Uncategorized
The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor
There are plenty of examples of blatant antisemitism and attacks on Jews that have occurred over the past 10 months. It seems that every day, we read about a synagogue being attacked, a Jewish student being spat on or assaulted, or the all too mainstream protester chants calling for Intifada or for Jews to go back to Poland — and the list goes on.
Perhaps less obvious — but more frequent — is the antisemitism that’s happening under the radar: things that are circumstantial and much harder to prove.
I’m not talking about Jewish writers having their lectures cancelled out of concern “for their safety” — it’s clear to everyone (except the organizers) where the motivation comes from.
No, this is the kind of discrimination that Black people and others experienced before the Civil Rights movement — and even after: being rejected as a tenant on a lease to an apartment, passed over for a job or promotion based on the color of their skin , or — as in my case — perhaps not having a contract renewed at a college after speaking out against their policies regarding “free speech.”
Do I have proof that me being Israeli or Jewish had anything to do with my dismissal?
Absolutely not.
But are the circumstances suspicious? Yes.
Two years ago, I accepted a Visiting Assistant Professorship in the English Department of a private Midwestern college in the United States. It was a one-year contract, and following the first year, the Chair of the Department notified me how much he appreciated my work — noting the anonymous student evaluations that gave me high marks, that a large number of students requested to take a second class with me, and that I helped raise the visibility of the college through public performances by my students. He also informed me that there was restructuring going on in the English Department, which would result in some of the classes I was teaching being offered only periodically.
In short, he asked me if I would be interested in remaining affiliated with the school, and return either every other semester, or, for instance, if another English teacher took a sabbatical. That suited me fine, as it allowed me to continue teaching, but also gave me time for my own creative endeavors back in Los Angeles, where I was commuting from every week.
On October 7, I was not teaching on campus. But like so many other colleges, a segment of the student population rose up to protest Israel. And even though I was a thousand miles away, I received an email from a student member of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) notifying all faculty that the group was calling for a one-day strike to protest, accompanied with a list of atrocities Israel had allegedly committed, even listing the bombing of the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza two weeks earlier, which had already been attributed to a stray missile from Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
How was it possible for one student to access the entire faculty and student body to spew their propaganda?
I contacted the Provost and Dean of the college to inquire. She replied that this was a recent policy change put into place two years earlier to encourage freedom of expression. I asked how this policy might play out if I rebutted the student’s charges through the college-wide email system, only to have another student rebut my defense, and so on and so on?
She replied that if it got out of hand, the school would shut it down.
I replied that the situation had already gotten out of hand, and trusted I wouldn’t be receiving anymore emails from such organizations.
The student newspaper got wind of this, and contacted me for my opinion. Here’s what they wrote in their article:
Safdie, who is of Israeli and Syrian Jewish descent, found sections of the message antisemitic and questioned why he received the email. “I’m all for freedom of expression, but I’m not sure this decision was able to foresee such a situation where students might abuse the privilege and create a hostile work/study environment for other members of the community.”
Fast forward several months, when I returned to campus for the Spring semester. Within a week of arrival, I received an email from the new chair of the English Department (who was also the associate Dean of the Race and Ethnic Studies program). She wanted to set up a Zoom meeting with me — even though our offices were 10 feet apart.
In a carefully worded statement that sounded like it was crafted by an attorney, she got to the point. Although the college was extremely pleased with all the work that I’d done, and that all my students loved my teaching, the college was making budget cuts and were not going to be able to renew my contract.
When I tried to explain to her my prior arrangement with the previous Chair, she simply replied that she’d be happy to write me a letter of recommendation.
Something about the Zoom call and her demeanor felt suspicious.
On a whim, I did an Internet search on my new Chair.
The first thing that came up on her Twitter Feed was a statement on the masthead of a literary magazine she edited, condemning the alleged mass killing and displacement of Palestinians in the wake of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks.
As I explored further, I discovered other parts of the statement:
The Israeli military—with the support of the U.S. government—has bombarded Palestinian civilians relentlessly, in violation of international law, and deprived Palestinians of food, water, fuel, and electricity.
And:
Because we work to “bring our readers into the living moment, not as tourists, but as engaged participants,” we believe that Palestinians need space to speak directly, whether from siege in Palestine or in diaspora. So too do others who bear witness to the ongoing settler-colonial violence in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
Two days after the Zoom meeting, I figured I might as well take the Chair up on her offer to write me a letter-of-recommendation; it was March, and I could still apply to other universities for employment the following year. (Universities can be suspicious if you leave a position after just two years, so a letter would be crucial to securing a position.)
After a week of email silence, the Chair wrote me back, saying that she wasn’t familiar with my teaching and requested to attend one of my classes to observe my skills. I invited her the following week to attend a class, which fit her schedule, but she did not show, and didn’t even write to give an explanation.
I followed up with an email to offer her another opportunity, followed by a second and third, but there was nothing but email silence.
I should also mention that, at the one faculty meeting we had, she stayed as far away from me as possible, and if I approached, she would quickly engage in discussion with another professor. The topic that day was adding a requirement for English Majors to take an anti-Racism class. One of the new offerings for the following year was focused on racism against Palestinians.
By the end of April, I decided to contact the Associate Dean of Humanities who oversaw the English Department, and sure enough, within an hour of my email, I finally received an email back from the Chair of the English Department, offering to attend my class, but letting me know that she was too busy to write me a letter of recommendation until the end of May — well past the end of the semester, and too late to help with a teaching application for the following year.
If there was ever a thought of going to the administration to complain about my treatment, that was quickly extinguished following an SJP demonstration that demanded that the college divest from Oracle. Apparently, Oracle’s website had stated support for Israel, and the Head of Financial Aid for the college felt the need to apologize for the school’s actions.
A response from the school’s administration read thus:“The business strategy or public statements from Oracle do not represent the viewpoints of the College. Due to the College’s contract with the business and the cost it took to make such major system changes, the College does not have any feasible or affordable alternative.
It also went on to assure protesters:
Less than 0.5 percent of the College’s investments are tied to Israeli companies and that none of these investments are directly held by the college.
As the semester ended, on another whim, I searched the Human Resources page of the college, and sure enough, there was a listing for a new English professor. The skills they were looking for were for someone who taught poetry as well as Race and Ethnic studies courses — none of which I was qualified to teach.
Was the college looking to shift away from courses like Screenwriting, Playwriting, and Non-Fiction — three popular courses I had taught that were always in high demand and had long waiting lists?
I guess I’ll never know.
Oren Safdie is a playwright and screenwriter.
The post The Quiet Antisemitism: My Experience as a Jewish College Professor first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Uncategorized
Seeking funding for a Yiddish project for kids or young people?
די פֿישמאַן-פֿונדאַציע פֿאַר ייִדישער קולטור האָט געמאָלדן אַז זי נעמט שוין אָן סובווענץ-אַפּליקאַציעס אויף נײַע פּראָיעקטן פֿאַרן יאָר 2027. די פּראָיעקטן דאַרפֿן האָבן פֿאַר אַ ציל דאָס שטאַרקן ייִדיש ווי אַ לעבעדיקע שפּראַך, באַזונדערס בײַ קינדער און דער יוגנט.
דער טערמין פֿאַר אַפּליקאַציעס פֿאַרן יאָר 2027 איז דער 7טער נאָוועמבער 2026. די אויסגעטיילטע סובווענצן וועט מען מעלדן אין דעצעמבער.
אַלע אַפּליקאַציעס מוזן זײַן אָנגעשריבן אויף ייִדיש און דאַרפֿן נאָכפֿאָלגן די אַפּליקיר-אָנווײַזונגען וואָס איר קענט געפֿינען דאָ.
אַפּליקאַציעס וועלן ווערן באַטראַכט אויף קאָנקורס-יסודות. מען בעט מען זאָל אַרײַנשיקן אַן אַפּליקאַציע (מיט אַלע נייטיקע בײַלייגונגען) דורך בליצפּאָסט צו:
applications@fishmanfoundation.org
The post Seeking funding for a Yiddish project for kids or young people? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Democrats leader Golan approached by man with knife on Israeli election day
(JTA) — JERUSALEM — Israel Police arrested a man carrying a large knife after he approached Yair Golan, head of the Democrats party, as Golan was campaigning in Tel Aviv on Election Day.
“Contrary to reports, no stabbing attempt occurred,” the police spokesman said in a statement.
The police said officers at the scene noticed a “suspicious object” protruding from beneath the coat of a man standing nearby. When they stopped him for inspection, they found a knife in his possession.
In a statement, Golan’s party said the man approached Golan “in a threatening manner” and that “when Golan’s security guards blocked him, a large knife slipped from beneath his clothing and fell to the ground.”
Police described the suspect as a Jerusalem resident in his 20s. He was arrested and taken to a local police station for questioning. They said the investigation “is ongoing.”
Following the incident, Golan said “incitement and violence will not deter us.” In a statement to the press he blamed the attack on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s negative campaigning and highlighted the ties between one of his spokespeople and Qatar.
“This is the direct result of the poison machine operated by Netanyahu and his Qatari agents. I call on everyone who cares about security and democracy to go out and vote now, so that we can ensure the country we love so dearly becomes a free and safe place once again,” Golan said.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Democrats leader Golan approached by man with knife on Israeli election day appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Rebellion PAC’s antisemitic political ad could incite violence against Jews
Israel did not cause high grocery prices in America.
Israel is not the reason you don’t have free universal healthcare.
But a new political ad from Rebellion PAC depicts struggling young parents grocery shopping in Michigan and putting back a dozen eggs because of U.S. military aid to Israel, saying they can no longer afford basics like bananas because they are funding healthcare in Israel. The ad ends by saying Republican Senate candidate Mike Rogers is for “them” — Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed is for you.
Rebellion PAC, an independent entity that legally cannot coordinate with campaigns or parties, is proudly promoting a political ad that is deeply misleading, inflammatory and dangerous for American Jews. The ad uses classic tropes blaming Jews for economic and social woes, the same propaganda used historically by antisemitic regimes in Nazi Germany and the USSR. The target in this ad is the Jewish state, but the familiar subtext remains: your family is suffering because Jews are taking your money.
This would be antisemitic in any context, but in the current climate it is wildly irresponsible. American Jewish communities are facing unprecedented domestic terror threats and a historic crisis in antisemitism.
In Michigan, where this ad is aimed at voters who may decide control of the U.S. Senate, an armed domestic terrorist drove a car packed with improvised explosives into Temple Israel. The intent was a mass casualty event aimed at killing as many Jews as possible, including the children in the preschool. Brave security team members stopped the attack, but the attacker was only a few feet from perpetrating what could have been the deadliest terror attack on U.S. children since Oklahoma City.
American Jews make up only 2% of the population, but according to the FBI, Jews made up 63% of religion-based U.S. hate crimes in 2025 — and roughly 14% of all reported hate crimes.
Every candidate across the spectrum, including El-Sayed and Rogers, should disavow and condemn the dangerous rhetoric in this ad. This ad takes real problems — the exploding cost of groceries and healthcare — and blames them on Israel. This is classic antisemitic propaganda.
El-Sayed’s campaign distanced itself from the ad without condemning its content.
“This ad is not affiliated in any way with the Abdul for Senate campaign,” El-Sayed campaign spokesperson Roxie Richner said in an emailed statement. “Abdul is focused on pushing back against Trump’s agenda that is raising prices for Michiganders. No one speaks for Abdul but himself and his campaign.”
It’s worth noting that the El-Sayed campaign did not disavow the content of the ad and only issued a statement via email. El-Sayed himself did not issue a public stance on social media or criticize the inflammatory and dangerous content of the ad. His response is wholly inadequate—it does nothing to confront the antisemitism in the ad, it simply points out his campaign did not make it.
Contrast this with his former opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens, who lambasted the ad on X, stating, “This type of fearmongering about Israel is wrong.” she went on to say, “Do we need to lower costs by building more homes, securing people’s health care, and creating a fairer federal tax code? Yes, we do!! How we do so is not by blaming the high costs of our goods on the only Jewish homeland in the world.”
El-Sayed should unequivocally condemn this ad and its content, not just distance himself from it. Every candidate should stand firmly against antisemitic rhetoric in electoral politics.
When bad actors tell people their economic problems are caused by Israel, it inevitably creates a dangerous situation for Jewish Americans. Though public opinion polls show falling support for the Jewish state, it’s difficult for Americans to take those frustrations out on Israel directly, so local American Jews become a convenient target for their misplaced anger. This is exactly what happened in Michigan at Temple Israel. A Hezbollah sympathizer took his anger on Israel out on the local Jewish population.
Americans are facing real issues. But Israel is not the cause. Our grocery bills are higher for a variety of complex reasons. Grocery inflation started during the pandemic with disrupted supply chains. Production costs have risen. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine raised global grain prices. Bird flu drove up the price of eggs. Tariffs have also impacted food prices.
In terms of healthcare, a Nov. 2025 Gallup poll found that 46% of Americans preferred a government-run healthcare system, while 48% preferred a system based mostly on private health insurance. Cutting or ending U.S. military aid to Israel would not change the fact that Americans are deeply divided on how we should address our healthcare systems’ deep-seated problems. That would require American lawmakers to agree on and enact changes to how our own system is financed and organized. This is an issue of political philosophy — not lack of funds. Israel is not preventing the U.S. from organizing or financing our own healthcare system. Ending military aid to Israel would neither reverse those food-price pressures nor establish universal healthcare. The ad offers struggling Americans a scapegoat for their hardships—and American Jews face the danger of being treated as that scapegoat’s local representatives.
Rebellion PAC’s co-founder and former Executive Director Brianna Wu decried the ad, stating, “I would have quit as executive director rather than produce this,” calling the ad “awful.” We should all follow her example.
Candidates, thought leaders and elected officials must all come together and condemn this dangerous and antisemitic ad. American Jews are already being discriminated against, attacked, and in severe cases, murdered by people who hold them responsible for Israel. Political leaders must reject rhetoric that puts an even larger target on our backs by turning us into scapegoats for America’s economic struggles and healthcare failures.
The post Rebellion PAC’s antisemitic political ad could incite violence against Jews appeared first on The Forward.

