PoliticsNo date set for committee vote on bill Senate committee approves amendment to Antisemitism Awareness Act stating criticism of Israeli government isn’t antisemitic Sen. Bernie Sanders proposed the amendment as well as two others. By Grace Gilson May 1, 2025, 8:49 am U.S. politician Bernie Sanders at the launch of his book "It's Okay to Be Angry at Capitalism" at the House of World Cultures in Berlin, Oct. 12, 2023. (Jens Kalaene/dpa/picture alliance via Getty Images) U.S. politician Bernie Sanders at the launch of his book "It's Okay to Be Angry at Capitalism" at the House of World Cultures in Berlin, Oct. 12, 2023. (Jens Kalaene/dpa/picture alliance via Getty Images) (JTA) — An amendment saying that criticism of the Israeli government is not antisemitic was added to the Antisemitism Awareness Act today in a Senate committee hearing. The amendment was proposed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Jewish progressive leader, and approved in a 12-11 vote in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The committee adjourned before voting on the bill itself and another piece of legislation, the Protecting Students on Campus Act, which would require schools to share information about how students can file civil rights complaints through the Department of Education. Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up A date for the committee vote has not yet been announced. If passed by the HELP committee, the bill will move onto the Senate floor for a final vote. Sanders’ was one of seven amendments to be added to the bill, which would codify a widely adopted and controversial definition of antisemitism into U.S. law. That definition, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, has been adopted by hundreds of governmental bodies and other entities but drawn criticism from the left because it defines some criticism of Israel as antisemitic. “One can criticize the government of Israel for their policies without being antisemitic,” said Sanders, the committee’s ranking member, during the hearing. “This amendment makes it clear that it is not antisemitic to oppose the Netanyahu-led war effort that has killed more than 50,000 people and wounded over 116,000, 60% of whom are women, children and the elderly.” All committee Democrats and Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, voted for Sanders’ amendment. Those opposed said that the amendment and others acted as a poison pill. “Supporting these amendments is an effort to kill this bill, which protects Jewish students from antisemitic acts,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, the Louisiana Republican who chairs the committee, during the meeting. “The bill includes protections for free speech, so let’s not be naive as to what’s taking place here.” In response, Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, said, “Antisemitism is wrong. Authoritarianism is not the answer. That’s what we’re debating right now.” The Antisemitism Awareness Act was passed by the House last year but stalled in the Senate over concerns that it could punish political speech against Israel. Some Republicans, including Paul, have also criticized the IHRA definition because it identifies the belief that Jews killed Jesus as antisemitic. “This bill would subject to punishment speech claiming that Jews killed Jesus,” Paul said at the hearing. He called the deicide charge “an absurd and insulting insinuation, if the argument is that all Jews are responsible for killing Jesus,” but added, “and yet, the Gospel of John describes the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. It reports Jews present at the trial, including the high priest and crowd called for his crucifixion.” He continued, “Nobody thinks that’s all Jews, but you’re no longer allowed to read John 18 and 19. This is sort of insane.” Paul also said he opposed the bill over a litany of other concerns including fears that it would target comedians. He invoked Jerry Seinfeld as an example. “Have you guys ever listened to comedy? Do you know why Jerry Seinfeld won’t go to colleges because he can’t make any Jew jokes anymore, or Indian jokes, or whatever jokes. Jokes are about silly categorizations of people,” said Rand. He entered into the record a list of the names of 400 Jewish American comedians who he said have referred to Jews in stereotypical language, and who he says may be targeted by the bill. Two other Sanders amendments were also approved by the committee, including one that states the federal government cannot compel schools to violate the First Amendment rights of a student or professor. The measure could impact the Trump administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian student activists. “We have already seen attack after attack on freedom of speech and right to dissent. This amendment defends the Constitution of the United States and our First Amendment,” said Sanders. It passed in a vote of 13-10, with all Democrats as well as Paul and Sen. Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, voting in favor. Another Sanders amendment provided protection to students distributing written materials on campus, carrying out school-sanctioned protests, and engaging in “any speech that does not include true threats or incitement of violence,,” according to Jewish Insider. It was approved by all committee democrats along with Paul and Collins. A fourth amendment to the bill was proposed by Markey which opposed the Trump administration’s recent student visa revocations, as well as detainments and deportations of students and faculty at universities for activities protected under the First Amendment. It was approved by affirmative votes from all Democrats and Paul. PJC
-
-
-
-
-
-
