Dear Friends,
The reverberations and fallout from the October 7 massacre persist. Of course within Israel—victims and hostages and their families, soldiers and their families, and really every citizen of Israel experiencing their world turned upside down; for residents of the West Bank and Gaza, increased violence all around them, the death toll rising in this war initiated by Hamas; and here in the United States—to a far lesser degree, but still intensifying levels of antisemitism and anti-Arab and Muslim expressions.
Philadelphia has become something of an epicenter for expressions of antisemitism in particular.
Three incidents from this past week are worth noting.
1) Chants of “Goldie, Goldie, you can’t hide; we charge you with genocide” outside of the Israeli-style falafel shop Goldie, owned by Israeli chef Michael Solomonov and partner Steve Cook, at 1911 Sansom.
There are a number of incendiary components of this. For starters is the use of the term “genocide,” which is worthy of an entire article on its own, but in short we can say that Jews have been victims to one of the greatest genocides in human history. genocide is defined by the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” As the date of the convention signals, the Nazi Holocaust was, in fact, the catalyzing experience for the creation of the term genocide, coined as it was by the Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin in his book “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe.”
To hurl the term “genocide” at Jews, victims of the foundational experience of genocide, a memory whose embers still burn—survivors of the experience still live—is of the gravest, most incendiary order.
To hurl such accusations at a falafel restaurant shows the cavalier and, frankly unserious nature with which these protestors approach their cause, and their disconnection from the fundamental roots of history and the conflict.
Thousands of Palestinians are dying in Gaza. It is tragic and something to be mourned. As I have said before, while I do not support a ceasefire now, because I believe Hamas holds genuinely homicidal aims towards the Jewish people, as they have expressed in their founding documents, the cost of this war in civilian lives and quality of life is extremely high, and so I understand and respect the conclusion drawn by those who say it is simply too high to continue to prosecute this war.
But to direct this level of agression and hatefulness—because it is hateful to direct the term genocide at Jews when considering the origins of the term and when considering, while recognizing the tragedy of the experience of Palestinians, that genocide requires intent to destroy a group, a group whose population under Israeli authority has been numerically burgeoning for decades, and, where, flawed though its been, Israel has been giving advanced warning to Palestinian civilians of military strikes as Israel undertakes an effort to defend itself—towards a restaurant, is worthy of the condemnation it received from both the governor and the president.
Some protestors will point out that CookNSolo, the restaurant group owners of Goldie and Zahav, among others, raised money in the aftermath of October 7 for an Israeli organization called United Hatzalah, a volunteer-based emergency medical services (EMS) organization, whose mission is to provide the fastest medical response to emergencies across Israel even prior to the arrival of ambulances and completely free of charge. Therefore, so the argument goes, because, this organization, which provides support to anyone who needs it, Jew or Muslim, Arab or Israeli, also provides ancillary support services, like packing supplies, to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), Goldie was worthy of protest and boycott.
A restaurant with deep Jewish ties, responding to an inhumane massacre in the owners’ home country, raised a modest amount of funds for an EMS service in that country, and was therefore “charged with genocide.” This is wrong, and needs to be called out by the broader community.
2) Graffiti and vandalism towards Makom Community, a Jewish enrichment center that creates family-centered Jewish experiences.
In an incident that received far less attention in the press, perhaps because there was no video to go viral, the staff of Makom Community, a Jewish enrichment center that provides daily after-school Jewish education programming, arrived Monday morning (the night after the demonstration that landed at Goldie) at their Sansom Street location to graffitied storefront windows with the words Free Palestine.
To be clear, unlike the thin veneer of Goldie’s connections to Israel as an Israeli-style restaurant which raised money for an Israeli nonprofit (which is not a legitimate basis for the hate it received anyway, as discussed above), Makom has no formal connection to Israel. It is simply a Jewish enrichment program.
There are multiple issues to address here:
    1. Vandalism is always wrong.
    2. As discussed above, it’s ridiculous to protest small private establishments halfway around the world even if they do have subtle connections to a country whose policies you disagree with, especially with the charge genocide.
    3. It becomes, yes, downright antisemitic to do so to a Jewish institution that has no formal ties to Israel.
Putting aside the obvious wrongness of graffitiing a private establishment, the issue on the table that is important for our purposes is that a Jewish after-school children’s program was seen as a legitimate target of pro-Palestinian vandalism simply because it was Jewish.
It’s clear there that no argument is being engaged about the rightness or wrongness about Israel’s policies—Jews are targeted because they are Jewish; because they are subsumed under the broader perspective of the “Zionist enemy” and therefore worthy such vandalism. It is wrong, and needs to be called out.
Makom responded beautifully, as they always do, placing a sign with parents and kids over the graffiti, which stated, “We all deserve peace and safety. Happy Chanukah! Let your light shine!”
Makom is a partner of Society Hill Synagogue. We are in a yearlong partnership with them, learning about their approach to Jewish pedagogy, and we are thrilled to support them.
3) The inability of esteemed college presidents to offer straightforward answers on whether or not calling for the genocide of Jews constitutes harassment.
I actually want to begin this reflection with a defense on the position that the college presidents, including Penn’s president, Liz Magill, were in. While I did not watch the entire five hour hearing, I watched multiple pieces beyond the clip of Congresswoman Elise Stefanik grilling President Magill, which went viral.
The issue of hate speech has vexed judges and campuses alike for decades. On the one hand speech that hatefully targets specific groups is deplorable. On the other hand it is dangerous to police speech because it raises the important question of “who decides?” Who decides which speech is beyond the pale? What if we found ourselves in a position where someone wanted to claim that expressions of support for Zionism were hate speech, a resolution the United Nations effectively adopted in 1979, which it thankfully finally reversed in 1991? There are arguments for giving a wide berth to free speech in order to make sure there is not unjust censorship, arguments which do need to be carefully navigated. We have seen college campuses become illiberal when it comes to speech and we want to make sure that isn’t exacerbated.
Still, there are lines. And a straightforward call of the genocide of Jews clearly crosses any line, no matter how wide the berth for free speech is. A protest calling for the genocide, the intentional destruction, of the Jews meets any definition of harassment you could imagine.
Watching the clip, you could almost feel the presidents resent the badgering by the congresswoman, resent being told they had to give a yes-or-no answer, and therefore refusing to do so. You could almost hear the hours of lawyerly preparation that went into a hearing, where they did not want to get pinned down on absolutes.
But the extremity of the question really did call for a yes or no answer: does calling for the genocide of Jews constitute harassment? Yes. Yes it does.
Leadership is hard. I’m not going to pretend I know all the circumstances that go into leading institutions of that size, all the pressures that one person is under. But that was a human moment, an opportunity for a human message, to give a sense of love and safety towards Jewish students on campus who feel under duress, as many students do in various respects. I wish the presidents had pictured Jewish students in front of them as they answered that very direct question.
I pray that campuses experience the purposes they were created for: learning, enlightenment, love. It’s a hard world out there, with war and with visceral views on it. I pray that students are able to have vigorous debates without being subjected to the most extreme versions of speech imaginable. Some of the questions in that arena are very hard. Some are not.
I pray for a Hanukkah for you all filled with light and love.
Shabbat Shalom and Hanukkah Sameah—to a peaceful Shabbat and a joyous Hanukkah,
Rabbi K.