August 9, 2023

A child who misbehaves can be told to sit in a corner for a while, and come back after apologizing. But in a world with 15 million Jews, how should they react to a rapper with 31 million Twitter followers, who says he likes Hitler, loves Nazis and posted he would go “death con 3” on the Jewish people? How should the world react now that a friend has brought him back after a hiatus?

On Monday night in Rome, Italy, Travis Scott welcomed Kanye West, who goes by the name of Ye, to the stage, in his first performance since an antisemitic tirade caused him to lose his Adidas contract and made people think he needed to go away for a while.

There’s no close comparison for a major artist who has so openly spewed Jew hatred. Video showed Scott telling the crowd “there is no Travis Scott without Kanye West.”

A risky move for Scott? Maybe not. He’s promoting his new album “Utopia,” released on July 28. Ye, addicted to the drug of attention, had puzzling podcast performances earlier this year that culminated in his wearing an mask during an interview with conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in which he said he liked Hitler. In an infamous “Drink Champs” interview, he railed against the seemingly all-powerful “Jewish media” a phrased he used about 20 times.

America is a free country. Ku Klux Klan members are allowed to march. People are allowed to hate. But venues do not have to agree to contracts with musical artists they don’t feel will be good for business. Ye was one of the most popular performers on the planet. Is he still? How many of his followers care if he says hateful things?

This performance could give cover in two different ways. Other artists may feel free to bring Ye on stage, rationalizing that Scott did it and there were no repercussions. It seems unlikely that a major venue in America would give Ye the chance to have his own show right now, but it could happen in the future. I wouldn’t be surprised. When there is a flurry of inertia and people pile on, people like to act like they care and are doing the right thing. But when the fury dies down, we see what people really think.

The scary thing is we don’t really know what’s in people’s hearts. Could Ye fill Madison Square Garden or Cryto.com Arena in a week? Probably. Would the venues have any moral qualms, or would there be threats of boycotts? It’s hard to answer that.

We should not be stupid. Someone whose main thrill in life is to cause a circus is not likely to run out of tricks. There is no rational explanation for Ye’s anti-Jewish vitriol.. There is no excuse for his absurd and disgusting behavior. But our society rewards controversy and forgives many transgressions if a person has talent.

There will no doubt be a “sha-shtil” campaign by Jewish groups. The logic is as follows: The public will accept Ye back anyway, so why make a fuss?  Be quiet and all the problems will go away if we don’t make trouble.

This would be the wrong approach. Ye pushed the envelope to the edge of the table before he pushed it off. Should we pull out the chair for him and offer a cushion?

Perhaps there are those who feel if only he apologized, all would be well. I went to one of his concerts in Manhattan about seven years ago. He put on a great performance. Needless to say, I would never even go to any arena that hosts him now, in any capacity. We should not forget, and we should not forgive. When we reward fake apologies, we lose our own credibility.

In a drunk tirade 17 years ago Mel Gibson told a Los Angeles police officer that the Jews were “responsible for all the wars in the world” and also used an expletive regarding Jews.

Though Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” drew criticism from Jewish leaders, Gibson’s comment to the officer is nowhere near as bad as Ye’s prolonged monstrous campaign. How sad it is that 78 years after the Holocaust and World War II, a man with many millions of followers can say he likes Hitler and still be seen by young people as a hero.

America is the land of the free and the home of the brave…but is also the land of some cowards.

Those who display antisemitism, racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, or show hatred to any minority group do so because of an emptiness inside, to garner attention, or both.

“Veahavta lerecha kamocha,” or “Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself” is something many are unable to follow. What is the lesson that the youth of America see from Ye? You can say hateful things, and you may have to sit in a corner for a while, but if you can gather a crowd, you’ll still get a chance to get loud.

Is it a coincidence that Ye was recently allowed back on Twitter, which is now called X? Perhaps we should not trust people who can’t even agree on their own name or that of their company.  On a battlefield of words, lies and hate can sometimes pierce a shield of truth and love.

I am generally not a fan of cancelling anyone as we would hope that better ideas prevail in the marketplace and on an individual level, people can vote with their feet and their dollars. That’s what freedom of speech is all about. The hope is that people don’t reward hate. But what do we do when the reality is that they do? If someone tells you they have the answer to that question, you need not hook them up to a lie detector test.

