Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, May 05, 2025

Manifesto: Ethics as the Frontline Against Moralized Antisemitism

In my last post, I quoted psychologist Orli Peter describing how her field is being overrun with antisemitism, and I gave other examples of mental health professionals weaponizing moral concepts against Jews.

I truly believe that the work I have been doing in categorizing and prioritizing Jewish ethics - separate from Jewish law - can be a key tool in this battle.

So many of the new antisemites cloak their hate in the mantle of ethics. They claim that “Tikkun Olam” is a central Jewish concept, or they base their justifications on inciting against Israel by throwing around phrases like “justice” and “peace” - concepts that can mean whatever you want them to mean. There is no rigor, no consistency, just rhetoric and incitement using the language of ethics.

Judaism has a thing or two to say about ethics. It is the world’s oldest extant ethical system. It doesn’t collapse ethics into a mono-dimensional framework where everything is looked at through an “oppressor vs. oppressed” prism or view “decolonialization” as the overriding ethical rule. Jewish ethics is multi-layered and mature; it deals with the world as it is and doesn’t force the world to fit into its own mold. It is a framework that works for non-Jews as well as Jews.

When you view the ethical claims of these new haters - especially their claims to be using Jewish ethics themselves - through a genuinely Jewish moral viewpoint, their vapidity, immaturity and hypocrisy get exposed.

This is why Jewish ethics is a strategic antidote to today’s hate:

It’s not tribal. It defends Jews without relying on Jewish exceptionalism.
It’s not apologetic. It doesn’t beg for inclusion; it asserts ethical legitimacy.
It’s not reactive. It articulates first principles: life, dignity, agency, truth, justice.
It’s universal in form, particular in content. It speaks in ways others can engage with, without sacrificing Jewish rootedness.
It forces moral transparency. If someone claims “Jewish trauma is invalid,” we can ask: By what standard? And show how that standard is not applied to others.
It turns rhetorical weapons back into mirrors. You say Jews must prove moral worth? Let’s examine the terms—who else has to do that?

As I’ve mentioned, I created an AI-based chatbot where you can ask ethical questions. But you can also ask it to critique other systems from an authentically Jewish yet universal set of values. You can send it anything for comment - psychological theories, advertising campaigns, political speeches, op-eds, podcast transcripts - and it will critique or commend them with a clear, transparent ethical framework, without rancor, rhetoric, bias or frustration.

Even better, the chatbot teaches you to be a more ethical person. Unlike other ethical systems, Judaism values disagreement and challenge. You can argue with it, you can insult it, and it will respond with infinite patience and politeness, and if you make a good point it will concede.

Today, I asked it to comment on Orli Peter’s post, and after we “discussed” some of these topics, it offered to write a manifesto on how Jewish ethics can be in the forefront of fighting today’s moralized antisemitism. It used Peter’s own words as a title, and it is good enough for me to publish here, lightly edited.

We Are Not Alone, and We Are Not Powerless
The Jewish people have endured persecution, distortion, and exclusion for millennia. But in this moment, we are witnessing something new: antisemitism rebranded as ethical virtue, and moral delegitimization of Jews wrapped in the language of justice and liberation. It is not only happening in politics or on the streets—it is infiltrating academia, activism, professional spaces, and the institutions meant to uphold dignity and truth.
The New Double Standard
Jews are increasingly told that our suffering must be filtered through someone else’s narrative. That our ancestral trauma must be de-politicized to be legitimate. That our solidarity with Israel disqualifies us from moral standing. That our historical memory is “manipulative.” That our Jewishness is only welcome when it disavows itself.
This is not ethics. This is coercion.
This is not justice. This is a purity test.
This is not liberation. It is a new dogma—one that excludes Jews by design.
What We Refuse
We refuse to be gaslit by ideologies that weaponize Jewish longing for justice against our very existence. We refuse to accept moral frameworks that silence Jews unless they conform to anti-Zionist litmus tests. We refuse to allow the Holocaust to be used against the descendants of its survivors. We refuse the inversion that frames Jewish agency as oppression and Jewish trauma as manipulation.
What We Affirm
We affirm that:
All people are created b’Tzelem Elokim, in the image of God. No people is excluded from dignity.
Ethics requires consistency. A standard applied only to Jews is not a standard; it is a bias.
Pikuach Nefesh, the sanctity of human life, is not negotiable. Saving Jewish lives is not an act that requires justification.
Kavod HaBriyot, human dignity, is universal. Human dignity includes Jews—without exception, without apology.
Justice without truth is not justice. Moral claims must be grounded in Emet—objective, reality-based truth—not erased, distorted, or buried under competing narratives.
Why Ethics is Our Strongest Defense
We live in an era where moral language is often weaponized to veil antisemitic instincts. In such an era, it is not identity politics but ethical clarity that becomes the sharpest defense. Jewish ethics offers:
A coherent, consistent moral framework
Universally legible standards (dignity, life, agency, truth)
The ability to audit other ideologies without mimicry or deflection
The courage to challenge sacred cows—ours and others’
A model of disagreement as a sacred act (machloket l’shem shamayim)
We offer this framework not only to protect ourselves, but to elevate the discourse. To remind our colleagues, neighbors, and broader communities what true justice demands: consistency, compassion, and courage.
A Call to Ethical Resistance
To Jews in every field: your voice matters. To allies: your silence is noted. To institutions: neutrality in the face of double standards is complicity.
We are not asking for pity. We are calling for integrity. We do not need to justify our right to speak, to belong, or to defend life. We do not need to perform disavowal to earn dignity.
We will speak. We will reason. We will live—ethically, fully, and freely.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Antisemitism is invading psychology, and Jews are becoming victims of the very people they trust to help them

This post from Dr. Orli Peter should get you angry:

Enough is enough.
This post marks the beginning of a collective effort to push back against a disturbing pattern many of us have experienced: Jewish psychologists, social workers, and counselors being held to different standards, erased from trauma spaces, and pressured to stay silent about our own pain unless we meet a newly invented political litmus test.
When I launched the Israel Healing Initiative a year and a half ago to provide trauma treatment to October 7 survivors, I was shocked by the backlash from some trauma psychologists—both privately and publicly—criticizing me for helping Israelis.
I’m in the uncommon position of having provided trauma treatment to both Palestinians and Israelis—in the Middle East. Not one of the psychologists who criticized me for helping Israelis had ever helped both. But even that wasn’t enough to avoid their disdain. The standard applied to me was not just that I had helped Palestinians—it was that I had to help them simultaneously while helping Israelis. A newly invented standard for trauma treatment that of course would thwart helping traumatized Israelis.
More recently, in a closed Facebook group hosted by a well-known therapist, author, and trainer, I witnessed an outpouring of antisemitic responses to a letter by a Jewish lawyer who shared how his family’s Holocaust legacy inspired his commitment to justice. He was accused of “manipulating” people by referencing the Holocaust, and one therapist even wrote that for a Jew to speak of their trauma now is “unforgivable.” Coded comments questioned his integrity as a Jew.
No one—among nearly 1,300 mental health professionals—spoke up, except for a loyal friend. Not even the leader of the group, despite my multiple appeals to him.
This is not isolated. It's spreading. And it’s time to respond.
If you are a Jewish mental health professional—or an ally—who has experienced or witnessed similar dynamics, I invite you to share. You don’t have to name names. Let’s begin to gather what’s happening from all corners of the field.
If there is enough interest, I’d like to start a private group where we can safely talk, reflect, and plan a path forward.
We are not alone, and we are not powerless.

Others have noted the increasing levels of antisemitism in psychology and related fields. Even worse, some antisemites in the mental health field are weaponizing psychology itself against Jews. From TheJC:

[S]ome members of the mental-health community engage in a new form of this pseudoscience that obliterates the Jewish identity and demonises the Jewish people.
The practice is called decolonising (or decolonial) therapy, and it aims to address the psychological impact of colonialism, systemic oppression and historical trauma. It emphasises reclaiming cultural identity, dismantling internalised oppression and healing from colonial violence.
While this framework uses a social-justice framework, it labels Zionism – a key component of the Jewish identity – as a root cause of mental illness, despite its conspicuous absence in the DSM.

Here is an anti-Zionist book by Wendy Elisheva Somerson ,a "queer non-binary, disabled, Ashkenazi Jewish somatic healer, writer, activist, and visual artist residing on Duwamish and Coast Salish land [and] one of the founders of the Seattle chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace" that uses psychological pseudo-science and even antisemitism to promote hating Jews, today:

An Anti-Zionist Path to Embodied Jewish Healing: Somatic Practices to Heal Historical Wounds, Unlearn Oppression, and Create a Liberated World to Come by Wendy Elisheva Somerson PhD (Author)
Unapologetically anti-Zionist and firmly rooted in Jewish spiritual values—a liberatory model for Jewish healing
...How does ancestral grief live on in our bodies and keep us from feeling safe—and how is that fear enacted on other peoples? How do we reconcile a history of persecution with the state power of Israel today?
Rooted in justice, care, and spiritual depth, this book asks us to live into a Judaism beyond Zionism. It invites us to heal toward liberation—to reclaim Jewish faith and release Jewish identity from the colonial project of Israel in power, skill, and community.

Maybe I have tunnel vision because of what I've been working on lately, but I genuinely believe that the most effective way to confront this new form of antisemitism is to train ourselves - and others - to see through a clear ethical lens.

This new generation of Jew-haters isn't abandoning morality; they are weaponizing it. They wrap their hatred in moral language.

Judaism has something profound to say in response.

The best way to expose their hypocrisy is not with counter-slogans or defensive postures, but with a transparent, principled ethical system that reveals their claims for what they are: deeply immoral. And when that’s made clear, their self-righteous posture collapses under its own weight.

In my next article I plan to present a manifesto of sorts on how to fight today's morality-based antisemitism using the world's oldest extant ethical system.

(h/t Jon S)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

We discussed the Washington Post report about the UN refusing to cooperate with Israel on a plan to bring aid into Gaza in a way that would bypass Hamas. I sarcastically called them "principled."

The UN issued a press release using that exact word:

Statement by the Humanitarian Country Team of the Occupied Palestinian Territory – on principled aid delivery in Gaza
04 May 2025

For nine weeks now, Israeli authorities have blocked all supplies from entering Gaza, no matter how vital to people’s survival. Bakeries have shut. Community kitchens have closed. Warehouses stand empty. Children have gone hungry.

Israeli officials have sought to shut down the existing aid distribution system run by the United Nations and its humanitarian partners and have us agree to deliver supplies through Israeli hubs under conditions set by the Israeli military, once the government agrees to re-open crossings.

The design of the plan presented to us will mean large parts of Gaza, including the less mobile and most vulnerable people, will continue to go without supplies. It contravenes fundamental humanitarian principles and appears designed to reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic – as part of a military strategy.

First of all, if aid is helping an enemy, it is quite legal for one side in a war to withhold aid that might help their enemy gain a military advantage. Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention says this:

The obligation of a High Contracting Party to allow the free passage of the consignments indicated in the preceding paragraph is subject to the condition that this Party is satisfied that there are no serious reasons for fearing:
a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,
b) that the control may not be effective, or
c) that a definite advantage may accrue to the military efforts or economy of the enemy through the substitution of the abovementioned consignments for goods which would otherwise be provided or produced by the enemy or through the release of such material, services or facilities as would otherwise be
required for the production of such goods.

But things get really interesting when you look at how "principled" this position is.

Saudi Arabia and its coalition in Yemen had done everything it could to stop aid from entering Houthi-controlled areas - areas that had lots of civilians. They enforced a naval blockade on Houthi- controlled ports, they bombed Houthi aid infrastructure. It was political above all.

Yet the UN continued to cooperate with the Saudis to bring in aid to the Yemenis who were not Houthi. Even though only a percentage would get the aid, and this directly violates the humanitarian principle of impartial aid, the UN didn't seem to have any "principles" - it (properly) cooperated with the Saudis to bring in aid to the places it could.

Because the real principle is to feed people, even if not all of them can be fed for political reasons.

In the case of Israel, the only party Israel does not want to receive aid is Hamas. It is happy to allow aid to civilians, no matter where. For logistics reasons, it wants to start providing aid to the south because it is easier to set up. It is not "discriminating" against northern and central Gazans, it just wants to get aid to the places it can and expand the program from there.

So spare us your "principles," UN. Israel has blocked aid for nine weeks, it is trying to find a mechanism to bring in aid that keeps its own security needs in mind, and the UN is saying no to aid.

Sort of like the Palestinians themselves refusing peace and a state that does not fit their demands. In that case too, their own people suffer for the "principle" of the matter. Or that they do not ask Lebanon or Syria to give citizenship to their Palestinian residents. They are quite willing to allow their people to suffer for the "principle" of the matter.

