Uncategorized
The new Anne Frank musical wants you to laugh at ‘woke culture’ — but is it funny?
Reactions to Slam Frank, Andrew Fox’s musical satire in which Anne Frank is rewritten as a Latinx pansexual girl named “Anita,” have been mixed. Some have called it a timely, comedic takedown of cultural hypersensitivity while others see it as a shonda to the memories of Holocaust victims. In interviews, Fox has refused to break the character of a playwright obsessed with woke culture, so there is no insight from him to understand the musical. Somehow, the show resists fitting neatly into any understanding of humor, making it hard to know exactly who — or what — you’re supposed to be laughing at.
In his 1655 book The Element of Law Natural and Politic, Thomas Hobbes explains humor through what he calls “superiority theory,” which argues that “laughter is nothing but sudden glory arising from some sudden conception of eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others.”
There’s also self-deprecating ethnic humor, where one makes jokes about their own ethno-racial group, often highlighting historically demeaning stereotypes or characteristics. In his book Ethnic Humor in Multiethnic America, scholar David Gillota describes it as a “psychological defense mechanism” that takes the power of aggression away from the dominant group since jokes about a minority community are being made by its own members.
Then there’s “culturally intimate humor” which SUNY Farmingdale professor Evan S. Cooper defined in his dissertation “I don’t get It?: Culturally Intimate Humor and Its Audiences,” as a familiar use of culturally specific stereotypes in a positive manner. Contemporary scholars have argued that some ethno-racial humor is a way for minorities to create group solidarity and make fun of the dominant culture, a tactic which Cooper calls “protest humor.”
Because Slam Frank pokes fun at so many identities using a diverse cast and crew, it is impossible to put it neatly into any one category of humor.
Take the scene where the cast members, wearing black hats and plastic hook noses, rub their hands together under red lights as they sing about colonizing Palestine and being able to charge high rent. Is it self-deprecating humor — a Jewish writer making fun of those who have turned the search for a holy land into a capitalist cash grab? Is it protest humor, using a caricature of how some anti-Zionists might imagine a Jewish cabal making fun of the ridiculous fantasies of antisemites? Is it superiority humor that is painting religious, Zionist Jews as somehow morally inferior? It’s impossible to know — and that’s part of what makes it so hard to know how to react, making for an awkward viewing experience.
If you understand the jokes about neurodiversity and pronouns as a form of protest humor against “woke culture,” does that mean the playwright sees political correctness as the dominant narrative in our society right now? In an age where diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are being targeted by the federal government and political lobbyists have suggested trans people should be considered a terrorist group, the idea that fighting inclusive culture is punching up feels ignorant. But at the same time, even among the left and among those whose identities are under attack — people who make up the cast and crew of Slam Frank — there seems to be an exhaustion with identity politics’ overpolicing of who can say what.
The jokes take on a whole new life in some of the merchandise. Among the items available for purchase in the lobby are t-shirts featuring a photoshopped image of Anne Frank as a nightclub DJ, trucker hats that say “Problem Attic,” and kippot with the Slam Frank logo — a yellow Star of David where the top point has been replaced with a silhouette of Frank, a la Hamilton’s iconic symbol. Unless you confront a wearer on the street, it will be hard to know why the person feels the need to advertise the show. Did they love the musical so much because of its mockery of antisemitism? Or were they enthralled by the takedown of Zionism? Or are they just celebrating a show that made them laugh?
When it comes to Slam Frank, it seems that the only true conclusion is that there is no certain message, which is frustrating for audiences who want to understand what they’re watching. It is particularly hard when we’re living in a time where society seems to constantly demand we proclaim a socio-political opinion on everything.
As a musical, Slam Frank actually holds its own, with pretty catchy — if not politically correct — songs and good performances. But every time I was compelled to laugh with the audience, my amusement was mixed with apprehension and guilt. I knew why I thought the overdone Black American Accent and caricatured Jewish stereotypes were funny; but it’s hard to relax when you don’t know if the rest of the audience is laughing with you or at you.
The post The new Anne Frank musical wants you to laugh at ‘woke culture’ — but is it funny? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Heritage Foundation staff confront president over antisemitism, defense of Tucker Carlson
The president of the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, apologized to his staff on Wednesday for his refusal to condemn Tucker Carlson after the right-wing broadcaster aired a friendly interview with white nationalist Nick Fuentes.