In May 2021, at the height of the most recent Israeli-Gaza war, over 250 Jewish studies scholars signed a statement placing all blame on Israel for the ongoing ethno-national conflict, using language that presents Israel as little more than a racially supremacist project produced by European imperialism. The document not only ignored the threat that such inflammatory rhetoric could pose to diaspora Jewry, but also actually ignored the violence already occurring against diaspora Jewry—random Jews who were being attacked by Palestinian social justice activists in the United States and Europe because they might be Zionists and are thus responsible for Israel’s alleged war crimes.

At the time I spoke out against this statement because it was saturated with such dangerous rhetoric. I subsequently gave public lectures explaining why such language, coming from self-professed experts in Jewish studies, does little more than embolden genuine antisemites on the intersectionalist social justice left, people who pontificate in public that Zionism is a “global threat” needing to be quashed along with imperialism, capitalism and racism. Such a statement could not possibly end the conflict in the middle east. And two years later, its ultimate worthlessness is apparent to any observer of Israel.

Accordingly, Jewish studies scholars have struck again this week, issuing another such statement and attempting to call out the “elephant in the room,” which they see as the “direct link between Israel’s recent attack on the judiciary and its illegal occupation of millions of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.” They have learned from their previous statements and have dropped much of the superfluous academic jargon, which does not serve their interests. It is far better to present Israel’s criminality in plain English should they wish to provoke anger among larger segments of the American public against diaspora Jewry. Thus far the statement has accrued over 500 signatures. Like all such documents, it contains grains of truth couched in outright lies and bigoted dog whistles because they know this is the best way to get their voices heard. I would like to highlight some of these falsehoods and dangerous claims below.

Like all such documents, it contains grains of truth couched in outright lies and bigoted dog whistles because they know this is the best way to get their voices heard.

Before I proceed, I am going on record, publicly, yet again, that I support a two-state solution. I believe that the current Israeli government has zero interest in resolving the conflict because they have the upper hand and know they can continue to tighten their grip in the West Bank, irrespective of their desired outcome. Even Ariel Sharon sought a cold peace; the current government wants no such thing. I also believe that all settlement construction that proceeded after Oslo was not only counter-productive for peace, but also morally wrong, even if Israel’s future borders should include some territory beyond the Green Line. Accordingly, I am not going to challenge their condemnation of daily violence experienced by Palestinians in the West Bank even if it fails to take Palestinian terrorism into account; it is a problem that Israelis need to address. I will not even challenge their use of the term “Apartheid” to describe what transpires beyond the Green Line. That has been done to death and it is now a core component of the conflict’s vocabulary, rendering any debate over the term pointless. But it is a term baked in emotive moral condemnation rather than sound legal reasoning.

Finally, as a Jewish studies professor, I have as much authoritative expertise on this subject as the vast majority of the statement’s signatories. I may not have their Ivy League “Blue Chip” (as one professor put it to me) pedigree and their current prestigious positions in the academy, but this is immaterial; expertise is not the product of the institution that houses you.

Far more modestly, I am going to highlight four major issues with this document, which should give our “leading experts” pause to rethink some of the claims they make and to choose more judicious language in the future.

1) “Indeed, the ultimate purpose of the judicial overhaul is to tighten restrictions on Gaza, deprive Palestinians of equal rights both beyond the Green Line and within it, annex more land, and ethnically cleanse all territories under Israeli rule of their Palestinian population.” It would be foolish of me to deny the current Israeli government’s desire to further entrench their rule in the West Bank. But their use of the term “ethnically cleanse” is sloppy as it implies protracted genocide. There is no evidence to back up a project of mass Palestinian expulsion. Far worse is the claim that the judicial reforms are intended to strip Palestinian citizens of their rights and subject them to “Apartheid rule.” I respectfully demand to see any evidence of Arab Israelis being stripped of their juridical rights.

2) “As Israel has grown more right-wing and come under the spell of the current government’s messianic, homophobic, and misogynistic agenda…” There are homophobic and misogynistic members of Israel’s government. There have always been; such is the nature of politics when religious parties have been a part of every Israeli coalition government. But there is zero evidence to suggest that Israel is in the process of stripping gay people and women of their rights. I would gently suggest that the Americans who signed this statement examine the recent rulings of their Supreme Court along with currently proposed legislation in states such as Florida. Measured against the United States (and so many other countries), this claim carries no weight and is an insult to Israel’s LGBT community and the women who helped craft and build up the Jewish state, making it the most socially progressive country in the region.

3) “Jewish supremacism has been growing for years.” I have explained at length why the phrase “Jewish supremacism” should never be used, even if, it is an apt descriptor for what many Palestinians in the West Bank experience. This locution is replete with historical baggage; Nazi baggage; baggage that led to the gas chambers and continues to empower American neo-Nazis. It also evokes images of “white supremacism,” thereby implying that the worst elements in American demagoguery are aligned with Jewish criminality.

4) “Meanwhile, American Jewish billionaire funders help support the Israeli far right.” I should not have to explain to Jewish studies scholars why blaming much of Israel’s oppressive policies on Jewish money and power from abroad is antisemitic. This is antisemitism 101. We cover it on the first day in my classes on the subject. Whether there are American Jewish billionaires giving money to the Israeli right is irrelevant. As a counter-example, consider George Soros. Whenever Fox News sounds the alarm over “George Soros Globalists” funding destructive projects, the Jewish left screams “antisemitism.” I agree with them. Why? Because even if Soros (and other wealthy Jews) are funding projects that can be described as globalist—policies that are abhorrent to conservatives—the name of a powerful wealthy Jew in conjunction with the term “globalism” is, much like “Jewish supremacism” and “Jewish money,” replete with historical baggage; Nazi baggage; baggage that led to the gas chambers and continues to empower American neo-Nazis. “American Jewish billionaire funders” does nothing but trigger antisemites, giving them the much-wanted confirmation from “blue-chip” Jewish Studies scholars that their project to liquidate Israel and the global Zionist threat is a righteous endeavor.

My critics will no doubt argue that much of what they have written is predictive: It will come to pass because of the unprecedented rightwing government in Israel, which is using the proposed judicial reforms to entrench their grip on power. But they were making the same arguments two years ago. Anti-Zionists have been making these arguments for two decades. These words can be found on every proposed boycott resolution going back to Durban if not earlier. This is the rhetoric of “Israel Denial,” a rejection of the idea of a Jewish state presented as if its relevance is to our current moment. The history of anti-Zionism suggests otherwise.

This document will not “fix” Israel. It can’t, much as BDS resolutions on college campuses can’t. But fixing Israel is not their immediate objective. Their objective is to promote anxiety and discomfort among diaspora Jews. They want Zionist Jews to know their message is being received by anti-Zionist activists, politicians and the larger academic community: Israel is not kosher, there are good Jews and bad Jews, and we, the bad Jews, are tainted by the stain of Jewish supremacy; we are no better than the ever-expanding circle of “fascists” and “racists” who are bringing America to its knees. The Jews, rather than any imagined connection between the Occupation and Israeli judicial overhauls, are “the elephant in the room.” We are the target.

I am a professor of Jewish studies who supports my people’s right to self-determination in our ancestral homeland, and if it is my fate to live with this target on my back I have little choice but to accept it. My silence would be inexcusable, unethical and shameful before future generations of Jews.

Jarrod Tanny is an associate professor and Charles and Hannah Block Distinguished Scholar in Jewish History at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington. He is the author of “City of Rogues and Schnorrers: Russia’s Jews and the Myth of Old Odessa” (Indiana University Press) and the founder of the Jewish Studies Zionist Network.

The COVID-19 pandemic thrust our world into an era of uncertainty, challenging every aspect of our lives, from health to education. As we strive to rebuild and move forward, one critical question emerges: How can we equip our children with the resilience needed to thrive in this new reality? Educators, parents, and community leaders alike must take on this challenge. At a time of seemingly endless instability, it’s imperative that educational institutions do not shy away from the challenge. And Jewish educators, with their unique blend of values-based instruction and centuries of wisdom to source from, stand as beacons of hope in cultivating resilient young minds for the challenges of the post-pandemic world.

As the head of a Jewish high school, I don’t want to imply that our task ahead will be easy. Thankfully, the worst of the pandemic is behind us, but our work is just beginning. To fully prepare the next generation of Jewish leaders, in this coming school year, educators must recommit to the following three principles:

1. Chesed

Chesed, or kindness, is mentioned in the Tanakh at least 200 times. As the sages have taught us, no word in our sacred writings is used superfluously; so, when a word is ubiquitous, its importance and power are clear. Today, on the news, on social media, and even within our community, we’re operating from a chesed deficit. From the stress involved in academic achievement and college acceptance, to the social pressures of belonging, the unique challenges of being an American teenager can often be overwhelming. 

To plant the seeds of resilience and stem the tide of the well-documented youth mental health crisis and the potential harms of social media, we must be the leaders our students deserve and embody the three characteristics most important to Jewish character as outlined by the sages – modesty, compassion and kindness. We must not minimize the challenges of our students, but rather meet them where they are, letting them know that they are fully seen and heard. Our sages based the concept of chesed on the acts of God Himself. And Rav Simlai taught in Sotah 14a that God engaged in chesed, as the Torah begins with an act of kindness and ends with an act of kindness. I call upon educators to begin and end their school days with an act of chesed. Prioritizing kindness in school sets the expectation that even in the face of a complicated, often worrisome world, students can show up to school and be greeted with compassion and kindness from their educational mentors.

2. Inculcate an inclusive community

Like many words in our current culture, “inclusivity” has been laced with political undertones. This is unfortunate. Prioritizing inclusivity within education is vital to building a robust, supportive, and connected community. And to empower a culture of resiliency, young adults must feel confident that they are welcome to show up as they are. 

To practice true “inclusivity” requires humility, generosity, and a commitment to listen before speaking. In today’s world, young adults face immense cultural pressure to be “correct” or risk ostracization. To combat this, Jewish educators must remember and remind students that everyone is made B’tzelem Elohim, in G-d’s image. That means young adults can take solace in knowing there’s no one single “correct” way to think, feel, or be. Our culture continues to impart rigidity around political views, personal choices, or individual beliefs – often painting concepts as dangerous or verboten. This has a chilling effect on the younger generations’ willingness to think critically and on their ability to seek social and personal connections without fear. 

Jewish high schools, while religiously homogenous, are diverse melting pots of varying identities. Seeing each other for who we are and treating everyone with dignity and respect, not regardless of, but because of, their unique beliefs, identifications, orientations, diverse backgrounds, opinions, and perspectives, make the Jewish community richer and more enduring. As Aristotle said, “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”

3. Don’t solve students’ problems, help them celebrate the “challenge”

Much has been written about “helicopter parents” and “snowplow parents.” The simple truth? Raising children is hard. And parents with the best of intentions can unintentionally instill poor habits and unrealistic expectations in their children. As educators, we have an important role to play. We must empower students, not solve their problems. While problem-solving is undoubtedly a crucial skill, it is one not for us, as mentors, teachers, and educators to undertake. By recognizing and understanding students’ challenges, teachers, principals, and counselors can have transformative effects on individual growth — helping students foster empathy, resilience, and deeper connections with others. 

The pressure to constantly solve problems can create a culture of haste, where the focus on outcomes overshadows the process and emotions involved. In a world with many unknowns, complexity, and turmoil, it’s vital to communicate to students that accepting “gray” can be more liberating than hunting for a “black” or “white.” As educators, when we rush to a solutions-oriented mindset, we risk neglecting the emotional and psychological toll that challenges can have on students. But when students feel heard and understood, they are more likely to develop the emotional tools necessary to cope with difficulties and chart their own individualized paths towards success.

These principles are aspirational; they will take work and individual accountability. But when educators lead the way, students will follow.

These principles are aspirational; they will take work and individual accountability. But when educators lead the way, students will follow. As we head into a new school year, and look toward an increasingly complex and uncertain future, the value of instilling resilience is paramount. Educators possess a unique ability to reach, connect, and mold young adults daily. By cultivating resilience through kindness, inclusivity, and embracing challenges, Jewish educators can help lead a generation of empowered young leaders who will confidently face a complex world, adapt to change, and thrive.

Mark Shpall, MA.Ed, J.D. is Head of School of de Toledo High school.