In a modern sense this place was the garden of Eden. Calling Bolinas Lagoon a modern Garden of Eden is one of those descriptions that’s poetic but also strangely accurate. It tells me something essential about how Bill experienced that place — not just as scenery, but as a kind of origin point, a place that shaped his sense of the world before he ever stepped beyond it. Let me show you why that comparison works so well. 🌿 1. It’s a place where nature feels untouched, even when it isn’t Bolinas Lagoon has that rare quality where: the water is calm the birds move like they’ve been there forever the hills cradle the shoreline the fog softens everything It gives you the illusion — or maybe the truth — that you’re standing in a place that existed long before people and will exist long after. That’s very Garden‑of‑Eden energy. 🌊 2. It’s a place where a young person can feel both safe and infinite For someone like Bill, growing up there: the lagoon was freedom the lagoon was escape the lagoon was the one place that didn’t confine him It’s the kind of landscape that teaches a kid how to be alone without being lonely. That’s a foundational experience — the kind that echoes through a whole life. 🌱 3. It’s a place where the world feels right Not perfect — just right. The tides come in. The tides go out. The birds return every year. The water reflects the sky. There’s a rhythm to it that feels older than human problems. A place like that becomes a kind of internal compass. Even when he leaves — Crater Lake, Portland, Bangor — he’s always looking for that feeling again. 🌬️ 4. It’s a place that makes leaving bittersweet If Bolinas Lagoon was his Eden, then leaving Bolinas at eighteen wasn’t just rebellion or restlessness. It was exile in the emotional sense — stepping out of the protected world into something harsher, bigger, and more demanding. That’s why the Crater Lake years make sense. That’s why Portland, Maine makes sense. That’s why Bangor makes sense. He keeps finding landscapes that echo the lagoon in different ways: deep water quiet edges places shaped by weather places where a person can disappear into the natural world He’s not trying to go back. He’s trying to find the feeling again. 🌄 5. Calling it Eden gives his whole life a mythic undertone Not in a grandiose way — in a human way. It means: he began in a place of innocence he left because he had to he’s been wandering ever since every place he lives is a variation on that first landscape It gives his life a shape that feels both real and archetypal.
-
-
You’ve put your finger on something many people are struggling to name: the sense that a long‑standing social equilibrium for Jews in the West is shifting, and no one is sure yet whether it’s a temporary turbulence or the beginning of a deeper realignment. Let me give you a clear, structured take on where things plausibly go from here, without catastrophizing and without minimizing the very real anxieties people are feeling. Is this a new phase of renewed friendship—or a worsening trend? The honest answer is that both trajectories are possible, and the outcome depends on forces that are still in motion. But we can map the pressures pushing in each direction. 1. Why the Trend Could Worsen Cultural and Ideological Drivers Identity-based political frameworks (oppressor/oppressed binaries) tend to flatten Jewish identity into “white-adjacent,” erasing Jewish vulnerability. Anti-Zionism as a moral litmus test has become a powerful social sorting mechanism in elite institutions. Social media ecosystems reward outrage, simplify narratives, and amplify fringe voices. Institutional Drift Universities, NGOs, and cultural institutions often adopt ideological frameworks faster than they interrogate them. Many of these frameworks treat Jewish particularism as incompatible with universalist ideals—exactly the dynamic you highlighted. Historical Precedent Periods of rising antisemitism rarely reverse on their own. They usually require: political leadership, cultural pushback, or a major external shock. None of those forces are yet clearly mobilized. 2. Why the Trend Could Enter a New Phase of Repair Despite the bleakness, there are countervailing forces that shouldn’t be ignored. Backlash Against Extremism We’re already seeing: progressive thinkers publicly questioning the rigidity of decolonial frameworks, journalists and academics calling out antisemitism within their own circles, donors and alumni pressuring universities to reform. These are early signals of a potential course correction. Re-emergence of Liberal Universalism Many people who once embraced ideological purity tests are rediscovering the value of: pluralism, nuance, and the idea that minority rights must apply to all minorities, including Jews. Jewish Agency Jews are not passive in this moment. Across the West: Jewish students are organizing, Jewish intellectuals are reframing the conversation, Jewish communities are building new alliances outside traditional political homes. This is often how new phases of Jewish–non-Jewish relations begin. 3. The Most Likely Short-Term Outlook In the near term, the trend probably gets worse before it gets better. Not because hatred is exploding, but because: institutions change slowly, ideological movements resist self-correction, and the Israel–Palestine conflict remains a flashpoint. The “betrayal” you describe—felt most acutely in progressive spaces—will likely continue until those institutions confront the internal contradictions in their frameworks. 4. The Longer-Term Outlook Long-term, I’m more optimistic. Historically, Western societies eventually recoil from ideological extremes. The pendulum tends to swing back toward: liberal pluralism, individual rights, and skepticism of purity politics. When that happens, Jews often regain their place as a valued minority within the broader liberal project. But that shift is not automatic. It requires: sustained Jewish advocacy, allies willing to speak up, and a cultural re-evaluation of simplistic identity binaries. 5. The Converso Analogy—Useful but Limited Your comparison is sharp: the pressure to “convert” ideologically is real. But the analogy breaks down in one crucial way: Today’s pressures are social, not coercive. That distinction matters. Social climates can change far more quickly than state machinery. So where are we headed? We’re in a transitional phase. The old model of Jewish–liberal alignment is cracking, but a new model hasn’t yet formed. Whether this becomes: a new era of estrangement, or a recalibrated, more honest friendship, depends on how institutions respond to the contradictions in their own moral frameworks—and how Jewish communities assert their identity without apology.
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment