Uncategorized
What We’re Really Asking Today: Could Another Holocaust Happen?
Illustrative: Demonstrators protest in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in London, Oct. 28, 2023. Photo: Reuters/Susannah Ireland
In the West today, Jews and non-Jews speak anxiously about antisemitism. They debate incident statistics, survey results, attitudes toward Israel, and the distinction — supposedly crucial — between hostility to Jews and hostility to the Jewish State.
Enormous intellectual and financial energy is invested in measuring all of this. Yet these debates are largely beside the point. They are a proxy for a darker, unspoken question: could another Holocaust happen?
Statistics cannot answer that question. They were never designed to. Nor can opinion surveys, however sophisticated.
After more than a decade of empirical research into antisemitism in Western societies, I have reached a conclusion that will sound extreme but is, I believe, unavoidable: another catastrophe for the Jews is not only possible but increasingly probable.
This is not because of a sudden resurgence of old-fashioned hatred, but because Western societies are undergoing a profound spiritual and political transformation — and Jews are once again positioned as expendable.
The West has largely de-Christianised. In the vacuum left behind, it is constructing an alternative creed powerful enough to provide meaning, cohesion, and moral orientation to societies that are fragmented, diverse, and unsure of themselves. One of these creeds is pro-Palestinianism. It functions not merely as a political stance, but as a civic religion.
Civic religion is not a new concept. It refers to the shared rituals, symbols, and moral narratives that bind a nation together when traditional faith weakens. What is new is the content. Pro-Palestinianism offers a simple moral universe — victim and oppressor, innocence and guilt — at precisely the moment when Western societies feel incapable of enforcing older lines of belonging and authority.
This helps explain several developments that otherwise appear baffling.
First, the speed and intensity of the Gaza War protests. Within days of October 7, 2023 — before the war had meaningfully unfolded, before casualty figures could be invoked — hundreds of thousands were already mobilised across Britain and Western Europe. The slogans evolved over time, but the mobilisation was instant and relentless. This was not spontaneous outrage reacting to unfolding facts. It was something closer to ritualised response.
There is no need to invoke conspiracy. The machinery behind this mobilisation is visible and long-established. Its urgency does not stem from the Middle East, but from Europe itself. Western societies are grappling with the integration of large immigrant populations, many from Muslim-majority countries, for whom identification with the Palestinian cause is emotionally immediate. Aligning national moral narratives with this cause is a low-cost way to signal inclusion, empathy, and shared purpose. Call it appeasement if you like; the deeper issue is insecurity. Societies that lack confidence in their own values are reluctant to discipline, because discipline presupposes a shared line — and the line is gone.
Second, the sheer disproportionality of the Palestinian issue in European politics. Governments fall, ministers resign, parties form, and retailers boycott over Gaza, while conflicts with far greater strategic relevance — Russia’s war in Ukraine, for example — fade into the background. Palestinian flags saturate cultural spaces, from city streets to school fundraisers to the inner doors of pub toilets. Avoiding the messaging now requires active withdrawal from public life.
This is not noble universalism. It is selective moral inflation. Gaza has “won” the competition for Western attention because it serves an internal function. Casting Israel as a supreme criminal and Palestinians as ultimate victims fits the sensibilities of newly arrived populations whose integration is deemed essential, and progressive movements unhappy with what they deem racism and elite supremacy in their own nations. Pro-Palestinianism promises social harmony, or at least the appearance of it. The reward is cohesion; the price is intellectual honesty.
Third, the widespread willingness to ignore — or actively deny — the atrocities of October 7. The denial is often explained as bad faith or manipulation. I think something simpler is at work. The violence was too alien, too disturbing for contemporary Western sensibilities. It does not fit the moral script that pro-Palestinianism requires. And so it must be softened, relativised, or erased. This is not endorsement of terrorism; it is narrative necessity. Civic religions, like traditional ones, cannot tolerate facts that undermine their moral clarity.
Finally, there is the strangest alliance of all: pro-Palestinianism’s ability to unite groups with fundamentally incompatible worldviews. The most striking case is the enthusiastic embrace of the Palestinian cause by segments of the LGBT community. The contradiction is obvious. Israel is the most LGBT-tolerant society in the Middle East; Palestinian and broader Muslim societies are not. In Gaza, homosexuality can be a capital offense. Yet the alliance persists.
This is not confusion. It is strategy. In Western societies, LGBT rights remain culturally contested, particularly among immigrant communities. Embracing a shared moral cause costs little and builds goodwill where it is most needed — at home, not abroad. Pro-Palestinianism functions as a bridge, allowing incompatible groups to coexist under a single moral banner.
Put together, these puzzles point to a single conclusion. The West is experiencing a genuine spiritual crisis. The sensibilities of the West today are secular, Islam is not attractive for the same reason that Christianity was abandoned. Nihilism cannot integrate diverse populations. And they are diverse. Very large minorities among the young generations in major Western European cities, at times 20%-40%, are Muslim or of Muslim heritage. A new glue is required — one that is emotionally compelling, morally binary, and accessible across cultural divides. Pro-Palestinianism fits the role perfectly.