During a tense, two-hour all-hands meetings, staff members challenged Roberts’ leadership, questioned Heritage’s credibility, and warned that his stance had gravely damaged the foundation’s relationships with Jewish partners and donors
“I made a mistake and I let you down and I let down this institution. Period. Full stop,” Roberts said.
He specifically apologized for a previous comment defending Carlson in which he decried a “venomous coalition” attacking the commentator. The phrase, he said, was “a terrible choice of words, especially for our Jewish colleagues and friends.”
The meeting, audio and video of which were leaked online, laid bare deep divisions inside America’s most influential conservative think tank, torn between Roberts’ attempt to mend fences and a staff revolt from within its senior ranks.
Several Heritage employees, including longtime fellows and legal scholars, told Roberts they no longer had confidence in his leadership. Others said his refusal to draw moral lines between Carlson and antisemites like Fuentes had caused lasting reputational harm.
“I made the mess, I want to clean it up,” Roberts told employees, adding that he had offered his resignation to the board but felt a “moral obligation” to stay and repair the damage.
Several staffers demanded that Roberts publicly repudiate Carlson. Two called for him to resign.
“You have shown a stunning lack of both courage and judgment,” said Amy Swearer, a senior legal fellow who has worked at Heritage for eight years. “I stand here today with no ability to say I have confidence in your leadership.”
“It has become increasingly difficult to continue to defend the Heritage Foundation,” added Rachel Greszler, another senior fellow. “I do not believe that you are the right person to lead.”
The confrontation followed days of turmoil triggered by Roberts’ decision to post a video in which he said Heritage would not “distance” itself from Carlson despite his friendly interview with Fuentes, a Holocaust denier who has praised Adolf Hitler. Roberts framed his position as a defense of “grace” and “free speech,” saying the right should avoid “canceling” its own.
That message sparked outrage across the political spectrum. Prominent Republicans, including Sen. Ted Cruz, denounced Fuentes as a “Nazi.” Jewish organizations that had partnered with Heritage on its antisemitism initiative, Project Esther, cut ties. Conservative commentators such as Ben Shapiro blasted Roberts for embracing a “no enemies to the right” ethos.
One of the most emotional moments at the meeting came during comments from Daniel Flesch, a Jewish staffer with Heritage’s Allison Center for National Security, who oversees Project Esther. He described being unable to defend Heritage to Jewish allies and friends.
“It has been six days… where as an organization we have been unable to utter the words…‘Tucker’s an antisemite, and we as Heritage do not want to associate with him,’” Daniel said. “We are bleeding trust, reputation, perhaps donors.”
Robert Rector, a Heritage veteran of 47 years, invoked conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., who in the 1960s sought to expel antisemitic and racist elements from the conservative movement.
“Buckley’s view was that we have to expunge all antisemitism from the movement and expel the lunatics,” Rector said. “This is what built the conservative movement. We are now reversing that.”
Hans von Spakovsky, another senior Heritage figure, warned Roberts that the think tank’s credibility could not be salvaged without a clean break from Carlson.
“The damage done to the reputation of Heritage is the worst I have ever seen,” von Spakovsky said. “If the Heritage Foundation and you do not dump Tucker Carlson publicly, we are not going to repair that damage.”
The meeting also exposed generational and ideological divides on the right. One young staffer argued that Heritage should not prioritize defending Israel and accused the leadership of promoting “Christian Zionism” — a comment that drew audible gasps.
Roberts and his deputies reaffirmed the foundation’s pro-Israel stance, but the exchange underscored how some younger conservatives, animated by online populism and isolationism, are challenging traditional right-wing support for Israel.
—
The post Heritage Foundation staff confront president over antisemitism, defense of Tucker Carlson appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
As Mamdani’s victory reverberates beyond NYC, Jews must choose solidarity over shock
The ascendance of Zohran Mamdani stunned many Jewish New Yorkers, and now that he has been elected, many Jews in New York and across the country feel fear and foreboding. The city that long stood as the beating heart of American Jewish life, creative, intellectual, and spiritual, has elected a man who denies the Jewish right to national self-determination, traffics in rhetoric that isolates our community, and aligns with movements hostile to Jewish safety and dignity.
This moment strikes a community already reeling from the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the wave of antisemitism that followed. Mamdani was the encampment candidate, lifted by the same forces that turned American campuses into arenas of cruelty and open hatred of Jews. For many, the outcome feels like the city we built, enriched and defended turning its back on us.
