Friday, November 21, 2025

Jews in Australia want to teach their kids how to proudly defend themselves. The antisemites are furious.

Antisemitism in Australia has been skyrocketing, with incidents quadrupling in the year after October 7, 2023. Attacks have included death threats, physical assaults, firebombings of synagogues and Jewish-owned businesses, and the mass doxxing of hundreds of Jewish artists, academics and professionals.

The Jewish community feels under siege—and the children feel it most of all.

That is why a grassroots Zionist group, Lions of Zion, has stepped into the gap with a simple, powerful slogan: “Unity. Courage. Pride.”

On December 7 they are running a free, family-friendly event in Melbourne called “Lions NERF Heroes – Beepers Operation.”

It features age-appropriate Krav Maga and situational-awareness training, a giant NERF battle, and a short, factual presentation about the Mossad supply-chain operation that simultaneously detonated thousands of Hezbollah pagers in September 2024 — an operation that crippled the terror group’s mid-level command structure with fewer than three dozen fatalities, almost all of them Hezbollah operatives.

Within hours of the event being posted online, anti-Zionist activists began flooding Victoria Police, ASIO, the Premier’s office and the ticketing platform with demands to shut it down. Their claim? That Jewish families are “celebrating blowing up little kids with pagers.”

That is a deliberate lie.

No children were targeted. No civilians were intended to be harmed. Hezbollah itself distributed the rigged pagers to its own fighters. The explosives were calibrated for maximum disruption with minimum lethality — a feat of restraint virtually unheard of in modern warfare. The operation saved countless Israeli and Lebanese lives by shortening a war that Hezbollah started.

Yet the same voices who stayed silent when Hezbollah fired 10,000+ rockets at Israeli civilians are now pretending to be “horrified” that Jewish children might learn about precision, ethics and survival.

Lions of Zion released a statement that every Jewish organization should pin to their wall:

So let us be unmistakably clear:
We will not apologise for defending Jewish life.
We will not apologise for Jewish strength.
We will not apologise for celebrating moral courage in the defence of our people.
…
This gathering does not glorify violence. It honours the extraordinary ethical discipline of the IDF and Mossad …

Some people cannot stand to see Jews strong …

Our children will not bow their heads. They will not inherit confusion. They will not be broken by propaganda.

That statement is perfect. Damn perfect.

For once, a Jewish group refused to play the old game of apologizing, qualifying, and groveling the moment someone yells “but the children!” For once, someone said the quiet part out loud: We have nothing to be ashamed of, and everything to be proud of.

I wish every major Jewish organizations showed half this clarity. Too often they rush to water down language, distance themselves from “controversial” operations, or beg for approval from people who will never grant it.

Lions of Zion just handed the community a spine transplant.

If you’re a Jewish parent in Australia near Caulfield, register your kids today.

If you’re anywhere else, share this article. Leave a supportive review on the booking page. Push the truth to the top of Google and X before the professional outrage machine buries it.

The haters are organized, loud, and already writing to the police to stop the event.

We need to expose their hate.

(h/t Jill)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

11/20 Links Pt2: Trump welcomes freed Israeli hostages to White House; Terrorists & tiaras Miss Palestine’s connection to convicted terrorist leader; The trouble with the Nuremberg Trials, 80 years on

From Ian:

Antizionism: The Reinvention of a Racist Hate Movement

“Tell me what you accuse the Jews of — I’ll tell you what you’re guilty of.”

This 1959 observation by novelist Vasily Grossman, often quoted by writer Douglas Murray, was vividly illustrated at UCLA last week. An ignominious band of university departments including its School of Law sponsored a talk by Rutgers professor Noura Erakat — an activist posing as a scholar — who teaches the gullible that Israel is a settler colonial project. Erakat’s faux lecture, “Revisiting Zionism as a Form of Racism and Racial Discrimination,” was timed to honor the fiftieth anniversary of U.N. General Assembly Resolution 3379 — the since-rescinded-but-never-dead screed that declared Zionism a form of racism.