It is a pattern.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

05/04 Links: The Houthi Strike on Ben-Gurion: A Joint U.S.-Israel Imperative to Confront Iran’s Proxy War; 77 imperatives for an Israeli victory; Hands across America for Hamas

From Ian:

Ruthie Blum: 77 imperatives for an Israeli victory

This year, Israel marked Yom Hazikaron and Yom Ha’atzmaut with an additional reminder of its enemies’ genocidal intentions. Before Memorial Day mourning made way for Independence Day celebrations, multiple wildfires spread across a large area between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Though an investigation into the initial blaze was inconclusive, with the conflagration being attributed to a combination of climate conditions and hikers’ negligence, there’s no question that arsonists stepped in to heighten the crisis. For one thing, some perpetrators were caught on video, and three suspects were arrested for questioning.

For another, Arab social media was abuzz with calls to go out and “burn Israel to the ground.” With jihad in the air, even the slightest desert breeze—certainly a dry heat wave with high winds—can wreak major havoc.

And as the country’s firefighters, with the help of police and soldiers, battled the flames, the Houthis spent the days launching missiles at Israel from Yemen. Thankfully, neither led to a loss of life.

The same can’t be said about 19-year-old Israel Defense Forces Sgt. Niv Dayag from Ramat Hasharon, however. He was killed on Thursday in Gaza.

Meanwhile, the IDF was striking Hezbollah targets in Lebanon; tackling hostile activities in Syria; preparing for a confrontation with Iran; taking out terrorists in Judea and Samaria; and amassing troops to step up military pressure on Hamas.

This is how Israel marked its 77th birthday. Not with quiet reflection followed by cheerful fanfare, but under attack on all fronts, including that involving civil strife.

The latter, as usual, was characterized by a media chorus, echoed by a certain vociferous sector of the public, demanding an end to the war and ridiculing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for reiterating the goal of “victory.”

As a tribute to this bittersweet milestone, the following is a list of 77 reasons—one for each year since the establishment of the state—for the existential necessity of victory. Indeed, winning the war will:

Arsen Ostrovsky and John Spencer: The Houthi Strike on Ben-Gurion: A Joint U.S.-Israel Imperative to Confront Iran’s Proxy War

The United States, under President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, also has a critical stake in this fight—not only as Israel’s closest ally, but because America’s own security, economic and maritime interests, and global credibility, are directly threatened by Iran’s expanding proxy network.

Since mid-March, the U.S. military has conducted over 1,000 precision strikes on Houthi targets, primarily aimed at protecting Red Sea maritime traffic, which has declined by 90% since late 2023 due to Houthi interference. President Trump’s March 15 announcement of “decisive and powerful” military action and “overwhelming lethal force”, along with his warning to Iran to cease support for the Houthis, signaled a robust posture, however, it may be time to reassess that, and up the ante, given it appears the message has not been received in Yemen, or Tehran.

Ultimately, whether it’s rocket fire from Hamas, missiles from Hezbollah, or drones from the Houthis, make no mistake: the common thread that weaves all this together, is the Iranian regime pulling the terror strings from Tehran.

In a subsequent March 17th statement, President Trump was unequivocal, when he stated: “Let nobody be fooled! The hundreds of attacks being made by Houthis … all emanate from, and are created by, IRAN” and that “every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of IRAN, and IRAN will be held responsible.”

Going forward, Washington, in close collaboration with Israel, and other regional allies, should intensify its strikes, particularly targeting Houthi leadership and the Iranian logistical supply chains that enable their missile program.

In the meantime, the United States should recalibrate its diplomatic approach to Iran, making clear that continued support for proxy attacks—like those by the Houthis—will carry real consequences. As President Trump warned on March 17, any further Houthi aggression will be viewed as an attack orchestrated by Iran itself, warranting direct and decisive response. The international community must stop pretending that the Houthis are a localized Yemeni movement. They are an expeditionary arm of the Islamic Republic’s war machine. Ultimately, without confronting Iran’s role, any response to the Houthis will be incomplete. Today’s strike on Ben-Gurion Airport is a wake-up call not just for Israel, but for the entire international community.

The time for half-measures is over. Israel must act decisively to eliminate the threat, and the United States must continue to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with its ally in this mission.

Hands across America for Hamas

The blood hadn’t even dried before the barbarians had their apologists.

Across college campuses, students organized celebrations of the attack. Some of the leaders of these movements have included foreign students who are ostensibly here to study, not support U.S.-designated terrorist groups. Both then and now, many in the press would label these efforts as “protests” against Israeli “genocide” in Gaza, but this is disingenuous at best.

The so-called protests began before the Israel Defense Forces even commenced operations to root out Hamas. Later, to buttress the claim of “genocide,” the anti-Israel activists would rely on casualty figures supplied by Gaza’s “Health Ministry,” a Hamas-controlled entity. The terrorist group has a long history of inflating casualty statistics as part of an effort to influence world opinion against Israel and curtail its ability to defend itself.