But panic provides no preparation, and despair offers no strategy. The Jewish people endured darker nights than this one. We never surrendered. We stood together, protected one another, and built stronger than before.
Clarity must guide us now. We reject the divisive and bigoted politics that carried Mamdani to Gracie Mansion. In his brief career he has championed efforts to delegitimize and demonize Israel, entertained defunding New York institutions that support Israelis, leveled baseless accusations of grave abuses, rejected the IHRA definition of antisemitism, opposed ceremonial resolutions honoring the State of Israel, failed to join resolutions commemorating the Holocaust, and — perhaps most galling to many — refused to condemn the call to “globalize the intifada,” a slogan that glorifies violence against Jews.
These actions reveal conviction, and we harbor no illusions about engagement. A few softened remarks before victory cannot erase years of radical rhetoric and targeted hostility. Tactical moderation rarely if ever equals moral transformation.
Events in New York echo beyond the city. When the largest Jewish community in the Diaspora faces rhetorical and political assault, extremists everywhere take notice. The effects reach synagogues, schools, students, and families across the United States. This moment concerns more than one election; it defines the boundaries of decency in public life.
Criticism of Israeli policy belongs in democratic discourse. Demonization of Israel and excuses for violence against Jews do not. That inversion, condemning Israel while minimizing Hamas atrocities, reflects not a pursuit of justice but an obsession with Jews. The Jewish people know this story from centuries of repetition, and we recognize it instantly because we survived it before.
But we also know what needs to come next.
We will fortify our institutions. We will organize for communal safety. We will advocate relentlessly at the municipal, state and federal levels. We will strengthen alliances with leaders who refuse to equivocate about Jewish life. And we will secure resources, philanthropic and governmental, to protect our people and our future in this still-great city.
We proceed without illusions. Leadership demands moral seriousness. When the mayor’s office abandons that duty, others will step forward. Jewish safety, dignity and continuity depend on our resolve, not on the goodwill of any administration.
New York stands as a city of Jewish strength, energy and resilience. That truth will not change. In this difficult hour, we choose solidarity over shock, courage over resignation, and resolve over naïveté. We lift one another up, safeguard our community, and affirm that our story never belonged to those who stand against us.
Let us not mourn, but organize.
—
The post As Mamdani’s victory reverberates beyond NYC, Jews must choose solidarity over shock appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
China and Qatar Move to Broaden Strategic, Economic Ties in Region
The Chinese national flag is seen in Beijing, China April 29, 2020. REUTERS/Thomas Peter/File Photo
China and Qatar are broadening ties and joint initiatives as both countries work to deepen their partnership amid shifting Middle East dynamics and China’s efforts to expand its regional influence, according to recent statements from politicians of both countries.
On Monday, Chinese Vice President Han Zheng held talks with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani in Doha on the sidelines of the Second World Summit for Social Development, focusing on regional developments and expanding bilateral cooperation.
The expanding Beijing-Doha relationship comes as Qatar seeks to position itself as a key player in the Middle East — pursuing a role in post-war Gaza and broadening its regional influence — while China aims to counter Western influence, navigate US sanctions, and expand its presence across the region.
During their meeting, the Chinese top diplomat pledged to deepen ties with Qatar across multiple sectors and elevate their strategic relationship to new levels.
He also stressed Qatar’s unique and influential role in the Middle East amid rising regional tensions and shifting power dynamics, reaffirming Beijing’s support and calling Doha a key ally.
“Deep political mutual trust forms the foundation of China-Qatar relations,” Zheng said during a joint press conference.
“We are committed to working with Qatar to implement the key agreements reached by our two heads of state and to maintain high-level exchanges,” he continued, referring to the recently signed agreements between the two countries, set to broaden the scope of their joint projects.
“We will continue to support each other on issues concerning our core interests and deepen cooperation in energy, artificial intelligence, and the digital economy, aiming to elevate our bilateral relationship to new heights,” he said.
The Chinese top diplomat vowed to deepen ties with Qatar, emphasizing China’s enduring commitment to their growing partnership and its aim to foster initiatives that benefit both nations.
For its part, the Qatari diplomat praised China’s long-standing role as Qatar’s largest trading partner, noting that the relationship holds vital importance for the country.
Al-Thani also expressed appreciation to China for its support in safeguarding Qatar’s territorial sovereignty and national security.