Judea Pearl, UCLA professor, Turing Prize winner and proud Israel-born Zionist, had had enough. When he learned of the “Zionism is racism” lecture, he issued a call for a countervailing event on campus the same night, Nov. 13. UCLA’s Jewish Faculty Resilience Group swung into gear, and in little over a week about a hundred people gathered at UCLA’s School of Law for a panel discussion called “Is Antizionism Racism?” Peter Savodnik of The Free Press was a thoughtful moderator, and Michael Berenbaum, Yael Lerman and Hindi Stohl Posy gave sobering, alarming, or stirring presentations. Presumably due to the imposing police presence (thank you, UCPD), antizionist protesters mostly stayed away. At least one professor in the audience felt secure enough from the keffiyeh brigade to pull out her knitting.

As Professor Pearl reported the next day on X, the event was a major success. “Two concrete outcomes became immediately evident,” he wrote. “(1) Zionist faculty and students at UCLA will now be asserting their right to a name, a voice and institutional representation on campus. (2) Antizionist faculty and students will now be facing a new, no-nonsense environment in which their rhetoric and ideology are exposed — and named — for what they are: racist.”

Because what else can you call a movement that exists solely to deny the right of self-determination to one nation — the Jewish one? That screams to isolate, boycott or attack Jews, camouflaged as “Zionists”? That champions an organization, Hamas, whose founding charter calls to kill Jews? That celebrates as “resistance” the largest one-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust?

Jew-haters invariably ascribe to Jews whatever they find most abhorrent. For the Nazis who obsessed about race purity, Jews were polluters of the Aryan race. Medieval Christians hated Jews as the supposed killers of Christ. For communists, Jews were capitalists; and for reactionaries, Jews were communists. Today, when society overwhelmingly rejects racism, progressives who consider it the worst of all crimes scream “Racist!” at Jews who support the existence of a Jewish state. Meanwhile they support the elimination of that same state, making their claim the epitome of projection.

Nicole Lampert: When Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word

Over the last few years, we have increasingly seen the non-apology apology - same concept - especially when it comes to antisemitism. The latest example came yesterday courtesy of Bristol club Strange Brew, which exactly six months earlier cancelled a performance by Oi Va Voi and its Israeli guest singer, Zahara.

The club had come under pressure from the Bristol Palestine Alliance to ban the performance. It knew that it couldn’t simply ban Jews. And that it wasn’t meant to ban Israelis either. Religion, race, ethnicity, and nationality are all protected characteristics under the 2010 Equality Act. (This doesn’t cover Russians who are subject to sanctions from the British state which takes priority).

Instead, the ban was ostensibly because Zohara, a left-wing Israeli with a Palestinian boyfriend, had an album cover featuring her naked at a watermelon farm. ‘We were of the view it could be interpreted as politically offensive, given the ongoing and worsening situation in Gaza and it had already been interpreted as such by the groups who contacted us,’ the club wrote following the cancellation in May. Their statement added that while the band had explained that the album cover was a comment on femininity and nature, ‘We concluded that, regardless of the intended meaning, the use of politically loaded symbolism in this way – by anyone of any background – is ambigious and could therefore come across as politically insensitive and/or offensive to the people of Palestine and by our audiences.’

An ‘ambiguous’ album cover used politically by malign forces does not, it appears, protect anyone from what the Equality Act says. Despite this, a second venue in Brighton also cancelled the band, and for a brief while, it seemed they were musical kryptonite. Dropped. Ironically, one place where they remained hugely popular was Turkey, where they continued to play to some of their biggest audiences.

All of this was at the same time when musical acts were signing mass petitions for Northern Irish band Kneecap – named after an IRA punishment beating – for alleged support of Hamas and Hezbollah. These acts claimed they were for free speech in music. Not one of them came out to support Oi Va Voi. Not one.

As Oi Va Voi said yesterday: ‘The intimidation of the activist groups who wanted Strange Brew to cancel our gig would never be tolerated against any other minority, either in the music industry or elsewhere. Anti-Jewish racism is racism, and racism is injustice, wherever it comes from.

