער (אויף ענגליש) אינעם פֿילם The Quarrel (די קריג, 1991), באַזירט אויף חיים גראַדעס דערציילונג. „אין זײַן ספּעציפֿישקייט װעגן אונדזערע איבערלעבונגען װי מענטשן, װי ייִדן, קענען מיר זיך ׳האַלטן בײַ די הענט׳ מיט דער גאַנצער װעלט.“
טיילװײַז האָט דער אַקטיאָר טאַקע דורכגעפֿירט דעם שמועס מיט מיר אויף ייִדיש, װאָס, ער איז מודה, קומט אים אָן שװערלעך, נאָר װאָס ער האָט בײַ זיך „נישט אין קאָפּ, נאָר אין האַרצן.“
איך האָב אים געפֿרעגט, צי ער פּרוּווט טאַקע פֿאַרגופֿן אין דער פּיעסע די אינטאָנאַציעס און זשעסטן פֿונעם טאַטן?
„איך האָב אַפֿילו ניט געדאַרפֿט פּרוּװן. אַלע קינדער קענען נאָכמאַכן זייערע טאַטע־מאַמעס,“ האָט ער געזאָגט. „דאָס גאַנצע לעבן האָב איך געזען װי דער טאַטע טרעט אויף פֿאַר משפּחה און פֿרײַנד. אַ נאַטירלעכער דערציילער איז ער געװען.“
מאַכט דער רמב״ן: „מעשׂה אָבֿות סימן לבנים“ — די טאַטן פֿון די עלטערן און די עלטערנס עלטערן זאָגן פֿאָרויס דאָס לעבן פֿון די קינדער.
רובינעקס טאַטע, ישׂראל רובינעק, אַ געבוירענער אין לאָדזש, האָט אָנגעפֿירט מיט אַ טעאַטער־טרופּע אין די־פּי־לאַגער פֿערנװאַלד, אין בײַערן. רובינעק איז טאַקע געבוירן געװאָרן אין דער זעלבער נאַכט, וואָס דער טאַטע איז דאָרט אויפֿגעטראָטן ווי דער גולם אין לייװיקס באַרימטער דראַמאַטישע פּאָעמע, אין 1948.
אָט דער צופֿאַל, דאָס געשעעניש, שמעקט מיט באַשערטקייט, מיט הייליקייט אַפֿילו. די אָ הייליקייט באַמערקט רובינעק אין משך פֿון „דאָס שפּילן שײַלאָק“, אין איינער פֿון דער פּיעסעס שטאַרקסטע רעפּליקן:
„איך האָב קיין מאָל ניט געגלייבט אין גאָט. איך גלייב אין דעם, אין טעאַטער. דאָס איז הייליק.“
אָבער אויך אין ייִדיש גלייבט ער. „ייִדיש, װי טעאַטער, איז קאָמונאַל — און איז הייליק,“ האָט ער מיר געזאָגט. „װי לאַנג האָט מען געזאָגט אַז טעאַטער איז טויט? אַזוי אויך מיט ייִדיש.“
דער אַקטיאָר זאָגט אַז עס גלוסט זיך אים איצט שפּילן אין ייִדישן טעאַטער, און ער האַלט אין אַרומרעדן מעגלעכע פּראָיעקטן.
אויך מיר, סײַ צוקוקער סײַ מיט־אַרטיסטן, קוקן אַרויס אויף דעם — אויף נאָך אַזאַ קאָמונאַלער, עקסטרע־הייליקער איבערלעבונג אין טונקעלן טעאַטער־זאַל, װוּ גאָר ניט איז ניט קאָנקרעט און קלאָר.
װי רובינעק זאָגט אין דער נײַער אויפֿפֿירונג, מיט פֿאַררייטלטע באַקן און שטאַרק אַקטיװירטע ברוגז־מוסקלען: „דער טעאַטער איז ניט קיין safe space (געזיכערט אָרט).“
דאָס הייסט, דער טעאַטער איז פֿאָרט אַ פֿאָרום פֿאַר פֿראַגעס, חילוקי־דעות, און גײַסטיקן געראַנגל.
זאָל זײַן אַזוי.
די פּיעסע וועט מען שפּילן ביזן 7טן דעצעמבער אין פּאָלאָנסקי־שעקספּיר־צענטער אין ברוקלין. צו קויפֿן בילעטן גיט אַ קוועטש דאָ.
The post Saul Rubinek plays a version of himself in ‘Playing Shylock’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Hasidic leader defends support for Mamdani. ‘I’m taking beatings to save you’
Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York City mayor is further deepening divisions within the Jewish community, with some mainstream organizations now adopting a wait-and-see approach while others denounce him as an “enemy.” At the same time, support for Mamdani among certain Hasidic groups is drawing growing attention.
In a recent tense interview with Mishpacha magazine, a weekly conservative publication widely read in the Haredi community, Rabbi Moshe Indig, a political leader of the sect known as the Ahronim, was pressed to defend his public embrace of Mamdani in the final days of the mayoral race. (The Ahronim is led by Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum from Kiryas Joel.)
“People call me a kapo,” Indig told the magazine, using a term that originally referred to Jewish inmates at Nazi concentration camps who were assigned to assist the SS. “Anyone who knows what a kapo is can see that I am the exact opposite — a kapo beat you up to save himself. I’m taking beatings to save you.”
Indig’s endorsement of Mamdani set off a firestorm within the community, exposing sharp internal divides over whether the candidate deserved the trust of many Jews. Criticism of Mamdani intensified after the election, following his mixed response to the protest outside the Park East Synagogue, which featured anti-Israel and antisemitic slogans. Mamdani, through a spokesperson, questioned the use of a sacred place for an event promoting migration to Israel, while also discouraging the language that was used at the protest.
“I’m taking missiles over this, not just bullets,” Indig said in the interview. He explained that his support stemmed from Mamdani’s quiet, sustained outreach to Haredi leaders and his clear status as the race’s frontrunner, saying Mamdani had simply earned the endorsement.
“I didn’t promise him votes,” Indig said. “I explained that because the community was so convinced of his antisemitism, I wouldn’t be able to get the majority of people to vote for him.”
Mamdani, he said, replied that he wasn’t seeking votes so much as an opportunity to show he could earn the community’s trust and disprove their perceptions of him. “I saw that as a beautiful invitation to our community,” Indig said.
Part of Mamdani’s outreach included a visit to Hasidic leaders in South Williamsburg during Sukkot and an open letter in Hasidic Yiddish that outlined his plans to combat antisemitism and advance his affordability agenda.
Andrew Cuomo, who won a majority of the Jewish vote and dominated Hasidic areas in Brooklyn on Election Day, failed to do that sort of politicking, Indig said. “Cuomo, who was supposed to be the favorite of the Jews, didn’t ask to go to any sukkah. Not one,” he said.
Indig’s endorsement of Mamdani marks the third consecutive mayoral race in which the Ahronim has demonstrated its political influence by backing the eventual winner, while other Hasidic blocs supported rival candidates. In 2021, they endorsed Eric Adams over Andrew Yang, who was favored by most leading Hasidic sects. And in 2013, they backed Bill de Blasio, who narrowly avoided a runoff in the Democratic primary by just 5,000 votes, while the Zalonim and other groups supported Bill Thompson, then seen as the frontrunner.
“We are currently the only Yidden with access to the future City Hall,” he boasted, using the Yiddish word for Jews. He hopes that changes, he said.
Last month, Mamdani named more than a dozen diverse Jewish leaders and activists to his transition team. Monica Klein, the Mamdani transition’s communications director, said the subcommittees are preparing to implement his “agenda of safety and security for Jewish New Yorkers and everyone else who calls this city home, including his pledge for an 800% increase in anti-hate crime prevention.”
Perceptions of Mamdani have yet to change. A recent poll of 745 American Jews found that 67% believed Mamdani’s election would make New York City’s Jews less safe, while 6% believed they would be safer. The Anti-Defamation League, which clashed with Mamdani during the election, launched a monitor to track Mamdani’s appointments and policies. The ADL also criticized the inclusion of Tamika Mallory as a member of the transition committee on community safety. Mallory co-founded the 2017 Women’s March, then stepped down from the organization after criticism over her ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and her refusal to affirm Israel’s right to exist.
Indiq affirmed that he’s comfortable with his decision. “Getting guarantees from him before the election gives me critical leverage afterward — if he fails to be a friend, I can call him on his promise to be there for us,” he said.
The post Hasidic leader defends support for Mamdani. ‘I’m taking beatings to save you’ appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Israel’s Netanyahu Says Syria Deal Possible, Expects Buffer Zone
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu participates in the state memorial ceremony for the fallen of the Iron Swords War on Mount Herzl, in Jerusalem, Oct. 16, 2025. Photo: Alex Kolomoisky/Pool via REUTERS
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday a deal with Syria is possible and he expects Syrian authorities to establish a demilitarized buffer zone from Damascus to Mount Hermon and other areas.
Netanyahu spoke a day after US President Donald Trump, whose administration has been trying to broker a non-aggression pact between the two countries, said it was very important that Israel maintained a “strong and true dialogue” with Damascus.
Syria does not formally recognize Israel, which following the fall of longtime Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad in December moved troops into a buffer zone along the Syrian border to secure a military position to prevent terrorists from launching attacks against the Jewish state.
The previously demilitarized zone in the Golan Heights, a strategic region on Israel’s northern border previously controlled by Syria and later annexed by Israel, was established under the 1974 Disengagement of Forces Agreement between Damascus and Jerusalem that ended the Yom Kippur War. However, Israel considered the agreement void after the collapse of Assad’s regime.
“What we expect Syria to do is, of course, to establish a demilitarized buffer zone from Damascus to the buffer area, including the approaches to Mount Hermon and the Hermon peak,” Netanyahu said while visiting wounded soldiers in central Israel. “We hold these areas in order to ensure the security of Israel’s citizens, and that is what obligates us.”
He added: “With goodwill and an understanding of these principles, it is possible to reach an agreement with the Syrians, but we will stand by our principles in any case.”
Trump has backed Syria‘s new leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, while Israel has voiced wariness over Sharaa’s past links to Islamist militancy, but has engaged in efforts to broker a deal.
An Israeli raid in southern Syria on Friday killed 13 Syrians, Syrian state media reported. The Israeli military said it had targeted a Lebanese Islamist militant group there. Netanyahu on Tuesday was visiting soldiers wounded in the clash.