But civic religions have consequences. They demand sacrifices. Historically, societies stabilise themselves by offloading tension onto those least able to resist. Jews, numerically small and symbolically charged, have always been vulnerable in such moments. There is little reason to believe this time will be different.
I am not predicting gas chambers. At least, I do not insist on them. History rarely repeats itself so neatly. Disenfranchisement, exclusion, informal expulsion, and moral abandonment are more likely. They will be framed, as always, in the language of justice and peace.
The uncomfortable truth is this: pro-Palestinianism did not arise despite Western weakness, but because of it. And until Western societies confront the spiritual emptiness that made this new faith necessary, they will continue to demand offerings. Jews have seen this altar before.
Dr. Daniel Staetsky is an expert in Jewish demography and statistics. He is based in Cambridge, UK.
Uncategorized
Portuguese artists pull out of Jerry Seinfeld-headlined festival
(JTA) — Several Portuguese artists have dropped out of a comedy festival in Lisbon headlined by Jerry Seinfeld, citing their support for Palestinians and implying opposition to Seinfeld’s support for Israel.
At least six acts over recent days have canceled their appearances at the MEO Commedia a La Carte Fest, a new international comedy festival in the Portuguese capital. The event from Oct. 29 to Nov. 1 has advertised that it will host Seinfeld’s first live appearance in Portugal.
Though none of the artists who withdrew mentioned Seinfeld by name, some hinted at a boycott against his pro-Israel views. The Jewish comedian has become one of Hollywood’s most prominent advocates for Israel since October 2023.
Actress and comedian Inês Aires Pereira announced on Instagram on Saturday that “one of the names” featured at the festival “persistently defends ideas and acts that I consider indefensible,” adding, “We cannot relativize or normalize a genocide.”
The comedy duo Cebola Mol posted a graphic of themselves with a watermelon, widely recognized as a symbol of solidarity with Palestinians. “We will celebrate justice, freedom and joy with you on another occasion,” they said on Instagram.
The festival announced on Friday that performances by the groups Tributo Pop and Conjunto Cuca Monga were also canceled, but did not provide reasons. Two other acts, comedian Pedro Tochas and visual artist Vhils, shared their cancellations on Instagram without further details.
Seinfeld has aligned himself with Israel during its current conflict in Gaza, following decades of largely avoiding commenting on political issues. He visited Israel in December 2023 to meet with the families of hostages seized by Hamas on Oct. 7 of that year. Since then, he has attracted attention for a series of dismissive remarks toward pro-Palestinian advocates.
During an appearance last year at Duke University, Seinfeld compared pro-Palestinian activists with the Ku Klux Klan, saying, “The Klan is actually a little better here because they can come right out and say, ‘We don’t like Blacks, we don’t like Jews.’ OK, that’s honest.”
Representatives of Seinfeld and producers of the MEO Commedia a La Carte Fest did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The post Portuguese artists pull out of Jerry Seinfeld-headlined festival appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
UK, France, Canada to ban goods from Israeli settlements
(JTA) —
The United Kingdom, France and Canada will ban goods produced in the West Bank settlements and Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem, British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband told Parliament on Tuesday, explaining that all such communities were deemed by his country to be illegal.
The declaration exacerbated the rising tensions riling the traditionally strong Israel-U.K. alliance. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar warned that these steps stoked antisemitism against British Jews in an on-camera statement to reporters in Jerusalem.
Sa’ar charged that the measures were a politicized hostile action deliberately taken ahead of Friday’s Jewish New Year holiday, with an eye toward influencing the country’s Oct. 27 elections.
Israel, he said, is responding by closing the British Consulate in Jerusalem that services Palestinians. It will also remove British representatives from the International Gaza Support Center in Kiryat Gat and halt the British training of Palestinian Authority security forces. He added that Israel would bar the entry of 12 British politicians and other nationals involved in anti-Israel activity.
France and Canada have also announced a ban on the import of settlement goods, Miliband told parliament. He noted that the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Spain and Norway have either banned goods or in the process of doing so.
In the same address, Miliband affirmed Israel’s right to exist, reflected on his own Jewish roots and rejected the notion that there was a connection between the policy steps against West Bank settlement activity and the safety of British Jews.
What is motivating the U.K., Miliband said, is “a deep sense of shame about what has unfolded in Palestine under the eyes of the international community” as well as Israel’s “clear intent to bury the Palestinian state.”
In response, he said, the U.K. “will introduce an import ban on goods from illegal settlements in the occupied [Palestinian] territory” as part of a “new comprehensive sanctions regime” that will be put in place within nine months.
This will include, he said, “action against specific companies and individuals who provide services, such as construction, infrastructure, financing or real estate for settlement expansion.”
To those who “finance or facilitate illegal settlements, let me say this, you will face the full force of U.K. sanctions,” Miliband warned.
Miliband clarified that the ban would not affect the export of religious items or life-saving Israeli medications. He explained that trade with the settlements was minimal and that the greater impact would be the sanctions on services.
As part of declaring the ban, Miliband said that the British government is also adopting the International Court of Justice’s 2024 advisory opinion that all Israeli settlement activity over the pre-1967 border was illegal.
But others in Parliament pushed back against Miliband’s declaration. MP Richard Tice of Britain’s right-wing Reform party said that the sanctions were a grave mistake that would “embolden the scourge of antisemitism against British Jews on British streets,” endanger ties with the United States and lead to “tit for tat” sanctions from Israel.
Miliband shot back that “no British Jew is responsible for the policies of the Israeli government and it behooves all of us to make sure that there can be no confusion about that,” saying that Tice’s statement “fell foul” of that goal.
The U.K. action is the latest escalation in tensions between Israel and the Labour-led British government headed by Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who took power in July.
The prior government, led by former Labour Premier Keir Starmer, had already angered Israel by recognizing Palestinian statehood in 2025, suspending licenses for the export of arms to Israel and freezing talks toward a free-trade agreement.
France and Canada are also announcing a ban on the import of settlement goods, Miliband told parliament. He explained that the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Spain, and Norway have either banned goods or in the process of doing so.
In concert with Miliband’s appearance at Parliament, Britain and 11 other countries issued a joint statement pledging “their intention to introduce national and/or support European restrictions on trade in goods with settlements which are illegal under international law.”
Those other countries were Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.
The 12-country bloc said it was taking this step to maintain the viability of the two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, describing the situation in the West Bank as “rapidly deteriorating.”
In its statement, the bloc stressed that it was taking this step amid an “unprecedented level of settler violence and settlement expansion, including the unacceptable decision to publish tenders for the E1 settlement project.” That project is seen as cutting through land that would render a Palestinian state unviable.
The post UK, France, Canada to ban goods from Israeli settlements appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
California Gov. Newsom, a presidential hopeful, slams Netanyahu and AIPAC in PBS interview
(JTA) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a 2028 presidential hopeful, ventured farther than ever in his criticisms of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a weekend interview that delved into the Democratic Party’s relationship with Israel.
“I think it’s overwhelmingly opposed to the current regime in Israel,” Newsom said of the party, in a PBS News Hour interview with Amna Nawaz.
Pressed by Nawaz on divisions among his colleagues on Israel, Newsom denied that the subject is “even controversial anymore,” stressing that “the condemnation of what Bibi Netnayahu’s doing is almost universal.” The governor slammed the Israeli military’s conduct in Gaza and condemned the settler violence that has expanded in the West Bank.
“We want a democratic and secure Israel, and we want a secure and democratic Palestinian state as well right next door,” Newsom said, adding that Netanyahu has proved counterproductive to achieving a two-state solution.
Though he repeatedly maintained that Democrats are not divided on Israel, the governor acknowledged that “some of the language” by fellow Democrats “has been weaponized.” Certain “aspects of rhetoric” from individual candidates, he added, are on “the spectrum of concern,” Newsom said.
A number of candidates from the party’s far left place most if not all of the blame on Israel for a war in Gaza that has resulted in tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths. and downplay the role of Hamas in launching the war with the Oct. 7, 2023 raid inside Israel in which 1,200 people were killed and more than 250 were abducted. Newsom’s rhetoric is of a piece with party moderates who are critical of the Israeli government but who call for a secure Israel, reject Hamas and who resist pressure from the left to call Israel’s actions “genocide.”
Newsom nonetheless insisted that the party is unified on the issue. “But I think universally, everyone agrees, even if you don’t think it’s genocide, that it’s been a moral catastrophe,” he said of the war in Gaza. “The vast majority of us also agree about the atrocities on Oct. 7th and how horrific and unacceptable it was, and the terrorism that was perpetrated by Hamas.”
Newsom was among the many U.S. politicians to visit Israel in October 2023, meeting with survivors and families impacted by the attacks.
During a March book tour, Newsom sparked a backlash when he said that some people were referring to Israel “appropriately as sort of an apartheid state.” He quickly walked back these remarks, telling Politico that he had used the term “in the context of the direction that Bibi is going.”
“I revere the state of Israel,” he declared at the time.
The governor warned, however, that if Netanyahu proceeds in the direction of West Bank annexation, apartheid could become “a word you may hear others use.”
In addition to amplifying his condemnation of Netanyahu this weekend, Newsom also addressed the fact that fewer Democrats are accepting funds from political action committees affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobbying group.
As for Newsom himself, Track AIPAC, an organization that compiles Federal Election Commission data to flag pro-Israel campaign contributions, did not log any such donations to the likely presidential candidate. But the group did flag him as “pro-Israel.”
“It’s a minority of Democrats that are accepting AIPAC,” the governor said, noting a “dramatic change” over the last couple years.
“The vast majority of Democrats I talk to, even Democrats in the past that have in the past have taken AIPAC money, are pledging not to now,” Newsom added. “That’s more of a mainstream position, interestingly, within the Democratic Party.”
The post California Gov. Newsom, a presidential hopeful, slams Netanyahu and AIPAC in PBS interview appeared first on The Forward.