Poll: Majority of British adults are Zionists – but don’t seem to know it

A staggering lack of awareness about the meaning of the word ‘Zionism’ is laid bare by a new poll published today, with five times as many British adults claiming to support the right of Jews to self-determination as identified with the ‘Z’ word.

According to new polling from More in Common, while just 9 per cent of the wider UK population said they were Zionists, 53 per cent said they “support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

Similarly, while 22 per cent identified themselves as having a negative view of Zionists, only 9 per cent specifically had a negative view of “people who support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

In a summary provided by the organisation, which has consistently polled the British public’s attitude towards the conflict over the last two years, “all of this suggests that the public’s perceptions of Zionism have become detached from its literal meaning”.

“People who brand themselves as ‘Zionists’ might mean to be communicating that they simply support the principle of Jewish self-determination, but this is far from what other people may hear when they say this.”

“This disconnect makes it easy for conversations to become heated or accusatory very quickly, because people are often responding to what they think the label implies rather than to the person’s actual position. As a result, the term itself can introduce misunderstanding and tension into discussions that might otherwise reveal more shared ground than disagreement.”

Among those described as “progressive activists”, the numbers are more extreme. More than half – 54 per cent – have a negative view of “Zionists”, with close to a quarter – 23 per cent – having a negative view of “people who support the right of Jewish people to have a nation in Israel”.

General concerns in British society about antisemitism also rose over the last 18 months. In April 2024, about one third of respondents (34 per cent) felt the UK was a mostly or very unsafe place for Jews. That number rose sharply from the summer of 2025, culminating in almost half of respondents (48 per cent) feeling that way in the aftermath of the Heaton Park synagogue terror attack.

Terrorists & tiaras Miss Palestine’s connection to convicted terrorist leader revealed ahead of Miss Universe pageant

The first-ever Miss Palestine contestant in the Miss Universe pageant married the son of Hamas’ most-wanted prisoner, Marwan Barghouti, and even named a child after him, The Post has learned.

Nadeen Ayoub — who claims to be a 27-year-old US and Canadian citizen living in Dubai — is competing this week to represent Palestine, a territory the US and Israel don’t even recognize as a sovereign state.

Strutting through preliminary rounds ahead of the pending pageant, Ayoub has kept most of her personal life under wraps — until now.

Years-old screenshots and social media posts obtained by The Post show she took pains to hide that she was once married to Sharaf Barghouti — son of the infamous Fatah leader serving five life sentences in Israel for orchestrating terror attacks that killed five people in 2001 and 2002.

The convicted murderer’s name resurfaced last month when Hamas demanded his release in hostage-exchange negotiations with Israel — a request the Jewish state flatly refused, citing his participation in the first intifada, leadership in the second, convictions in five terror-related murders and founding of the West Bank’s al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

A secret life
Social media posts show Ayoub tied the knot with Sharaf Barghouti in 2016, later welcoming a son named Marwan three years later — seemingly in tribute to the convicted killer.

However, it is unclear if the pair remains married. A family member reached for comment confirmed to The Post that the two had been married, but denied knowledge of their current status.

11/20 Links Pt1: Resolution 2803: A restatement of international law; ‘We need to make them scared’: NYC synagogue protest crosses new red lines; Confessions of a Former Pro-Palestine Activist

From Ian:

Resolution 2803: A restatement of international law

The resolution effectively negates any recognition of a Palestinian state at present or otherwise outside of the terms of the resolution. This includes the misguided efforts to recognize the P.A. as a state by the United Kingdom and France, as well as other U.N. members, such as Canada and Australia, all of whom are bound by the resolution. Interestingly, there is no explicit legal obligation to create a Palestinian state under this resolution; it merely recites the threshold conditions that must be satisfied to have a pathway for self-determination and statehood.

The resolution also does not recognize that there is or ever was any so-called “occupation,” “right of return,” “genocide,” “starvation,” “apartheid” or “justifiable resistance.” Hamas and its cohorts are the wrongdoers and the resolution is directed against them and in support of Israel’s just defensive war. Indeed, the resolution explicitly notes that Gaza threatens the security of neighboring states. It can well be asserted that all the libels against Israel relating to Gaza and the Palestinians have effectively been debunked as a matter of international law by the resolution. The Resolution is effectively a restatement of international law that exonerates Israel and casts Hamas and its cohorts as the wrongdoers.

