There are moments of decision that come to each of us when a moral choice must be made. Most of the time, those decisions have no great impact and we can make them easily without worrying about the risks such an action would carry for us or for the people near and dear to us. But there are other times in which our actions do have significant consequences and risks for us and our dear ones, and that our actions will define us for better or worse.
This blog was inspired (or better – provoked) by President Trump‘s and his administration’s ongoing efforts to bully large swaths of America’s citizenry and bend to his will government workers, the Justice department, politicians, educators, scientists, legal firms, universities, cultural, artistic, racial, and immigrant groups, and most recently six members of Congress – all respected veterans and former intelligence officials – who urged in a video disseminated widely that all members of the military not to obey unlawful orders, per the military code. President Trump’s irascible threat that they should be charged with treason and punished with execution is the most recent and stunning outrage.
Some have compared what is happening now in the United States to Germany in the 1930s when all democratic norms were destroyed in Hitler’s rapid and irrepressible march to dictatorship and the persecution and murder of Jews and others who resisted the Nazis. I don’t know if this claim is an accurate comparison or not. I have my doubts given the complexities of American democracy and the independence of federal, state, and local centers of authority that still exist, and given the noble actions of many judges at every level and of hundreds of attorneys who have filed law suits against Trump’s unconstitutional actions, though Trump is following the autocratic playbook closely, per Project 2025. I will leave the comparison to historians.
Without a doubt in my reading of history, however, the most extreme acts of moral courage, resistance and defiance against a murderous regime were taken by the many thousands of rescuers who hid or helped Jews during the Holocaust at great personal risk to themselves, their families and communities.
Years ago I read The Altruistic Personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe – What Led Ordinary Men and Women to Risk Their Lives on Behalf of Others? by Samuel P. and Pearl M. Oliner with an Introduction by Rabbi Harold Schulweis (New York: The Free Press, 1988). Rabbi Schulweis, a moral giant in his generation, invited the Oliners to speak at his synagogue – Valley Beth Shalom in Los Angeles – and he invited the Board of Rabbis of Southern California to meet the authors and learn about their work.
It is written on the cover the following biographical notes about the authors and the purpose and content of the book:
“Samuel [Oliner] was ten years old when his entire family was murdered by the Nazis in Poland. Thanks to the help of a Polish Christian woman, he found a place to hide through the war – and survive. His experience left him with a profound, lifelong sense of wonder and a question that was the origin of this book.
In a time of extreme danger, what had led this woman, and a few thousand like her, to risk her own life and the lives of her family to help those who were marked for death – even total strangers – while others stood passively by?
To answer that complex and critically important question, Samuel and Pearl Oliner undertook the massive Altruistic Personality Project, which interviewed over 700 rescuers and nonrescuers living in Poland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Italy during the Nazi occupation.
Samuel (1930-2021) was a Professor of Sociology at Humboldt State University. Pearl (1931-2021) was a Professor of Education at Humboldt State University.
By comparing and contrasting rescuers and bystanders, [the Oliners] discovered that those who intervened were distinguished by certain common characteristics, including a deep-seated, wide-ranging empathy to others developed in their childhood homes, where moral and ethical values were not only strongly held, but acted upon by their parents. Unlike their neighbors who were concerned with their own survival and chose not to become involved, rescuers felt a more extensive concern and responsibility for the fate of the others and believed that what they did would make a difference…the Altruistic Personality explores the experiences and motivations of those uncommon individuals who aided Jews without compensation of any kind-and with full knowledge of the fatal consequences that would befall them if their actions were discovered.”
Altruism is based on a faith in a higher moral authority to which one is committed and the standards of which permeate one’s attitudes and behavior towards others, especially those outside one’s personal cultural, religious, ethnic, and national communities, and regardless of one’s personal self-interest and safety. This faith and moral commitment can come from one’s religious faith, parents, family, and other community groups to which a person belonged.
The Oliners learned in their research that rescuers did not consider themselves to be moral heroes. In their interviews these uncommon individuals explained that they could not do other than what they did and be able to live with themselves, regardless of the great risks involved. Rescuers felt instinctively and intuitively the difference between moral right and wrong and acted always according to their deeply held moral values nurtured and emphasized since childhood. They present to us a powerful model of quiet defiance and resistance.
The following are selected passages from this book:
“I did nothing unusual; anyone would have done the same thing in my place.” A Dutchman [said] who sheltered a Jewish family for two years.” (p. 113)
“Rescuers did differ from others in their interpretation of religious teaching and religious commitment, which emphasized the common humanity of all people and therefore [rescuers] supported efforts to help Jews.” (p. 156)
“I found it incomprehensible and inadmissible that for religious reasons or as a result of a religious choice, Jews would be persecuted. It’s like saving somebody who is drowning. You don’t ask them what God they pray to. You just go and save them.” (p. 166)
“…the language of care dominated [for most rescuers]: Pity, compassion, concern, affection made up the vocabulary of 76 percent of rescuers…”(p. 168)
“Rescuers described their early family relationships in general and their relationships with their mothers in particular as closer significantly more often than did non-rescuers. Rescuers also felt significantly closer to their fathers than did bystanders. From such family relationships, more rescuers learned the satisfactions accruing from personal bonds with others.” (p. 173)
“What distinguished rescuers from non-rescuers was their tendency to be moved by pain. Sadness and helplessness aroused their empathy. More frequently than others, rescuers were likely to say ‘I can’t feel good if others around me feel sad,’ ‘seeing people cry upsets me,’ ‘I get very upset when I see an animal in pain,’ ‘It upsets me to see helpless people,’ and ‘I get angry when I see someone hurt.’” (p. 174)
“…parents [in disciplining their children] of rescuers depended significantly less on physical punishment and significantly more on reasoning.” (p. 179)
“Involvement, commitment, care, and responsibility are the hallmarks of extensive persons [or ‘expansive persons’ – An extensive/expansive person is often friendly, outgoing, talkative, or generous by nature.] Disassociation, detachment, and exclusiveness are the hallmarks of constricted persons. Rescuers were marked by extensivity [or expansiveness], whereas non-rescuers and bystanders in particular, were marked by constrictedness, by an ego that perceived most of the world beyond [his/her] own boundaries as peripheral.” (p. 186)
“Constricted people experience the external world as largely peripheral except insofar as it may be instrumentally useful. More centered on themselves and their own needs, they pay scant attention to others… contractedness begins in early life. Family attachments are weak, and discipline relies heavily on physical punishment, the latter often routine and gratuitous. Reasoning and explaining [of parents to their children when a child does wrong] are infrequent [for the contracted personality]. Family values center on the self and social convention; relationships with others are guarded and generally viewed as commodity exchanges. Stereotypes regarding outsiders are common.” (p. 251)
“Moral courage is thus the conspicuous characteristic only of the independent, autonomous, ego-integrated liberal.” (p. 256)
Again, I am not making a direct comparison between what is taking place today in the United States with Germany in the 1930s. We Americans are, nevertheless, being challenged morally in ways most of us alive today have not experienced or imagined possible ever in our lifetimes. Our political leaders as well as university presidents and their boards, law firms, entertainment companies, journalists and the media, scientists and the men and women serving in the armed forces systematically are being morally challenged by a President whose clear intent is for Americans to bend the knee to his autocratic will.
The book may explain one important reason why so many Americans continue to support President Trump, though a Gallup poll released yesterday shows that Trump’s approval rating has sunk to a historic low of 36 percent with disapproval at 60 percent, and that the MAGA coalition is fracturing.
The book, though published in 1988, is still available and I recommend it highly.
To say we are living in a confusing, destabilizing, polarizing, and dangerous era is stating the obvious. In thinking back over the past thirty years, I offer an expanded list of events that I believe contributed to bringing us to this inflection moment in American history, mostly negative events (sorry to say), but many positive ones too (I have not included foreign happenings except for those that have affected directly the United States and the stability of our nation).
The positive events:
The election of the first African American president of the United States;
The recovery from the 2008-9 economic crisis;
The normalization of LGBTQ rights;
The passage of the Affordable Care Act;
The Iran Nuclear deal;
The largest march in American history for women’s rights following the installation of Donald Trump as President on January 21, 2017;
The galvanizing of the Me-Too and Black Lives Matter movements;
The passage of climate change legislation and the international Paris Climate Accord;
The nomination of the first woman of a major political party for president of the United States and the installation of the first woman and person of color as vice-president in US history;
The multiple and successful law suits brought against unconstitutional and illegal actions taken by the Trump Administration;
The end of the Gaza War and the return of the Israeli hostages;
The November elections in New Jersey, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and California;
The “No Kings” march.
The negative events:
The 9/11/2001 terrorist attack;
The Afghan and Iraqi wars in which 7000 Americans, 200,000 Afghanis, and 600,000 Iraqis were killed during the United States’ longest wars against Al Qaida and extremist Muslim terrorists;
The 2008-9 US economic meltdown, mortgage crisis, and bank failures;
The rulings of the Roberts’ Supreme Court that have compromised American democracy including Citizens United, the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade, the discarding of key elements of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the gutting of affirmative action in college decisions, the expansion of gun rights, the granting of presidential immunity, and the MAGA assault on voting rights;
Multiple mass shootings in cities across the country;
Increasing income inequality, the accumulation of massive wealth of the top one percent, regressive tax policies, and the exploding federal debt;
The rise of social media (for better and worse) reflecting negative and positive human impulses;
The spread of opinion-laced “information” through media bubbles and the diminishing viability of classic news sources (e.g. newspapers, network evening news broadcasts, etc.);
The rise of Donald Trump and the MAGA movement;
The multiple indictments and double-impeachment of a sitting American president;
The Covid plague and death of 1.2 million Americans;
The violent rebellion against the legitimate election of a president on January 6, 2021 led by the sitting president who refused to accept his electoral defeat;
Russia’s aggression and nearly four-year war against Ukraine;
The Hamas invasion of Israel and the murder of 1200 Israelis and foreign workers on October 7, 2023, the taking of 250 hostages, and the ensuing 2-year Israel-Hamas war resulting in the death of more than one thousand Israeli soldiers and tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians;
The dramatic rise in antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and anti-Israel hatred on the far political right and far political left;
The rise in racism, misogyny, homophobia, and Islamophobia;
Trump’s pardoning of all those tried and sentenced for violence and sedition against the United States on January 6, 2021;
The return of Trump 2.0 in the 2024 presidential election that has brought a systematic attack on American democracy and norms, the Constitution, media, the Justice and Defense departments, most federal agencies, American foreign aid, the State Department, EPA, HHS, the American military and intelligence services, the human rights of immigrants and peoples of color, the killing of people without due process in international waters based on the assertion that they are narco-terrorists, the threat of ICE and the use of the military in cities and states, Trump’s weaponizing of the Justice Department against his political critics and enemies, and Trump’s call for the execution of six members of Congress (all distinguished military veterans and intelligence officers) who cut a video telling service members not to follow illegal orders;
Trump’s cancellation of the Iran Deal, Biden’s Climate Change legislation, and the US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord;
The attack from the far political right-wing on the Judeo-Christian ethic;
The normalization of white Christian nationalist supremacy in the US;
The massive grift and enrichment of the President, his family and wealthy friends in the amount of billions of dollars in an ongoing violation of the US Constitution’s Emolument clause.
Like so many of you, I have responded with disgust, anger, anxiety, exhaustion, and despair at the plethora of bad news, the cruelty, inhumanity, indecency, and ongoing assault against the US Constitution and American democratic norms that permeates our politics and culture in these days. I have asked myself why millions of Americans and their congressional representatives accept without protest the developing autocracy of Donald Trump who has in these first ten months of his second presidency done so much damage to American democracy and our democratic traditions.
I am reminded of the Irish poet William Butler Yeats’ (1865-1939) famous poem The Second Coming that he wrote in 1919 shortly after the First World War ended and as the Irish War of Independence began. The poem was inspired by that era’s turmoil, chaos and societal collapse (not unlike our own times):
“Things fall apart; the center cannot hold; / Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world. / The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, / And everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; / The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
It seems to me that there are two primary motivating needs of tens of millions of Americans who have supported or acquiesced to Trump’s growing autocracy and immorality. In times of flux and chaos, people crave, on the one hand, certainty, and on the other a sense of security with like-minded culturally similar others.
My childhood Rabbi Leonard Beerman (1921-2014) offered a profound bit of wisdom, as he always did, long ago when he wrote:
“I live with uncertainty and doubt. But what I have learned is that doubt may be the most civilizing force we have available to us, for it is doubt that protects us from the arrogance of utter rightness, from the barbarism of blind loyalties, all of which threaten the human possibility.”
The writer Kathryn Schultz (b. 1954) explains in her book Being Wrong why certainty is so appealing to so many:
“The simplest truth about certainty is that it feels good. It gives us the comforting illusion that our environment is stable and knowable, and that therefore we are safe within it. Just as important, it makes us feel informed, intelligent, and powerful…Uncertainty leaves us stranded in a universe that is too big, too open, too ill-defined…Where certainty reassures us with answers, doubt confronts us with questions, not only about our future but also about our past: about the decisions we made, the beliefs we held, the people and groups to whom we offered our allegiance, the very way we lived our lives…the unconsulting fact [is] that …we can’t shield ourselves and our loved ones from error, accident, and disaster…our attraction to certainty is best understood as an aversion to uncertainty.” (p. 169)
That is where autocrats step in. They claim certainty about everything, contrary to what the French philosopher Charles Bernard Renouvier (1815-1903) poignantly said: “Properly speaking, there is no certainty; there are only people who are certain.”
Of course, there are always options, some are better and some are worse, but it’s upon us, an informed citizenry, to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each based upon the facts, science, reason, human rights, and the principles of equality, justice, compassion, empathy, and peace.
As elections begin to appear on the political horizon, it’s important for us all to consider what constitutes great leadership. As concisely as I can characterize it, great leadership requires not just vision and high moral rectitude, but the love of truth and a sacred commitment to further the common good. There are times when all leaders must stand up against the crowd, take a political risk knowing that they can lose everything, power, position, and the respect of their followers. Great leaders, however, bear the responsibility to act on behalf of the best interests of the public and to set a high moral standard for themselves and their colleagues.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, in his superb book that I highly recommend, Lessons in Leadership – A Weekly Reading of the Jewish Bible (Jerusalem: Koren Publishers, 2015) put it simply: “To lead is to serve. Greatness is humility.” (p. 190)
As the election season begins in the United States, and would-be leaders announce their candidacies, polls rejecting the Trump administration’s positions on virtually all the issues of concern to American voters, along with the millions who turned out to march on “No Kings Day,” and the important work of so many American lawyers and judges who have advocated for and ruled on behalf of American constitutional and state law and against autocratic over-reach, ought to give us a measure of hope and remind us how much agency we still have.
In electing candidates worthy of our support as servant-leaders, we can reverse the anti-democratic actions and trends that have plagued the United States in recent decades, and begin to restore American democracy despite the horrific damage that has been done.
We are today witnessing a dramatic rise in antisemitism in the United States and around the world that most Jews alive have never seen, experienced or imagined before. This millennia-old shape-shifting hatred that appears in different forms in every era continues to permeate our politics and culture.
It is important to understand what modern Jew-hatred is and what it is not. To that end, despite it being a complex psychological, cultural, religious, political, and historic phenomenon unlike any other hatred in world history, I offer a few comments below that I believe help clarify what this hatred is, what it is not, and what we Jews (and others) should do as we confront it.
“There are a number of modern and classic iterations of antisemitism that continue to be promulgated by the [political] far left and far right. They include Holocaust denial, offensive stereotypes of Jews (such as casting a Jewish individual as a Christ-killer, a puppet master, imposter, and swindler who manipulates national events for malign purposes, a foreigner, a controller of banking, the media, government, and the wealthy elite), denying the Jewish people our right to self-determination, applying double standards to Jews and Israel that are not applied to any other nation, using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism to characterize Israel and/or Israelis, drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis, and holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.” –Rabbi John Rosove, “From the West to the East – A Memoir of a Liberal American Rabbi” (West of West Books, 2024)
“The antisemite was a coward, afraid of himself, of his own consciousness, of his own liberty, of his instincts, of his responsibilities, of solitariness, of change, of society, and the world — of everything except the Jews. The antisemite doesn’t hate Jews because of some bad experience with flesh-and-blood Jews, but uses a preexisting ‘idea of the Jew’ as a prism for ordering his troubled world. Antisemitism was thus a psychic liberation from responsibility for one’s conscience, a rebellion against the burdens of rationalism….If the Jew did not exist, the antisemite would invent him.” -Jean Paul Sartre, Anti-Semite and Jew (1946)
“Jews know that democracy is their best protection. Less democracy means less protection for all minorities, and even if the dictator makes a big show of being the Jews’ protector and a friend of Israel, it’s at best temporary and conditional. No one is ever safe with a dictator, certainly not the Jews.” -Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, July 29, 2022
“Today, anti-Zionism is often a form of antisemitism, but not always. After all, there are plenty of anti-Zionist Jews who identify as Jews proudly. However, the single-minded blind obsession with Israel often bleeds into hatred of Jews and normalizes Jew-hatred. Of course, not all criticism of Israel is illegitimate or unwarranted, and certainly not antisemitic, but some of it is, and on some college campuses and on-line forums a lot of it is. We need to be able to appreciate subtlety, nuance, and historical context, and to distinguish between legitimate critique and the new mutated form of antisemitism dressed up in the garment of pathological anti-Zionism.” -Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch – Podcast “In These Times” with Natan Sharansky (2022)
“What we generally call antisemitism is a 19th-century coinage that helped turn an ancient religious hatred into a racial hatred. As racial hatred came to be considered uncouth after World War II, anti-Zionism (that is, blanket opposition to a Jewish state, not criticism of particular Israeli policies) became a more acceptable way of opposing Jewish political interests and denigrating Jews. Should Israel cease to exist, new forms of bigotry will surely develop for the next stage of anti-Judaism, adapted to the prevailing beliefs of the times. The common denominator in each of these mutations is an idea, based in fantasy and conspiracy, about Jewish power. The old-fashioned religious antisemite believed Jews had the power to kill Christ. The 19th-century antisemites who were the forerunners to the Nazis believed Jews had the power to start wars, manipulate kings and swindle native people of their patrimony. Present-day anti-Zionists attribute to Israel and its supporters in the United States vast powers that they do not possess, like the power to draw America into war. On the far right, antisemites think that Jews are engaged in an immense scheme to replace white, working-class America with immigrant labor. Tucker Carlson and others have taken this conspiracy theory mainstream, even if they are careful to leave out the part about Jews… the foul antisemitism of the right, yoked to its old themes of nativism, protectionism, nationalism and isolationism, is erupting into the public square like a burst sewage pipe.” –Bret Stephens – What an Antisemite’s Fantasy Says About Jewish Reality – NYT – Jan. 21, 2022
“In 2025 America, antisemitism is real – sometimes in plain sight, sometimes encoded and winked at, and sometimes expressed as obsessive hatred of Israel and Zionism. The problem transcends left-right politics – stretching from Nick Fuentes and “great replacement” conspiracists on the far-right to those on the far-left who cast Jews globally as oppressors. We see it everywhere – from chants in the streets to online memes in our social media feeds and conspiracies festering in the darker corners of the web. As we wage this critical fight, we must take care not to undermine either our own interests or the health of American democracy. And we must be honest that – at times – the fight against antisemitism is itself being politicized and weaponized. If we are not careful in our approach, we risk ending up less safe, less free, and more isolated.
We cannot define legitimate criticism of the Israeli government as antisemitism – especially not in law. Weaponizing antisemitism as justification to slam the gates shut [on immigration into the United States] is not “protecting Jews,” it is erasing a core American ideal that granted us protection. To allow right-wing actors – including those willing to defend and platform dangerous figures like Nick Fuentes – to chip away at those pillars in the name of “protecting Jews” is not only hypocritical and ironic – it is deeply, dangerously self-defeating. Not all the anger coming at the Jewish community today is rooted in ancient hatred. Some of it is rooted in protest against the policies of the government of Israel – policies that many Jews disagree with as well. While some protest on the left crosses a line into antisemitic narratives, that doesn’t negate the legitimate reasons for much of the protest. We cannot fight antisemitism by censoring political speech, by withdrawing from civil rights coalitions, by letting the far-right weaponize our fear, or by refusing to look at our own agency and responsibility. We should be honest that both the left and right ends of the spectrum have some antisemitic elements and not allow this important issue to be made into a political football. We need to defend democracy. Defend free speech. Build alliances. Protect the rule of law. And we need to do all this out of a firm conviction that Jewish safety in America will not come from isolating ourselves or policing ideas. It will come only from solidarity, partnership, and the deep and universal American promise that freedom and equality are not for some, but for all.” –Jeremy Ben-Ami, “Can We Do Better at Fighting Antisemitism,” Word on the Street, November 2, 2025)
In the last number of weeks, Rozana International began operating a mobile clinic in Gaza to begin to address the overwhelming health tragedy there. Rozana’s staff of two doctors and a nurse—all Palestinian Gaza residents—are treating 100 Palestinian patients every day in a large tent; men, women and children who were bombed out of their homes and who themselves are living in makeshift shelters. In this fragile setting, a team of local medical professionals is on the ground every day—treating injuries and addressing urgent health needs. With a planned increase in staff and sufficient supplies, the clinic looks to serve 10,000 patients a month.
Rozana International is an organization that uses health diplomacy to strengthen ties of communication and cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians. I have been a supporter for about ten years and believe not only in its humanitarian mission but in its success as a way to help Palestinians in dire need of medical help, but also as an Non-Governmental-Organization (NGO) that brings out the best in Israelis and Palestinians, working together to save lives.
On Sunday, November 9, I invite you to join a webinar with Mohammed Asideh, Rozana’s director of advocacy and the head of Rozana’s Palestine NGO office in Ramallah. He is in charge of Rozana’s Gaza Mobile clinic.
Rozana’s short-term aspiration, once the first clinic is fully operational, is to open and fund a second clinic to handle minor surgeries that are not getting the attention of the severely diminished hospital system. Rozana also has separate funding to provide a “warm line” for a lactation counseling pilot project for Gazan mothers. These projects are the building blocks that will allow Rozana to establish a permanent Rozana Palestinian NGO office in Gaza. When that happens, it will allow Rozana to play a significant humanitarian role there going forward.
Rozana Palestine’s operations include a variety of policies that comply with U.S. government guidelines regarding counterterrorism and money laundering.
Both the Quran and the Talmud teach that if we are able to save even one life, we save the entire world. We who support Rozana believe that precept must include our Palestinian brothers and sisters. Despite the ongoing tragedy of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, the creation of Rozana’s Mobile Clinic gives Americans of all faith traditions and those with no faith tradition as well the opportunity to help save Palestinian lives.
I believe in Rozana, its leadership, its health care physicians and nurses, and what it has done so successfully over many years in bringing Israelis and Palestinians together in partnership. It is an organization worthy of our support.
Please join us in this Webinar to learn more about Rozana’s life-saving work. You will be moved. To register – join us on November 9 at 1:00 PM EST .
In response to a landmark congressional letter to President Trump led by Senator Adam Schiff (Democrat – California) and signed by 46 Democratic Senators (all but Senator Futterman of Pennsylvania) voicing clear opposition to potential Israeli annexation of the West Bank or Gaza, J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami issued the following statement:
“This is a tremendous show of unity across the Democratic caucus. Together, Democrats are sending a clear message to extremists in the Israeli government: If they think they can get away with annexation without consequences, it’s time to think again.
The letter demonstrates a broad, principled commitment to Israel’s long-term security, aspirations for Palestinian statehood, a viable path to peace, and a sustainable US-Israel relationship rooted in shared democratic values. We applaud the senators’ leadership in making clear that illegal, unilateral annexation runs counter to American values and would harm Israel’s interests by reversing the progress toward regional integration achieved by the Gaza ceasefire and weakening the US-Israel relationship.
J Street has long believed that Israel’s future as a secure, democratic homeland for the Jewish people depends on the Palestinian people’s ability to live in freedom and dignity in a state of their own in the West Bank and Gaza. Extremists who want to claim the entire land for Israel are pursuing annexation to make that outcome impossible, locking in endless conflict, destroying Israel’s democratic character and entrenching Israel’s status as a pariah state.
We urge the Trump Administration to continue making clear that any steps toward annexation are unacceptable and undermine progress made through the ceasefire, and to prioritize the pursuit of a renewed diplomatic effort to achieve a regional peace.”
Note: J Street is a pro-Israel, pro-democracy and pro-peace political organization in Washington, D.C. that affirms that only a negotiated resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is agreed to by Israelis and Palestinians peacefully working together can the legitimate needs and national aspirations of both peoples be met. J Street endorses more than 200 Members of Congress and has chapters in most major American cities as well as chapters on more than 40 college and university campuses across the country. For more information about J Street policies and advocacy work, go to http://www.Jstreet.org.
I signed onto this important letter as a proud American Jew and Reform Rabbi, liberal Zionist and supporter of the people and State of Israel, despite my strong criticism of the most extreme right-wing messianic and anti-democratic government in the history of the State of Israel. As I discussed in detail in my Kol Nidre sermon at Temple Israel of Hollywood (for those interested, you can view it on YouTube here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28uW3QLeE28), I believe that this is the time for the American Jewish community and especially young liberal and progressive American Jews who feel alienated from Israel and the organized American Jewish community, to stay engaged with Judaism, the Jewish people and the State of Israel at this most horrific inflection moment in modern Jewish history and in the context of the dramatic increase of antisemitism in the United States and around the world in decades. To date, hundreds of American Rabbis have signed onto the following letter and more are signing on every day. It will be released soon. No letter of this kind has been written or signed before by so many American rabbis.
“As rabbis from across the United States committed to the security and prosperity of the Jewish people, we are writing in our personal capacities to declare that we cannot remain silent in the face of rising anti-Zionism and its political normalization throughout our nation. When public figures like New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani refuse to condemn violent slogans, deny Israel’s legitimacy, and accuse the Jewish state of genocide, they, in the words of New York Board of Rabbis president Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, “Delegitimize the Jewish community and encourage and exacerbate hostility toward Judaism and Jews.”
As prominent New York City Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove stated in a recent sermon, “Zionism, Israel, Jewish self-determination—these are not political preferences or partisan talking points. They are constituent building blocks and inseparable strands of my Jewish identity. To accept me as a Jew but to ask me to check my concern for the people and state of Israel at the door is a nonsensical proposition and an offensive one, no different than asking me to reject God, Torah, mitzvot, or any other pillar of my faith.”
We will not accept a culture that treats Jewish self-determination as a negotiable ideal or Jewish inclusion as something to be “granted.” The safety and dignity of Jews in every city depend on rejecting that false choice.
Therefore, we call on all Americans who value peace and equality to participate fully in the democratic process in order to stand up for candidates who reject antisemitic and anti-Zionist rhetoric, and who affirm Israel’s right to exist in peace and security.
We also call on our interfaith and communal partners to stand with the Jewish community in rejecting this dangerous rhetoric and to affirm the rights of Jews to live securely and with dignity.
Now is the time for everyone to unite across political and moral divides, and to reject the language that seeks to delegitimize our Jewish identity and our community.”
I am 75 years old. The last time I attended a massive march was in 1987 in Washington, D.C. on behalf of the right of Soviet Jews to immigrate to Israel or to the United States. Before that I was a frequent public protester against American involvement against the Vietnam War and in civil rights demonstrations in the 1960s. Since then, after serving as a congregational rabbi for more than 40 years, my social justice activism has been expressed in the context of my community’s activism and in my writings. But, I will be at one of Los Angeles’ No Kings Rallies with my children and grandchildren this weekend because my outrage at what Trump is doing to innocent Americans and to our democracy needs outward expression.
The only actions that are now making a difference and protecting our democracy are the many court cases and judges who are rejecting in rulings Trump’s illegal executive orders. Also, we have to be grateful to the many Democratic state governors who are courageously resisting Trump in their states and the Democratic Congressional Representatives and Senators who are doing everything they can to resist the malignancies of Trump.
The only action we American citizens can take before the mid-term election that might begin to persuade Trump and his sycophantic Congress and the many voters who voted for Trump in the 2024 election but who are now appalled by his excesses and immorality is to participate in non-violent demonstrations throughout the country and support financially candidates for election in the mid-terms whose values align with our own.
I am at once excited and anxious to participate in a No Kings Rally this weekend. I’m not anxious for my own safety, but on account of my fear that Trump’s minions will be sent deliberately in plain clothes to violently disrupt peaceful demonstrations and give Trump the excuse he wants to send more federal soldiers into “blue cities and states” to quell what he characterizes as “anti-American traitors.”
I urge everyone to attend one of these rallies. If more than ten million Americans turn out, which I heard is one goal of the organizers, we will be furthering the movement to take back our democracy in the mid-terms and to break through the “ice” of the MAGA movement.
No matter what the provocations we might encounter, everyone who attends these rallies must remain absolutely non-violent.
Introductory Note: I delivered this sermon on Kol Nidre at Temple Israel of Hollywood where I served as Senior Rabbi from 1988 to 2019. The YouTube above is available to watch or the written text below.
Shanah tovah.
It’s so good to look out from this bimah once again and see so many friendly faces. I’ve missed you.
I thank our Board of Trustees and my clergy colleagues for extending to me the invitation to speak with you on this holiest of nights. I’m honored to have this privilege. The adage that you can’t go home again doesn’t apply to me here. Temple Israel was and remains a home away from home for my family and me. Our sons were educated here, and now our two grandchildren are enrolled in our schools. L’dor va-dor.
Since I became Rabbi Emeritus six-plus years ago so much has happened in each of our lives and our families, in the life of this community, in our country, Israel and the Middle East, and around the world.
And here we are, together again at this annual reunion, as we begin Yom Kippur and Temple Israel’s 100th anniversary year.
Tonight commences our day of fasting, reflection, self-criticism, and renewal, and is an opportunity to count our blessings too, to cherish each other, to remember those who have passed on who have been dear to us, and those who built this community and left it to us as part of their legacy.
Particularly in these soul-crushing and heart-breaking times in which we’re trying to make moral sense in this new era that began on October 7th two years ago, it’s important to remind ourselves who we are and who we’ve been as Jews over our long history.
Judaism includes many things, a moral and legal tradition founded upon the principle of tikun olam (repairing the world), a religion and faith, a culture, history, languages, a Homeland, literature, art and music.
Though twice we were forcibly exiled from the Land of Israel, we’ve kept the Holy City of Jerusalem in our hearts. In exile we’ve suffered persecutions, but we survived as Jews despite all those who sought to destroy us.
Our liturgies, philosophies, theologies, and ideologies evolved as we’ve lived and adapted in lands throughout the world.
We are therefore not a religious and faith community alone. We’re a people and civilization distinguished by our moral values, ideas, and sense of community, lived experience and history no less significant than the Greek, Roman, Ottoman, and British empires, though we’ve never occupied as much territory as any of them.
I was asked to speak tonight about Israel, the war, Zionism, and our relationship as American Jews to the Jewish State, and I confess that after accepting the invitation, I asked myself how I ought to speak about this most horrific inflection moment in modern Jewish history and in the history of Israel.
To start, the 20-point peace plan unveiled on Monday at the White House, has many good things in it, including an end to the war, the immediate return of the hostages, a plan for the day after in Gaza, the surrender of Hamas, a surge of humanitarian aid, no forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, an eventual Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, a recognition of the Palestinian aspiration of self-determination and a “credible pathway” toward statehood, and the support of the Arab world, not a small thing at all.
The proposal needs Hamas to support it and we’ll know soon enough if it does. Word is that it intends to reject it, but even if Hamas accepts the plan, it’s likely that Prime Minister Netanyahu and Hamas’ leadership will, for their own domestic political reasons, drag their feet and put obstacles in the way, or even derail the initiative altogether.
A significant weakness of the plan is that no Palestinians were involved in developing the agreement and there was no mention of the future of the West Bank. For true peace and a two-state solution ever to emerge, Israelis and the Palestinians must work face-to-face, from the ground up, not top down with one of the parties excluded, as Trump’s plan does.
After the press conference, PM Netanyahu, speaking in Hebrew, rejected Palestinian statehood as he has done throughout his political career.
I fear, therefore, that the status quo before Monday’s announcement hasn’t really changed, though I would love to be wrong.
My initial intent in speaking with you tonight was not to talk policy; rather, to reflect about who we are as Jews, and what impact the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023 and these two years of war have had on our identity as liberal American Jews, our Jewish values, and our relationship with the people and State of Israel.
Since October 7th, like so many of you, I have continually felt despondent, outraged, grief-stricken, vengeful, and deeply worried about the families of those murdered on that day, the well-being of our hostages and young soldiers and their families, and about the thousands of innocent Gazans who have lost their loved ones, homes, and communities.
I’ve been a Zionist since my earliest years. My family was among the earliest pioneers to Palestine starting in 1880, and I have many dear Israeli friends. I’ve studied, taught and written about Zionism, the State of Israel, and Jewish history, about Jewish texts, literature and values. But, nothing has pierced my heart and soul like what we have experienced during these past two years. Consequently, no sermon I have ever given has been more difficult and painful for me to write than this one.
The founding of the State of Israel only three years after the greatest tragedy ever to befall our people, transformed who we were to become as Jews in this era. The new state returned us to our ancient Homeland and to history. Israel gave us confidence and agency. It restored our pride as a people. It offered us protection from antisemitic hate and violence. And it became a laboratory in which our people’s ethical tradition could be tested in the context of our attaining power and sovereignty for the first time in two thousand years.
But, what happened on October 7th represented the greatest existential threat in most of our lifetimes to everything we have been as a people in the modern era.
Israeli commanders feared in the initial days after the attack not only that Hamas would continue its savage rampage going north killing Jews with the ultimate goal of destroying the Jewish state, but that Israel’s enemies on all sides would join the war in a coordinated attack. Such a combined assault would have overwhelmed Israel’s defensive capacity.
Even before that awful day, Zionism and the State of Israel had come to be regarded by many in the United States and around the world cynically, with derision and in the most pejorative terms. That downward trend intensified and metastasized almost immediately as Israel began fighting back. Those hostile to Israel have for years sought to re-frame Israel’s narrative as discriminatory, racist, colonialist, and as a cancerous foreign element in the heart of the Islamic Middle East that had no legitimate right to exist.
An increasing number of progressive left-wing Americans, people many of us thought were our friends and social justice allies, agreed openly with the harshest Israel critics, justifying morally what Hamas did and some even celebrating Hamas by calling its brutal and savage terrorists, inexplicably, “freedom fighters.”
Every people has the right of self-definition, and we liberal American Jews and Zionists who support and love the State of Israel have that right as well. Especially now after two years of war, a dramatic rise in antisemitism around the world, and Israel being labeled a pariah nation, we Jews cannot allow Israel haters, antisemites and right-wing extremist Jews to define us or to determine the inner life of the Jewish people. We need to be able to restate our liberal Jewish narrative and lead with it whenever we discuss with those who know much or little about the history of the Jewish people, Judaism, Zionism, and the State of Israel.
I want to express to you tonight as clearly as I can, from the deepest place in my being, in an effort to reclaim our narrative, why I remain a liberal American Jew, a liberal Zionist and a supporter of the people and State of Israel despite my very strong protest against the policies of the most extremist, anti-democratic, right-wing, messianic, and myopic ruling coalition government in the history of the Jewish state.
As a liberal American Jew, I believe in the right of the Jewish people to a state of our own in our historic Homeland and in the right of Israel militarily to defend itself whenever it’s attacked by terrorists and hostile states set on its destruction.
As a liberal American Jew, I affirm that the universal humanitarian values advocated by the ancient prophets of Israel, developed by rabbinic tradition over the past two millennia, and included in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, including equality, justice, compassion, empathy, human rights, and peace – all foundational virtues in Judaism – must be the core values guiding all of the Israeli government’s policies and reforms, its military and civil society.
As an American Jew, I acknowledge that I am not an Israeli citizen. I do not pay Israeli taxes nor do I send my children and grandchildren to the Israeli military. Nor do many of us American Jews know people who were murdered on October 7, though two of the young people killed at the Supernova music festival, Norelle and Roya Manzuri (aleihen b’shalom), grew up here in our own Briskin Elementary School.
Few American Jews have family members who were taken as hostages, and few among us have been subjected to missile attacks forcing us to run quickly with our children and babies in our arms into shelters with only seconds to spare before the explosions and the walls of our home shake.
Only Israeli citizens have the right to take the hard decisions that impact their lives and well-being. However, as an American Jew who loves Israel and who cares deeply about Israel’s citizens and future, I insist that I do have the right to share my ideas and criticism of Israeli government policies and trends that I believe are harmful to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, that threaten our security and well-being as Diaspora Jews, and are contrary to our liberal Jewish and democratic values.
I had little doubt that Israel had to respond militarily in order dramatically to reduce Hamas as a military threat to enable Israelis safely to return to their homes in southern Israel, just as Israel had to defang Hezbollah in Lebanon to allow Israelis to return safely to their homes in the north.
However, I’ve been haunted ever since I read words written soon after the war began by a dear Israeli friend, Nadav Tamir, who wrote:
“After October 7th, I understood the anger and desire for revenge, but I feared Hamas would win the battle for our souls if they succeeded in making us as murderous and vengeful as they are…” (1)
I knew Hamas couldn’t win this war on the battlefield. Thankfully, Israel is too strong and strategic a military power, but like my friend, I worried too that Hamas would succeed in corrupting the heart and soul of the Jewish people.
This war began as a just war of self-defense against a cruel and vicious enemy that committed massive war crimes against our people. Israel’s initial war goals were to bring the hostages home and to degrade Hamas’ ability ever to attack Israel again as it did on that day.
Like many Israelis and American Jews, I too have felt the need for revenge, but I’ve asked myself at what cost to my heart and soul and to the soul of the Jewish people should I or any of us continue to harbor such self-destructive emotions? And at what moral cost to our people have these two years of violence and killing had upon Israelis and the Jewish people around the world?
Earlier this year, 600 retired Israeli security military and intelligence officials wrote to President Trump to urge him to apply pressure on Israel to end the war because they believed that Hamas was no longer a military or strategic threat to Israel and that there was nothing more to be gained in continuing the battle, that the war was harming Israel’s international legitimacy, causing immense suffering for Gazan civilians, and that the war was no longer a “just war.”
But, despite their advice and expertise, the fighting has gone on and on. Though Trump has now tried to end this war, over the past two years, Israeli bombers, missiles and tanks have utterly destroyed Gaza, house after house, apartment building after apartment building. Water, electricity and sewage infrastructure no longer exist. It’s estimated that 90 percent of all homes, 436,000 residences, are either destroyed or damaged beyond repair with tens of thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians dead – men, women, children, babies, the elderly, entire families wiped from the face of the earth. They and so many of our own Israeli soldiers and hostages that have been killed could have been saved had the war ended long ago.
If all of this isn’t awful enough, from March to May of this year, the Israeli government withheld all humanitarian aid from Gaza allegedly to force Hamas to release the hostages and to surrender. But that tactic backfired. We’ve seen the images of starving children. Even if Hamas doctored some of the photographs for its corrupt propaganda purposes, is there really any doubt that thousands of children were starving because Israel used humanitarian aid as a weapon of war? This tactic was not only immoral and un-Jewish, but according to international law, a war crime.
After heavy criticism from the United States, Israel opened the gates and aid began flowing again on hundreds of trucks daily into Gaza, but far more is needed to address the horrific long-term effects of famine.
It is American policy that Israel and all recipients of United States’ weapons must adhere by law to standards concerning humanitarian aid and the use of force. As painful as it is for me to say this because I have always supported American military aid to Israel throughout my life, I support those 27 Democratic Party Senators who in July voted to block the sale of U.S.-made heavy bombs, guidance kits for bombs, and assault rifles to stem Israel’s use of these offensive weapons to harm civilians, block humanitarian aid, and contribute to mass starvation in Gaza. Though the bill didn’t pass in the Senate, the intent of those Senators was to put maximum pressure on President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extremist government to end this war.
Those 27 Senators are friends of Israel. In their vote to withhold offensive weapons they carefully distinguished between those weapons and the defensive weapon systems of Iron Dome, Arrow, and David’s Sling that save Israeli lives. These Senators should not be accused of being anti-Israel as some in the American Jewish community have done. They are not that. They instead should be praised for acting on behalf of the best interests of Israel and the Palestinian civilians of Gaza and for applying necessary pressure on the Israeli government to do what is just and compassionate.
Many of us are aware also of the organized right-wing extremist settler violence and murder of Palestinian civilians in the West Bank, the demolition and burning of their homes, orchards and fields with impunity and often with the participation of uniformed Israeli soldiers. The intent of these violent settlers, with the backing of this extremist Israeli government, is to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank altogether, from their homes and villages in which they have lived for generations, to make way for more Jewish settlements and the eventual annexation of the West Bank into a Greater Israel, also contrary to international law.
Several weeks ago, I was stunned when Prime Minister Netanyahu arrogantly boasted that Israel will become “Super Sparta” – a reference to the ancient hyper-militaristic, self-reliant society that was isolated from the rest of the world. The “Super Sparta” vision prizes armed-force prowess above all else and is not a vision for Israel’s future that most of us would recognize or of what early Zionists hoped for Israel to become as a nation amongst nations. It’s a road-map to deepen Israel’s pariah status around the world and to accelerate Israel’s moral and political decline.
It ought to be clear by now that given the massive destruction and killing that continues day after day that Israel has crossed red lines and committed war crimes. War crimes are committed in every war, and in this war, it’s likely that rogue commanders and rogue soldiers have shot civilians without provocation, and missiles and bombs have destroyed buildings inhabited by Hamas commanders without nearly enough concern for the number of civilians who would certainly be killed. Those commanders and soldiers should be held accountable when the war is over.
We Jews know better. Our own people have been the victims of war crimes throughout our history. Judaism gave the world a system of justice and a moral tradition of compassion based upon the principle that every human being is created b’tzelem Elohim, in the divine image, and therefore is of infinite value and worth.
Israeli soldiers have long been trained in what’s called Tohar HaNeshek, purity of arms, meaning that every means and every effort must be taken at all times by every commander and soldier to preserve innocent human life. (2)
To their great moral credit, hundreds of Israeli reserve soldiers are now refusing to report for military duty because they know that Israel is now fighting a cruel and unjust war. The vast majority of Israelis too, according to polls, are demanding that the war, killing and suffering end, and the remaining hostages be returned home.
This war has shaken Israelis and world Jewry to our core. The wounds of each of our peoples, of Israel and Palestine, are going to be difficult to heal or overcome for generations.
In the United States and around the world, we Jews are dealing also with a rise of antisemitism – much of it exacerbated by this war – that most Jews alive today have never seen, experienced or imagined before.
The Palestinian-Israeli struggle is amongst the oldest unresolved conflicts in the world. The Israeli historian and writer Fania Oz-Salzberger put it exactly right when she wrote a month ago:
“Here’s a truth to reckon with: neither Israelis nor Palestinians are going to disappear any time soon. No one can destroy their respective claims to a sovereign state in their ancestral homeland, which happens to be the same land. Barring a cataclysmic event, there will be no river-to-sea Palestine and no Greater Israel. This is a conflict that can only be solved by territorial and political compromise.” (3)
There are serious ideas, in addition to what we heard on Monday, that have been developed over the last number of years between Palestinians and Israelis working together, from the bottom-up, who recognize and accept each other’s legitimate national aspirations, needs and rights. Despite whatever despondency I have felt, there are two related ideas that I actually find hopeful and visionary.
One is called “Eretz L’kulam – A Land for All: Two States, One Homeland”, a political vision developed by Israeli Jews and Israeli Palestinian Arab citizens. The proponents of the idea envision two democratic and sovereign states alongside each other – Israel and Palestine – linked together in a confederation much the way the European Union functions. (4)
The second idea is a “23-State Solution” that includes all the western Arab states and Israel in coalition with each other, complete recognition of Israel for the first time in Israel’s history by most of the Arab and Muslim world, and the creation of a demilitarized Palestinian state, perhaps as part of the confederal model. (5)
This isn’t the time or place to discuss the details of these ideas, but it’s important to know that there are creative and pragmatic ideas that can offer hope and a way forward. After the holidays, this sermon will be posted on our synagogue’s website and on my personal blog (6), and I will include links to both of these proposals that spell out the details, if you are interested.
All ideas about how to resolve this conflict are, of course, not risk-free, but the status quo is unsustainable. Violent rejectionist Jewish Israelis and violent rejectionist Palestinian Arabs will have to be controlled harshly by each state’s respective police forces in any future negotiated agreement.
To be Jewish, especially in these times, means, in part, to lift ourselves up out of the morass of confusion and despair, to reclaim our virtue as critical and creative thinkers who raise moral questions and seek practical solutions, and who can argue with one another without withdrawing from the fight or being intimidated by Israeli zealots or their supporters in the United States who slander us as self-hating Jews, antisemites, Kapos, and traitors because we dare to be critical of Israeli policies and actions as a matter of conscience and moral outrage about this war that long ago should have ended.
We Jews have always viewed our purpose through an aspirational lens. We have striven as a people to be better than we are, that we do not ever settle for the status quo, and that we stay committed to correct moral wrongs and move forward as best we can.
Some of our own young liberal and progressive American Jews, however, are decoupling the State of Israel from their Jewish identity, and others are closing the door behind them and disavowing being Jewish altogether. Many are walking away from the American Jewish community because they believe that we rabbis and teachers, Jewish leaders of synagogues, national Jewish organizations and Jewish summer camps, who taught them Judaism’s moral principles emphasizing compassion and empathy, justice, human rights, and peace are, in their minds, hypocrites because we have not been nearly critical enough, or critical at all, of Israel’s bad behavior in this never-ending war.
I want to speak now to you, our young generation of Jews.
I understand how many of you feel and why you feel as you do. But, I believe that this is not the time to turn your backs on our people, on Judaism, on liberal Zionism, or on the State of Israel.
Our Jewish moral and ethical principles transcend any specific point in time or series of events. Judaism is not what we see in war or as a consequence of our having to cope with antisemitism, though both can teach us much about ourselves as Jews.
Judaism is what we rabbis, teachers, synagogues and Jewish summer camps tried to impart to you, our young people, about the vitality in living an enriched Jewish life, about the multitude of ways to be spiritual beings within Jewish community, about the wisdom our sages, mystics, and great thinkers have left for us, about ways to live the rhythms of our holidays and life cycles, and about the meaning of the establishment of the State of Israel as the greatest single accomplishment of the Jewish people in two thousand years.
Though you may wish to turn away, I hope you will decide to stay engaged in whatever way is meaningful to you because we need you, your way of thinking, and your critical moral voice.
Another thing about us Jews – our struggles are nothing new. We are, after all, Yisrael – a people who wrestles with God and with the moral challenges and complexities we face every day as individuals and as a people.
We Jews have always recognized the wide chasm between what is and what ought to be. The best of us, however, have not sat on the side-lines nor given up without entering the fight on behalf of our people and for human rights, justice and peace for all peoples and nations, including the Palestinians.
We live in a violent and corrupt world. It’s understandable that so many of us want to turn away from the news out of the Middle East and throw up our hands and shout “enough already!”
But, once we do that and we’ve had a chance to breathe and restore our moral and emotional equilibrium, it’s better for us to draw close to one another again and reaffirm our Jewish identity, our age-old principles and values, and our faith that eventually there will be a better day for Israelis and the Palestinians.
I keep reminding myself that history swings like a pendulum, from the death of the spirit to renewed life, from division to unity, from war to peace, from despair to hope, and that we Jews have lived this swinging back and forth over and over again throughout our history.
I remind myself that every human-made problem has a human solution if we apply critical and creative thinking, our understanding of the needs and truths of the “other,” and the will to compromise in order to solve the seemingly unsolvable.
As a Jewish community, each of us has the right to think what we want and to feel what we feel – as I have shared with you my thoughts and feelings here tonight – and the Jewish community ought to be a safe space for everyone to find their place and their voice, to argue with one another passionately but respectfully, to disagree without becoming disagreeable, and where even our harshly contrasting ideas and perspectives, our many different life experiences, and our generational distinctions can live alongside each other with humility as we engage in discussion, argument, criticism, and self-criticism.
Our people’s safety valve is that we talk and discuss and argue, and hopefully that we also listen to each other, especially to those with whom we disagree the most.
Our challenge as American Jews in these days is to find ways to come together and to affirm our foundational Jewish values as we struggle to cope in these painful and disturbing times and not to become numb to the barrage of terrible events that are all around us.
And it’s our challenge as well to look to the future with fortitude and hope. Our history of survival as a people teaches us to do so.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks wrote:
“To be a Jew is to be an agent of hope in a world serially threatened by despair …No Jew knowing Jewish history can be an optimist, but no Jew worthy of the name abandons hope.” (7)
This new era in Jewish history begins with a darkly written chapter, but this is not the last chapter. It’s upon us, all of us, to write what comes next.
I wish us all the strength, perseverance, thoughtfulness, and moral courage necessary in this New Year.
I often sign-off my emails to my Israeli friends saying:
“Stay safe and sane. With love – John.”
And I say to you too, my beloved congregation:
Stay safe, sane and strong. And most importantly, hold those whom you cherish very close. We need each other.
With love – John.
G’mar chatimah tovah.
Notes:
Nadav Tamir, “Never Again”, The Times of Israel, August 22, 2025.
Introductory Note: I am not a New Yorker, but I have been waiting for someone to express the truth about NY’s Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s true positions about Israel and why his hostility to the State of Israel is so upsetting to me.
My friend and the former President of the Union for Reform Judaism, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, is as astute an observer and moral voice of American Jewish life and Israel as there is in the American Jewish community. He writes semi-frequently on pressing issues facing world Jewry in Israel’s newspaper Haaretz. The following piece appeared today, and I thank Eric for writing it. It ought to be read by every Jewish New Yorker before the election. If you have Jewish friends in New York, please share this with them.
Sept. 4, 2025
Before and after the election, my plea to the Jewish citizens of New York City is: Use mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s Democratic Party primary victory to educate people about Israel.
Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, is charming, attractive, bright and a natural politician. Energetic, enormously talented and only thirty-three years old, in the Democratic primary he ran a brilliant campaign.
Is Mamdani too good to be true? Unfortunately, he is.
Despite his many virtues, this attractive, articulate man, with the popular touch and Trumpian feel for politics, is a virulent, relentless anti-Zionist.
Like most New Yorkers, I was profoundly impressed by Mamdani and by his remarkable ability to reach voters of different age groups and ethnicities. I was impressed too by his message: He did not offer platitudes or complicated position papers, but hammered home the point that the cost of living is killing ordinary people. Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his other establishment rivals never had a chance; coming across as stodgy and out-of-touch, they lost to their dynamic younger rival by double digits.
But his beliefs about Israel are clear. Mamdani has expressed them repeatedly, and without equivocation. From his earliest days as a political activist as a student at Bowdoin College, he has declined to say that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. He held this view on the day of the deadly massacres of October 7, and held it just as strongly on October 8.
When he became a candidate for mayor of New York, a city with 1.5 million Jews, Mamdani was obligated to spell out specifically how he would deal with Israel issues. His refusal during the Democratic primary to condemn the use of the phrase “globalize the intifada” drew the most attention. He claimed that the term did no more than express solidarity with the Palestinians, but many Democrats and others, and certainly many Jews, rightly insisted that what it meant was “kill the Jews.”
Responding to the pressure, Mamdani said that he would discourage the use of the phrase but would not denounce it, a tweak that satisfied few of his critics. If the phrase was offensive, why not condemn it outright?
His hostility to Israel was expressed in many other ways as well. He indicated that as mayor, he would implement some form of boycott against Israel, and has advocated an academic boycott of Israel’s universities, consistent with his support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. He promised not to visit Israel if elected mayor, breaking a longstanding precedent.
To the surprise of many, most have not seemed overly concerned, or at least less concerned than one might expect. The reasons for this are not entirely clear.
One possibility is that most of New York’s 700,000 Jewish voters, like most other New Yorkers, think it is a foregone conclusion that Mamdani will win, and therefore a “wait-and-see” approach may make sense. After all, his major competitors are New York’s corrupt current mayor, a no-name Republican and a former Democratic governor of New York who has lots of baggage and barely seems to want the job. It would take a near miracle for any of them to beat Mamdani.
Another possibility is that the majority of Jewish New Yorkers – myself included – tend to be left-leaning in their politics, and therefore are sympathetic to Mamdani’s progressive views on domestic politics. It is these issues that have dominated the public discussion until now.
To be sure, attempts have been made to draw away Jewish support from Mamdani by painting him as a domestic radical, if not a raving socialist lunatic. Most Jews are not radicals, and would not support Mamdani if they saw him as the dangerous extremist that his opponents claim he is. Despite what Republicans say, New Yorkers are not clamoring for Lenin; in an economy made unstable by Trump’s tariffs, what they want is to get ahead and support their families, and Mamdani is promising to move them in that direction.
In short, Mamdani is an attractive candidate with an attractive platform. And while Jewish leaders have tried to raise the alarm about his Israel views, it has been difficult, in the quiet summer months to generate interest and concern among the broader Jewish community about this candidate’s relationship to Israel.
This issue is even more fraught in the current moment, as it appeals strongly to young Jews in particular, many of whom are justifiably furious at Israel’s actions in Gaza. These same young Jews often argue that as mayor Mamdani will have no foreign policy role. They therefore resent any effort to criticize their candidate for his Israel views. “Why are we even talking about this?” is a question that is often heard. “This race is about New York, not Israel.”
Are we to conclude from all of this that Mamdani will pay no price for his opposition to a Jewish state?
It is hard to say. There is no denying that Jewish support for Israel has declined as the war in Gaza drags on and the death toll of innocents grows. New York Jews are angry at Israel, furious about Gaza and sickened by the Kahanists who sit in Israel’s cabinet. And we should remember that despite his outspokenness on Israel, Mamdani won a decisive victory in the Democratic primary.
Nonetheless, I believe that in the two months that remain before the general election, as the election heats up and Mamdani’s views are subjected to far more intensive scrutiny, the dynamics of the race will change.
Support for Israel has declined, but it has hardly disappeared, and Jewish voters who have not been paying attention to the mayoral race – and that is the majority – will begin listening to what the candidates have to say. And I am betting that when they do, they will not like at all what they hear from Mamdani.
Mamdani, in my view, is playing an ugly little game with Jewish voters. In the Gaza era, presided over by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, it is not a problem to be a critic of Israel. Critics are everywhere, particularly in the Democratic Party, and even Israel’s most stalwart supporters are calling for more “balance” in America’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Some of Mamdani’s supporters, taking advantage of the growing debate, are slyly suggesting that he is simply another critic among many amid the ongoing war.
If this were true, of course, there would be little or no controversy. If Mamdani were promoting some form of a two-state solution, I would be voting for him myself.
But Mamdani is not a critic of Israel, he is a hater of Israel. Despite some very minor rhetorical adjustments, he remains what he has always been, an opponent of a Jewish state. His toxic disdain for Israel puts him so far out of the mainstream of the Jewish community that it will not be easy for Jews with even minimal attachment to Israel to support him. And while some will, given the alternatives, they will do so with reluctance and concern.
It is also true that Mamdani has said not a word about Islam’s miserable record in promoting both democracy and religious pluralism. Israel, where 20 percent of its citizens are non-Jews has a better than average record in that regard. Since Mamdani opposes the Jewish character of Israel, he should have the decency to speak up about Pakistan and other countries in the Muslim world that are neither democratic nor pluralistic.
What should Jews do in this election? I don’t tell people how to vote, and as I have indicated, I believe it is almost certain that Mamdani will be elected.
But both before and after the election, my plea to the Jewish citizens of New York City is: educate, educate, educate. Use Mr. Mamdani’s primary victory as an occasion to educate the people of New York about Israel.
This means making it clear that thoughtful criticism of Israel at this difficult moment is both welcome and necessary, and will be encouraged from all candidates. This means offering our own criticism, and calling for a resumption of diplomacy and an end to the war in Gaza. This means demanding that Mamdani stop the word games and be honest, finally, about what he really expects Israel to be and do.
And this means saying to the citizens of New York and the people of the world that there must be a Jewish state, and that saying there should not be a Jewish state is an act of hostility against the Jewish community and Jews everywhere.
I am posting what the historian Heather Cox Richardson reported on August 26 in her Substack (worth subscribing) from a powerful speech delivered by Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker on August 25 in Chicago that everyone ought to read, assuming you had not heard or read it already:
Calling Chicago, Illinois, a “a disaster” and “a killing field,” Trump referred to Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker as “a slob.” Trump complained that Pritzker had said Trump was infringing on American freedom and called Trump a dictator. Trump went on: “A lot of people are saying maybe we like a dictator. I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator. I’m a man with great common sense and a smart person. And when I see what’s happening to our cities, and then you send in troops instead of being praised, they’re saying you’re trying to take over the Republic. These people are sick.”
This afternoon, standing flanked by leaders from business, law enforcement, faith communities, education, local communities, and politics at the Chicago waterfront near the Trump Tower there, Governor Pritzker responded to the news that Trump is planning to send troops to Chicago.
He began by saying: “I want to speak plainly about the moment that we are in and the actual crisis, not the manufactured one, that we are facing in the city and as a state and as a country. If it sounds to you like I am alarmist, that is because I am ringing an alarm, one that I hope every person listening will heed, both here in Illinois and across the country.”
He acknowledged that “[o]ver the weekend, we learned from the media that Donald Trump has been planning for quite a while now to deploy armed military personnel to the streets of Chicago. This is exactly the type of overreach that our country’s founders warned against. And it’s the reason that they established a federal system with a separation of powers built on checks and balances. What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal, it is unconstitutional. It is un-American.”
Pritzker noted that neither his office nor that of Chicago’s mayor had received any communications from the White House. “We found out what Donald Trump was planning the same way that all of you did. We read a story in the Washington Post. If this was really about fighting crime and making the streets safe, what possible justification could the White House have for planning such an exceptional action without any conversations or consultations with the governor, the mayor or the police?”
“Let me answer that question,” he said. “This is not about fighting crime. This is about Donald Trump searching for any justification to deploy the military in a blue city in a blue state to try and intimidate his political rivals. This is about the president of the United States and his complicit lackey Stephen Miller searching for ways to lay the groundwork to circumvent our democracy, militarize our cities, and end elections. There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention. There is no insurrection.”
Pritzker noted that every major American city deals with crime, but that the rate of violent crime is actually higher in Republican-dominated states and cities than in those run by Democrats. Illinois, he said, had “hired more police and given them more funding. We banned assault weapons, ghost guns, bump stops, and high-capacity magazines” and “invested historic amounts into community violence intervention programs.” Those actions have cut violent crime down dramatically. Pritzker pointed out that “thirteen of the top twenty cities in homicide rates have Republican governors. None of these cities is Chicago. Eight of the top ten states with the highest homicide rates are led by Republicans. None of those states is Illinois.”
If Trump were serious about combatting crime, Pritzker asked, why did he, along with congressional Republicans, cut more than $800 million in public safety and crime prevention grants? “Trump,” Pritzker said, “is defunding the police.”
Then Pritzker turned to the larger national story. “To the members of the press who are assembled here today and listening across the country,” he said, “I am asking for your courage to tell it like it is. This is not a time to pretend here that there are two sides to this story. This is not a time to fall back into the reflexive crouch that I so often see where the authoritarian creep by this administration is ignored in favor of some horse race piece on who will be helped politically by the president’s actions. Donald Trump wants to use the military to occupy a U.S. city, punish his dissidents, and score political points. If this were happening in any other country, we would have no trouble calling it what it is: a dangerous power grab.”
Pritzker continued: “Earlier today in the Oval Office, Donald Trump looked at the assembled cameras and asked for me personally to say, ‘Mr. President, can you do us the honor of protecting our city?’ Instead, I say, ‘Mr. President, do not come to Chicago. You are neither wanted here nor needed here. Your remarks about this effort over the last several weeks have betrayed a continuing slip in your mental faculties and are not fit for the auspicious office that you occupy.’”
The governor called out the president for his willingness to drag National Guard personnel from their homes and communities to be used as political props. They are not trained to serve as law enforcement, he said, and did not “sign up for the National Guard to fight crime.” “It is insulting to their integrity and to the extraordinary sacrifices that they make to serve in the guard, to use them as a political prop, where they could be put in situations where they will be at odds with their local communities, the ones that they seek to serve.”
Pritzker said he hoped that Trump would “reconsider this dangerous and misguided encroachment upon our state and our city’s sovereignty” and that “rational voices, if there are any left inside the White House or the Pentagon, will prevail in the coming days.”
But if not, he urged Chicagoans to protest peacefully and to remember that most members of the military and the National Guard stationed in Chicago would be there unwillingly. He asked protesters to “remember that they can be court martialed, and their lives ruined, if they resist deployment.” He suggested protesters should look to members of the faith community for guidance on how to mobilize.
Then Pritzker turned to a warning. “To my fellow governors across the nation who would consider pulling your national guards from their duties at home to come into my state against the wishes of its elected representatives and its people,” he said, “cooperation and coordination between our states is vital to the fabric of our nation, and it benefits us all. Any action undercutting that and violating the sacred sovereignty of our state to cater to the ego of a dictator will be responded to.”
He went on: “The state of Illinois is ready to stand against this military deployment with every peaceful tool we have. We will see the Trump administration in court. We will use every lever in our disposal to protect the people of Illinois and their rights.”
“Finally,” he said, “to the Trump administration officials who are complicit in this scheme, to the public servants who have forsaken their oath to the Constitution to serve the petty whims of an arrogant little man, to any federal official who would come to Chicago and try to incite my people into violence as a pretext for something darker and more dangerous, we are watching, and we are taking names. This country has survived darker periods than the one that we are going through right now. And eventually, the pendulum will swing back, maybe even next year. Donald Trump has already shown himself to have little regard for the many acolytes that he has encouraged to commit crimes on his behalf. You can delay justice for a time, but history shows you cannot prevent it from finding you eventually.
“If you hurt my people, nothing will stop me, not time or political circumstance, from making sure that you face justice under our constitutional rule of law. As Dr. King once said, the arc of the moral Universe is long, but it bends toward justice. Humbly, I would add, it doesn’t bend on its own. History tells us we often have to apply force needed to make sure that the arc gets where it needs to go. This is one of those times.”
Rabbi John Rosove's Blog 