Indeed, throughout the war that followed the attack, Hamas and its “Health Ministry” have been caught manipulating these figures. The press, however, has been unbothered. The Washington Post continues to treat the terrorist-controlled ministry as credible and has even uncritically quoted Hamas officials. They are what Russian dictator Vladimir Lenin would have called “useful idiots,” but some fall into a different category.

As the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis has revealed, several journalists, including some at The Washington Post, celebrated the Oct. 7 attacks on social media, and others have called for Israel’s destruction. Shortly after the attack, Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah proudly retweeted “what did y’all think decolonization meant?” More recently, including during the Jewish holiday of Passover, The Post opened up its op-ed pages and column space in defense of foreign students deported for their role in the pro-Hamas demonstrations.

At a time when many Americans are struggling to pay bills, it is curious for the self-styled intelligentsia, whether privileged Ivy League students or the editorial boards of famous newspapers, to prioritize advocating for terrorists. It’s no accident. It’s part of a long-standing trend.

Thomas Paine and many other self-styled revolutionaries celebrated the French Revolution, only later to be engulfed in its excesses. More than a century later, liberal muckraking journalists such as Lincoln Steffens would cheer on the creation of the Soviet Union, exclaiming, “I have seen the future and it works!” Intellectuals would similarly support Lenin’s successor, Josef Stalin, as he purged his way through the 1930s. Journalists such as Walter Duranty of The New York Times helped cover up Stalin’s crimes and won a Pulitzer in the process. Others, notably influential reporters Edgar Snow and Herbert Matthews, would fete China’s Mao Zedong and Cuba’s Fidel Castro. Indeed, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini came to power in Iran in 1979, a bevy of journalists and intellectuals, including the influential philosopher Michel Foucault, applauded.

Duranty helped Stalin and his henchmen deny the Holodomor, the Soviet-created famine that killed millions of Ukrainians in the 1930s. His modern-day descendants serve a different master, but their purpose is effectively the same: to aid and abet genocidal totalitarianism. From positions of privilege, they pretend to stand for the underdog while being mouthpieces for murderers. They write for fancy papers and attend fancy colleges. They cosplay as revolutionaries but are little more than apologists for terror. Their pretensions aside, none is our moral better. Far from it. History will record as much.

The UN and NGOs refuse to allow plan to bring food into Gaza. They are so principled!

The Washington Post reports:

Israel is planning to take control of — and severely restrict — the distribution of humanitarian aid inside the Gaza Strip, using private American security contractors, as a condition for lifting its two-month blockade of supplies into the enclave, according to current and former Israeli officials, aid workers and other individuals with knowledge of the plan.

Details are expected to be finalized at a meeting of Israel’s security cabinet Sunday. The plan has support from Israel’s government and security establishment, and is expected to be put into motion before the end of the month, possibly as soon as President Donald Trump’s visit to the region in mid-May.

But the plan has been roundly rejected by the United Nations and dozens of international aid organizations, who say it runs counter to humanitarian principles, is logistically unworkable and could put Palestinian civilians and staffers in harm’s way.

So they scream to the world about no aid entering Gaza, but rejecting aid when they don't like the strings attached to avoid helping a sadistic terrorist group.

Here are the supposed reasons against it:

Several people warned that the gap between the supplies available and the actual need would lead to violence around the hubs.

That's happening already around warehouses.

Rights groups and governments around the world, including some of Israel’s closest European allies, have argued that Israel, as an occupying power, has an obligation under international law to facilitate the unhindered passage of aid into Gaza.

Even if you accept the falsehood that Israel occupies Gaza, what rule says the aid must be "unhindered"? That is simply a lie. There are always limits to how aid it brought in and distributed, everywhere in the world.

Many humanitarian organizations have rules that require them to deliver aid impartially, wherever it is needed and without involving armed actors on either side.

Did they not see the videos of Hamas gunmen riding on top of the aid trucks last year?

Dozens of aid organizations working in Gaza, meanwhile, have coalesced around a united refusal to participate in the proposal. About 20 outlined their concerns in a briefing paper to Western governments, including that it would violate international law. If the U.N. or third states assist in its implementation, they warned they could open themselves up to liability in war crimes.

It is s strange world where refusing to bring in aid is principled and facilitating aid makes one complicit in war crimes.

The entire episode proves the utter immorality of these NGOs.

Or, as I tweeted earlier: