Jon Stewart Buries the Lede

On Stephen Colbert, he deftly changes the subject

There’s been a lot of public, celebrity-endorsed antisemitism in the past few weeks, which is painful as hell. And lest you think it’s being overblown by the Jewish establishment, trust me: the Jewish college students I work with are talking about it and they’re feeling it.

I don’t feel compelled to publicly respond to every case: Kanye, then Kyrie Irving, then Dave Chappelle on Saturday Night Live. Especially because everyone else is chiming in, I don’t feel like I have much to add to the conversation.

The first problem isn’t how we respond to antisemitism. It’s antisemitism itself.

But I was watching an extended interview with Jon Stewart on Stephen Colbert last week, and that was a tipping point for me. Perhaps because of the fact that I’ve long admired Jon Stewart, and I have a special affection for his sort of political comedy with a creamy moral center. And because my personal politics often line up with his.

But that’s why I was so troubled by his appearance on The Late Show. I might have expected a vigorous defense from a prominent Jewish celebrity. Instead, he deftly changed the subject.

(He got off a few good lines; he always does. “I wasn’t on the [secret conspiratorial] committee that lost Kanye the Adidas deal. I’m on the committee that does oil prices and bagel flavors.” “Kyrie Irving, they suspended him from playing basketball. If you want to punish him—send him to the Knicks.”)

Stewart spent most of his time decrying the responses to antisemitism; the cancellations and so on. He quotes Dave Chappelle’s monologue, “It shouldn’t be this hard to talk about.” As if the heart of this problem was about free speech or the right to say bigoted things.

Jon Stewart sounds smart and compassionate when he speaks. He quotes Kanye, saying, “Hurt people hurt people,” and that instead of covering up hate you need more conversation. He implores us to consider the Black perspective, with its history of oppression, and suggests that each of these things—Kanye, Kyrie, Chappelle—are howls of pain from people who have been historically oppressed.

I agree with every syllable. So what’s the problem?

The problem is burying the lede. The first problem isn’t how we respond to antisemitism. It’s antisemitism itself.

I agree with everything Stewart said about free speech, the imperative of actually listening to oppressed communities, the ugly futility of cancel culture, etc. Those are important and thoughtful topics for discussion.  But the point is that all those things are secondary to the actual story here: Extremely famous people said extremely bigoted things, with the very real possibility of those things leading to violence against an already shaken community. And if he had the integrity to name that pain, he might have had a little more moral authority to make these other points.

The story of Dave Chappelle’s rant on Saturday Night Live isn’t “Will he get cancelled now for saying edgy things?” The real story is: His nasty words exacerbate the pain in a community already on edge.

Do we have to do this again? Does Jon Stewart, or Dave Chappelle, have any sense of the context of the surging wave of antisemitism? Does he realize that Chappelle’s monologue occurred two weeks after synagogues throughout New Jersey were on lockdown because of a “credible threat” of violence against them? Do we have to mention the shorthand of one-word names that we’ve all come to know in the past few years: Pittsburgh, Poway, Monsey, Charlottesville…?

Once again, a prominent progressive thinker has shown that every community’s pain is legitimate—except for the Jewish community’s. Jon Stewart might spend this Thanksgiving reading English comedian David Baddiel’s shocking book Jews Don’t Count, to see firsthand how antisemitism is the progressive community’s dirty secret.

But this is a recurring pattern. A few weeks ago, Brown University’s Hillel building received a handwritten threat of violence. Thank G-d, it didn’t pan out, and after a day or so, a perpetrator was caught (not from the Brown community) and the students’ safety was assured.

Yet these were the first two sentences of the letter that the Jewish community received from the university’s Vice President:

“Our country continues to experience deeply troubling and disturbing levels of division, intolerance, and discrimination.

On Sunday afternoon, staff at Brown RISD Hillel discovered an antisemitic note in a reception area, and this follows reports in recent weeks of other incidents against Jewish, Black, Asian, LGTBQ+ and other underrepresented individuals on campus and in the surrounding community…”

She just “All Lives Matter”ed us!

If we learned anything from Black Lives Matter, it’s this: each community’s pain is uniquely their own. To shovel all forms of discrimination into the same bin is a form of erasure—and it’s its own kind of racism.

And that’s the progressive Achilles heel of Jon Stewart’s interview as well.

Jon Stewart pretty much invented late night comedy that could be topical, progressive, and still funny as hell. If only his Jewishness was a bit more self-aware and informed, I’d be laughing with him this week.

Jews, Once Again in the Crosshairs

Do you remember Dr. Barnett Slepian?

Dr. Slepian was an Ob-Gyn and abortion provider at Buffalo Women Services in Buffalo, New York, who was shot in his kitchen in October, 1998. Before the murder, Dr. Slepian’s personal information had been posted on a public website (and afterwards, his name on the site was x’ed-out). He was far from the only victim of this special symbiosis of terror: an extremist group publishes private information—including a home address and the names of relatives—and then washes its hands of any complicity when an unhinged supporter of their cause takes their implication to its logical conclusion.[1]

And tragically, that is hardly the only example of homegrown terror in these bloody times.

I was thinking about the murdered abortion doctors while the latest form of anti-Jewish hate has emerged here in Boston. A new toxic website called the “Mapping Project”[2] has slithered up from the primordial sludge of the internet, purporting to out communal organizations that are “responsible for the colonization of Palestine or other harms such as policing, U.S. imperialism, and displacement.”  The agenda is to intimidate and threaten every organization with ties to Israel—which means virtually every Jewish organization in New England. And judging by the list, the politics of right vs. left are irrelevant; every Jewish group (except synagogues) is indicted in the slander.

The website identifies and gives the addresses of approximately 500 organizations. Among them are the organizations that are the backbone of the Jewish community of New England: the Combined Jewish Philanthropies, the Boston JCRC, the ADL, the Jewish Arts Collaborative, the Synagogue Council of Massachusetts, the New Israel Fund, J Street, and more. Addresses are listed, as are the names of board members and major donors.

Also: University Hillels (including Babson College, where I work) and Jewish day schools.

Got that? Our schools.

This, as the nation still seethes from the massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.

Let’s take a moment and review what the Jewish community has experienced in the past three years. In January 2022, a rabbi and three worshippers were held hostage at gunpoint in Colleyville, Texas. In December 2019, two terrorists shot up a kosher grocery store in Jersey City, New Jersey, killing three. In April 2019, a gunman fired an assault rifle in the Chabad synagogue of Poway, California, killing one woman. And on October 27, 2018, a gunman massacred 11 people and wounded 6 in a mass shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA, the deadliest attack on a Jewish community in U.S. history.  And those, of course, are just the most tragic of the near-weekly assaults and acts of vandalism, not to mention the cesspool of hate found on social media.

Into this context, the people behind this “Mapping Project” have the gonads and ugly souls to put these institutions in their crosshairs.

No doubt, if an act of violence is perpetrated against one of these Jewish organizations (G-d forbid), the BDS crowd in New England will profess their innocence—just like those who post the home addresses of abortion doctors.

Are Jews on edge in America? Yeah, I’d say so. We have learned how to live with increased security in our synagogues and communal institutions, in this land of alleged religious liberty. And we know who our allies are—as well as those who have remained sadly silent.

The message of the “mapping project” is clear: the Jewish community as a whole bears responsibility for the oppression of Palestinians, as well as every other social injustice on earth. (There is no room in BDS for the complexity and nuance in the Israel-Palestinian crisis; just demons and martyrs.)

This “Mapping Project”, in fact, has all the hallmarks of classic antisemitism:

·      Jews run a sinister international cabal that controls world events;

·      Jewish money finances this global network;

·      Zionism is a form of colonialism and white supremacy (it is so utterly self-evidently neither of those things) (and as if these Jewish organizations weren’t in fact the targets of white supremacists!);

·      As Justin Finkelstein of the ADL-New England has pointed out, similar maps have historically been used to target the Jewish community and turn the public against it as a “fifth column.”

The individuals behind the “Mapping Project” are, of course, cowards. In the name of “exposing the truth,” they hide their own identities. The usual bigots have promoted their work – BDS Boston, Mass Peace Action, and their ilk. These are the sorts of groups who went after Boston Mayor Michelle Wu last year for taking campaign contributions from “sinister Zionists”—again, the classic antisemitic phrasing designed to delegitimize and demonize the Jewish community.

Yet, as ever, people of good faith are determined not to let haters win. On Monday, a remarkable online gathering was held, assembled by the ADL, CJP, and Boston JCRC. 1,300 community leaders recommitted to the long fight against antisemitism and all bigotry, as well as doing the hard work with allies who understand that the support of a democratic and peaceful Israel is not simply a hobby or political flavor—it is, in fact, part and parcel of our work towards Tikkun Olam (World-Repair).

Of course, we don’t know when the next assault will come. The memory of Dr. Slepian—as well as Colleyville, Pittsburgh, and all the others—tells us we must be vigilant. These are dangerous times.

To our enemies we say: We will never succumb to terror or be derailed in our own self-determination, nor in our eternal connections to the Land of Israel, nor in our vision of a future of peace for two peoples with valid narratives determined to live alongside one another.

To our allies we say: We remain ever grateful for your friendship, and we will ever be your partners to fight against all hate and bigotry.

[1] As far as I know, the murder of Dr. Slepian was because he was an abortion doctor—not because he was Jewish. It is therefore just an incidental wrinkle that he was murdered at home on Shabbat, shortly after returning from shul where he had been saying Kaddish for his father.

[2] My dilemma: Do I provide a link for readers to see the “Mapping Project” for themselves? I’ve decided not to give them the web traffic. If you want to find it, I presume you know how to do so.

Is the War in Ukraine a "Jewish Issue"?

First: I know it’s a crass and parochial question. I don’t mean for it to be. Wherever there is oppression, tyranny, and military aggression by a malignant dictator—and Putin checks all the boxes—a Jew should be anguished.  If it’s a human rights issue, of course it’s a Jewish issue.

But there are a few specifically Jewish dimensions to the Russian assault against a nation that has the 10th largest Jewish community in the world (depending on how you’re counting), a population that has been there for over 1,000 years.

Ukraine and Belarus were homes to some of the most glorious spiritual geniuses in all of Jewish history; the birthplaces of some of the great figures of Jewish modernity, especially early Zionists and Hasidic masters.  Through the end of the 19th century, this region was home to the largest Jewish community in the world, by far.

 
Putin’s gaslighting. “Gaslighting” is a tool of abusers everywhere. It means: to obfuscate a situation by accusing the other person of doing something that the perpetrator himself is doing. (“Election security!” comes to mind.) Gaslighting makes the victim feel like he is the one who’s crazy, like she is the one who is the problem.

Putin’s particular gaslighting is his call for the “de-Nazification” of Ukraine. It’s not even clear what that means, but in recent years many people have found it useful to hurl the “Nazi!” epithet at their social and political opponents, which is especially ironic, given the rise of actual neo-Nazis these days.

It's gaslighting not only because of Putin’s tyrannical instincts, but also because his invocation of Nazis implies the persecution and annihilation of Jews—as if Russian (and Ukrainian) history wasn’t soaked with Jewish blood.

One Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said:

They tell you that we’re Nazis. But how can a people that lost 8 million lives to defeat the Nazis support Nazism? How can I be a Nazi? Say it to my grandfather, who fought in World War II as a Soviet infantryman and died a colonel in an independent Ukraine.

Ukraine’s Jewish president.  Zelensky was elected president of Ukraine in a landslide vote in 2019 after a career as a comic actor and stand-up comedian. (The Times of Israel: “He was catapulted to fame by playing a foul-mouthed schoolteacher on TV who became president after one of his students filmed his profane rant against corruption and posted it online.”) He caught the world’s attention by getting tangled up with Rudy Giuliani’s traitorous machinations and Trump’s first impeachment.

It does not seem that Zelensky’s Jewishness has particularly influenced his political outlook, nor was there a notable surge in antisemitism after his election. But you can be sure that if the Russian-Ukrainian situation devolves, murmurings about international Jewish cabals and conspiracies will be murmured in the dark corners of the Internet and the usual suspects.

Jewish canaries in the coalmine.  But perhaps the biggest fear is one that is linked to the region’s repulsive history. Jews are always the canaries in the coalmine at times of crisis.

Jews have long been identified by European mobs as “others” and outsiders, useful targets for hate. In Ukraine there was a 17th century proto-Holocaust known as the Chmielnicki Massacres; it is estimated that 100,000 Jews were slaughtered at a time when the world Jewish population was about 1.5 million. (Bodgan Chmielnicki, the cursed leader of the uprising, is remembered among Ukrainians and Russian nationalists today as a hero.)

Historically, the Jewish condition in the region was fraught. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus (where untold numbers of generations of my ancestors lived until they thankfully escaped) were homes to some of the most glorious spiritual geniuses in all of Jewish history; they are the birthplaces of some of the great figures of Jewish modernity, especially early Zionists and Hasidic masters.  Through the end of the 19th century, this region was home to the largest Jewish community in the world, by far.

In 1881 Tsar Alexander II was assassinated—and the Jewish community was falsely implicated in the crime. Brutal pogroms were unleashed by bloodthirsty peasants with the knowing encouragement of churches, newspapers, and the government. And in a 30 year period, massive numbers of Jews got the hell out—approximately 2.5 million left, most of them heading to the shores of America’s goldene medina.

When the Soviet Union emerged in the 20th century, Jews were perpetual targets of discrimination, deportations to Siberia, and abuse. I know that I am not alone in my generation of Jewish Americans whose appetites for political action were profoundly shaped by the Free Soviet Jewry movement. (And we won—the Soviet Jewry movement has been called the most successful human rights campaign in history!)

There’s a reason why it’s so hard to visit a synagogue in Europe these days. When you go as a tourist and want to drop in on Shabbat services, there are hurdles to jump through; you can almost never simply show up and say you’d like to join the service. It involves calling ahead, always showing your passport, and often driving back and forth searching for a community that is self-consciously trying to keep its head down and not draw attention to itself. Such is the state of freedom of worship in “civilized” Europe.

So when we see this uncloaked Russian neo-Soviet aggression, our basic humanity is triggered and we worry about all the victims. But it also makes sense that we fear for the safety and well-being of Ukraine’s Jewish communities, who are on edge precisely because of the region’s awful history: When times are rough, Jews have always been the convenient scapegoat by oppressors.

Keep them all in your prayers this Shabbat, and for the awful weeks ahead that we surely have in store.

How can we help? Tzedakah Funds have been set up to help the victims of the crisis through the WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM and the JDC - AMERICAN JEWISH JOINT DISTRIBUTION COMMITTEE.

Marking Yom HaShoah in 2019

This is the text of the letter I sent out to the Babson College community today,
on the eve of Yom HaShoah:

Thursday is Yom HaShoah, the annual day in the Jewish calendar that commemorates the annihilation of European Jewry during World War II. Seventy-four years after the liberation of Auschwitz and the defeat of the Nazis, it is a time for sober reflection about what the legacy of the Holocaust means to us who are now three and four generations removed from it.

In truth, all Jews today carry within them the legacy of the SHOAH (the Jewish term for the events called “the Holocaust”), although each carries it in a different way. Many Jews have branches on their family trees that simply break off. Others grew up with memories passed down from grandparents and great-grandparents about survival in the most miraculous, or most horrific, of circumstances. Others simply know the stories, and have a vague sense of responsibility because of the legacy of this painful history. It is part of us, forever.

Yom HaShoah seems especially resonant this year. Surveys of Americans tell us dispiriting news. Two-thirds of millenials (and 41% of all Americans) do not know what Auschwitz was; 22% of them never heard of the Holocaust (or aren’t sure if they have). The remaining survivors of the death camps are elderly today; in a few years, there will be no living eyewitnesses to the crimes of the Nazis and their enablers.

And the emerging trends of hate, violence, and white supremacy are on our minds this year. The murderous attack at the Chabad synagogue of Poway, California last week - six months after the massacre of Jews on a Shabbat morning in Pittsburgh - in the name of white nationalism conjures up great horror among us on this Yom HaShoah.

This week, the ADL released its annual study of antisemitism in America. In 2018, it recorded 1,879 antisemitic incidents in the United States, including the bloodiest in American history (the assault in Pittsburgh). This number is the third-highest annual number that the ADL has ever recorded. This is why many Jews, young and old, are asking questions we've never asked in our lifetimes:  How safe are we here, really? 

What is there to say or do? I think the answer from Jewish tradition is twofold. There is a famous saying by the great sage Hillel from over 2,000 years ago (it would be a cliché if it weren’t so perfectly accurate):  “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”

“If I am not for myself”— this is why Jews take the legacy of the Shoah so personally. Jewish survival, and its transmission to the next generation, is an absolute obligation for us; the Shoah makes that message only more profound. This is part of what the State of Israel means to us: There is a refuge; a safe place (recalling that the whole world, including America, turned its backs on many victims of the Nazis); and, not insignificantly, a Jewish army to defend itself. The Shoah isn’t the reason Israel exists (its roots extend far earlier than the War), but it does explain the passion with which its supporters will defend it.

In other words, this response to the Shoah is: AM YISRAEL CHAI: The Jewish People lives. And every Jew has a responsibility to make it so. 

“But if I am only for myself”— That “but” is crucial. The Shoah didn’t start with death camps; it began with the increasing dehumanization of Jews, and propaganda that gradually eroded rights and liberties to the point where we were turned into something less-than-fully-human. Denial of rights leads to oppression. And that leads to neighbors abandoning and attacking neighbors; which led to genocide. It was systematic, it was thoughtfully planned, and it was almost successful.

This idea, too, seems particularly profound in 2019. The massacres of Muslims at prayer in Christchurch, New Zealand remain a fresh wound. As does the assault on Christians in Sri Lanka. And the burning of three black churches in Louisiana last month. Just to cite the three most notorious, and most recent, examples of the current rise of hateful violence. 

In other words, the other commanding voice of the Shoah is to stand up against the dehumanization of anyone, anywhere. To say to every tyrant: “Not on our watch.” To know and understand our neighbors - and to defend and protect them.

That is what is at stake in the memory of the Shoah. That is what we mean when we say “Never Again.”

Saying No to the Neturei Karta of the Left

 ?הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם אֵין אֲנִי לִי, מִי לִי.?וּכְשֶׁאֲנִי לְעַצְמִי, מָה אֲנִי? וְאִם לֹא עַכְשָׁיו, אֵימָתָ

Hillel would say: If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, when?  (Pirkei Avot 1:14)

When it comes to Hillel’s famous quote, selective memories prevail. The Jewish left has a tendency to forget the first clause—if we don’t stand up for ourselves, no one else will. And the right tends to ignore the second—if we’re only concerned about our own needs, what happened to our essential human empathy? Hillel knew that living in tension with these two values was the jumping-off point for much of Jewish ethics.

This tension surfaced on Thursday evening, as the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston voted to prohibit Council member-organizations from partnering with or co-sponsoring events with “self-identified Jewish organizations...that declare themselves to be anti-Zionist”. This is a good and proper decision.

Some people may not think so. Some inside-the-tent groups on the Jewish left opposed the measure, arguing that we need to expand the Council, to be inclusive of the widest possibly array of voices that are found in the Jewish community. That dilemma—one which progressive minded people are especially sensitive to—was widely felt at the JCRC meeting.

The JCRC vote became a necessity when one of the Council’s constituent organizations—Boston Workmen’s Circle—suggested that its occasional partnering with anti-Israel groups, such as the Jewish Voice for Peace, might mean that they are not in compliance with JCRC’s membership requirements. This prompted a close look at what, precisely, membership in JCRC means.

The JCRC was founded in Boston in 1944 as a coalition of organizations to act as a unified voice for Jewish concerns. First and foremost among those concerns was combating antisemitism. But JCRC also became the leading Jewish voice in New England for progressive causes, such as the labor movement, civil rights, women’s rights, etc. And fighting for a secure, Jewish, democratic, and peaceful State of Israel—which was a progressive cause then, and, for many of us, remains so today.

Thursday’s discussion was absolutely civil and occasionally emotional. Workmen’s Circle, with its Yiddish-socialist early 20th century roots, was a founding member of the Boston JCRC. Its representative, urging the Council to reject the measure, argued that if some groups haven’t found a place at the Jewish “table”, we should “make a bigger table.”  As JCRC Executive Director Jeremy Burton pointed out, there was an appropriate sadness in the room—because it would be sad to lose organizations of good people, committed to righteous causes, over this issue.

Further, it’s terribly sad when Israel—which once was the great unifier of the Jewish people—becomes the thing that divides.

And it’s sadder still when the State of Israel behaves in such reprehensible ways (not only towards Palestinians, but also towards large swaths of American Jews) that some Jews feel that they have no choice but to abandon the Zionist enterprise altogether.

I felt all those things at the meeting—and I also felt a surging sense of pride to raise my card and vote in favor of the resolution.

Because, as Jeremy also pointed out, boundaries in fact mean something. They don’t merely exclude. They also define: what, precisely, do we stand for?

Granting legitimacy to anti-Zionist voices (which, noisy as they may be, are a microscopic constituency among American Jews) would be a disaster.

After all, among the greatest gifts that Zionism brought was the invigorated notion that the Jews are a people; that we are a cantankerous, often dysfunctional, but nonetheless-in-the-same-boat family wherever we are found.  The State of Israel became the greatest expression of this, and the ultimate experiment in putting Jewish ideas into action (a government, a university, a military, a culture, a society) in two thousand years.

Groups like Jewish Voice for Peace jettison all that. They made explicit last week what has been obvious for much longer, when they issued a defining statement affirming that they are opposed to Zionism in all its forms. Let’s be clear: this isn’t an academic exercise. If that point of view gains traction in the American mainstream, the direct result will be the killing of more Jews.

It’s difficult to make those boundaries. Progressive-minded people quite appropriately want to be inclusive of as many others as possible; indeed, we are often stronger together.

But there are boundaries. For instance, most Jews recognize that the group known as Neturei Karta—an arm of the ultra-extremist Satmar Hasidic sect—are beyond the pale of mainstream Jewry. They’re the ones who show up and picket community Israel celebrations, or who meet with the most implacable leaders of Israel’s enemy nations to offer their friendship and support. They call Zionism a demonic abomination (and worse) and insist that it delays, rather than hastens, the world’s redemption.

Well, last week the JVP made it official: they are the Neturei Karta of the left. They chose the side of the Jewish people’s enemies, abandoned the notion of Jewish peoplehood, and rejected any awe of being part of a generation for which our ancestors desperately yearned (and often died). Their argument completely misunderstands or ignores history, utterly abandons the work of the Zionist left, and in fact strengthens those who oppose any vision of a peaceful future for Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East.

They inhabit that strange parallel universe where the fringiest extremes of the left and right bend around so far that they become ideologically rather close. It’s the sort of place where tiki-torch bearing MAGA extremists dovetail with the antisemitic extreme of elements of the Women’s March leaders, who somehow find it so difficult to disassociate from Farrakhan.

Voices like these are active opponents of the values inherent in the mainstream Jewish community, especially its civil rights elements—the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the National Council of Jewish Women, the American Jewish Committee, Jewish Labor Committee, etc. Not to mention the wonderful Zioness Movement—“unabashedly progressive, unquestionably Zionist.”

And then there’s Boston’s JCRC itself:  historically standing for decency, justice, human rights, and peace for all. “For all” includes us, too, you know. Our opposition to Trumpism in all of its grotesque forms does not mean we have to join together with other kinds of haters, including antisemites.

Hillel himself would have appreciated the irony.