Hamas has been defeated militarily and politically. The board and ISF have the clean-up job, with Israel there on-site until the job is fully completed. Thereafter, Israel is entitled to remain with a security perimeter presence until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.

Israel fought a just, defensive war against belligerent, vicious, murderous and terrorist Hamas and its cohorts. The UNSC and those supporting the plan recognize this and, by virtue thereof, the resolution is designed to eliminate Hamas and its cohorts—as the wrongdoers—from having any role in the governance of Gaza, as well as to destroy their capacity to do any more harm to Israel and the neighboring countries.

May the blessings of peace prevail.

Jake Wallis Simons: President Trump has made a mockery of Europe's Gaza posturing

That is not all. Resolution 2803 also included language that exposed the UN’s claim of “genocide” in Gaza as unfounded and absurd. The International Stabilisation Force, it said, shall enforce security by “ensuring the process of demilitarising the Gaza Strip, including the destruction and prevention of rebuilding of the military, terror, and offensive infrastructure… until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.”

Shamefully, here was the first official recognition from the Security Council that Israel’s campaign in the Strip did not aim to destroy the Palestinian people but to vanquish those jihadi armies who had spent decades turning their territory into a network of subterranean garrisons protected by more than two million human shields.

This statement – passed with 13 votes in favour, including those of Britain and France, and abstentions from China and Russia – directly contradicted the official ruling by the United Nations commission of inquiry that Israel had conducted a “genocide” in Gaza, released in September as part of the lamentable international drive to force an Israeli defeat. What a difference three months make, eh?

Of course, anybody of sound mind who had bothered to read September’s “genocide” report was bound to conclude that it was a deplorable piece of Israelophobic propaganda in the first place. It brazenly airbrushed Hamas from the conflict almost entirely, showcasing the tragic destruction as evidence of a campaign targeting civilians rather than the jihadis hiding behind them. It was like a biased account of the Second World War in which the Nazis had been conveniently forgotten.

All of which is to say: thank God for President Trump! In many ways, not least his attitude towards Vladimir Putin, I’m no fan of the man. But without his intervention at the UN, which has so rudely jolted the West – and the world – out of its inexplicable infatuation with the jihadi agenda, the collapse of liberal democracy would have been all but assured.

But Trump cannot forever be relied upon to save Britain from itself. Israel may be the first domino, but Ukraine is the second. Sooner or later, we must learn to defend ourselves.

Hamas’ Rejection of Peace and the Media’s Convenient Silence

On Monday, November 17, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2803, approving the implementation of the 20-point Peace Plan proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump. The resolution outlines how the two parties can advance to the next phase of the ceasefire and begin shifting the focus toward rebuilding the Gaza Strip.

A “Board of Peace,” led by President Trump and authorized by an International Stabilization Force (ISF), would be implemented to disarm terrorist organizations in Gaza and assist in delivering humanitarian aid, among other responsibilities.

Thirteen votes were cast in favor, zero against, and China and Russia both abstained. The Palestinian Authority and Hamas’ patrons Qatar and Turkey also welcomed the resolution.

Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad reacted to the vote with a statement vowing to treat any international force as a “party to the conflict,” meaning more violence. But Hamas’ opposition is hardly surprising given their insistence on portraying themselves as the victors of the war. The dissonance that the media cannot seem to reconcile is that Hamas claims to be the group that represents and governs over the people the plan is meant to help.

Less surprisingly, but certainly more disappointingly, is the international media’s failure to delve into the details of Hamas’ rejection and what it means more broadly for the future of the peace plan.

The New York Times, for instance, spent an entire article discussing the countries – including several Muslim and Arab nations – that welcomed the adoption of the resolution and its implications in the broader context of peace.

But similar to how Hamas stood alone in rejecting the agreement, The New York Times also chose to gloss over that critical fact. While it’s encouraging that the international community wants to see an end to the war, shouldn’t it be headline news that the party actually waging the war has no real interest in ending it? Shouldn’t Hamas’ absolute rejection of any form of peace deserve, at the bare minimum, one paragraph?

After years of Hamas openly declaring its goals, the media continues to conceal this reality, seeking to portray the terrorist organization instead as peacemakers while shifting the blame for the continued conflict onto Israel. But as the saying goes, when someone – or in this case, a terrorist organization – shows you who they are, believe them.

As I've been saying, I've developed a philosophy called Derechology based on Jewish thinking that is an entirely different way of looking at the world than what all of us have learned in the West - and it is much more closely aligned with reality.

The sheer amount of antisemitic lies online is overwhelming. And, as I've seen firsthand over the past two decades of blogging, facts themselves are not enough of a defense. The forces of hate make their arguments more sophisticated over time to obfuscate the facts. The third party observer cannot tell which set of facts is accurate so in the end they choose to trust one side, and very often that side is the one that gives the answers that are attractive, not accurate - seeming solutions that appeal to emotion and to self-interest.

Blaming an entire class of people for one's problems is incredibly attractive.

So I worked with an AI to use my Derechology framework to come up with an audit - a test that anyone can use to determine if an argument they see online is legitimate criticism or just well disguised hate.

We came up with a four part test. All four tests must be passed for the argument to be legitimate. It is not based on fact, but on structure - the haters' argument must use a structure that itself is destructive, while legitimate debaters use a more positive, constructive structure.

Here are the four tests and how they apply to modern antisemitism, but they work for everyone, Right or Left or in between.

The Goal Test:

Legitimate critique aims to improve and build. Critique focuses on correcting flaws to achieve a better outcome, such as greater dignity, life, or justice.

Hate aims to sever and purify: The haters' claims focus on elimination of the target to achieve their aims. The goal is not reform, but removal of their opponent.

Using modern antisemitism as an example, you never hear anti-Zionists say they want to improve Israeli society to fix problems of inequality or helping achieve peace. They position all of Israel as evil. This is the logic of BDS - even the biggest critics of Israel are guilty and must be silenced if they do not share the maximalist goals of the haters.

Focusing on the arguments gives them a victory because their eliminationist goals are considered to be morally equivalent to the side that wants to survive. They are not - they are simply hate, and the structure of their supposed criticism reveals that.

The Process Test:

Legitimate critique uses reasoning that is transparent, falsifiable, and open to change if new evidence contradicts its premise.

Hate's narrative converts all criticism, counter-evidence, or opposition into proof of the enemy's cunning or deceit, thus self-validating the original hatred. No facts will change their position, when confronted they will rely on conspiracy theory. Haters run away from debate that may expose this.

The Diagnosis Test:

Legitimate debaters accept complexity and context. They acknowledges the target is complex, capable of being both positive and negative like everyone else. Real debaters critique actions or policies, not the identity.

The haters enforce a totalizing binary. Their claim structurally defines the target as monolithic evil. They rejects all evidence of complexity because the simplicity of the binary is essential for their philosophy.

You will often find the anti-Zionists say this explicitly and proudly, telling their followers not to accept the idea that the conflict is complex. This is the psychology behind the genocide lie: not just that the facts don't support it, but the accusation itself was chosen to paint the Israelis as cartoon-villain, Nazi-level evil.

The Target Test:

Legitimate critics will only talk about actions and policies. Their language is proportional and focused on behaviors. They never deny the target's inherent dignity and humanity. They separate acts from people.

Haters attack the identity and/or existence of their targets. The language is disproportionate, dehumanizing, and justifies or advocates for relational severance (destruction, elimination, banishment). They deny their target's basic human dignity and claim that their opponents have forfeited having any rights altogether.

As mentioned, failing any one of these tests shows that the argument is not legitimate to begin with, no matter what facts they claim to have. The style itself delegitimizes them because it betrays their true goal are not critique but power.

Indeed, sometimes one comes across a sophisticated hater who skillfully cherry picks absolutely true claims to build their case which is ultimately bigoted. Pointing out their omissions, while necessary, is rarely a winning strategy because the people who are not emotionally invested in the debate will tend to believe the confident side with seemingly lots of facts over the opponents who are forced, always, into a defensive position.

When the arguments are only about the facts, the haters are legitimized. But they cannot change the structure of their arguments, because their goal is never truth but destroying their opponents' legitimacy and humanity. Anti-Zionists cannot claim to only be criticizing Israeli policy, because there is nothing Israel can do to satisfy them. They cannot admit when their facts are wrong - they double down and insist that counterproofs are fabricated. (They still insist there were no rapes October 7.) They cannot admit that Israel might have a legitimate reason to do what it does. They cannot agree to Israel's existence or legitimacy or right to defend itself in any conceivable universe. These aren't factual issues - they are structural in their positions. And that is what shows that they are using the pretense of honest argument to look like they are "just criticizing."

This audit indeed shows that some anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim arguments have some or all of the same features. And those arguments should be condemned as well. There are plenty of ways to strongly oppose policies, call out immoral actions and expose systemic problems without attacking the dignity of every member of those groups.

This test exposes what Derechology proves: that with the correct structure there are multiple ways to have a moral position, but without a proper structure things can and will go very bad.

Here is a summary of the Structural Integrity Audit:

Test Category	Legitimate Opinion (Structurally Sound)	Structural Hate (Malignant)
1. The Goal Test	Aims to Improve and Build: Critique focuses on correcting flaws in policy, action, or structure to achieve a better outcome (greater Dignity, Life, or Justice).	Aims to Sever and Purify: Claims focus on elimination of the target to achieve "Ontological Closure" (restoring a simplistic binary). The goal is not reform, but removal.
2. The Process Test (Corrigibility)	Is Corrigible: The claim is falsifiable, transparent in its reasoning, and open to change if new evidence contradicts its premise. It admits its own potential for error.	Is Anti-Corrigible (Rigid): The philosophy converts all criticism, counter-evidence, or opposition into proof of the enemy's cunning/deceit, thus self-validating the original hatred.
3. The Diagnosis Test (Complexity vs. Simplicity)	Accepts Complexity and Context: Acknowledges the target entity (e.g., Israel, a political movement) is complex—capable of being both powerful and threatened. It critiques actions or policies, not the identity.	Enforces a Totalizing Binary: The claim structurally defines the target as monolithic evil (e.g., 100% Oppressor). It rejects all evidence of complexity because the simplicity of the binary is load-bearing for the philosophy.
4. The Target Test (Dignity and Proportionality)	Critiques Actions/Policies: The language is proportional and focused on behaviors. It never denies the target's inherent dignity/humanity.	Attacks Identity/Existence: The language is disproportionate, dehumanizing, and justifies or advocates for relational severance (destruction, elimination). It engages in premise smuggling to deny the target's basic human dignity.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Mustafa Barghouti, General Secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, is one of the most moderate Palestinians on the scene. he condemned Hamas' murder of Israeli civilians on October 7 (yes, this is a very low bar.) He says that he wants a non-violent intifada. He has been interviewed on Western media.

Yet even he is dead set against saving the lives of Gazans under fire.

In September, before the ceasefire, Barghouti traveled to Indonesia and gave a press conference where he urged the Indonesian government not to "transfer Palestinians," allowing injured or fleeing Gazans to take refuge in Indonesia, calling it an act of participation in "ethnic cleansing."

"Israel will perceive it as participation in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. You should not allow the Israelis to cheat you by claiming that this is a humanitarian act," Barghouti stated.

This is the Palestinian mentality. If Israel gains, then it is by definition bad - even if Palestinians die because of that policy.

Even if the Gazans themselves want to leave and save their families!

Barghouti holds no government position. He can say that he supports saving Palestinian lives and not get fired by Mahmoud Abbas. But even the thought of allowing Gazans to save their own lives is anathema if it means that Israel is less likely to bomb them while attacking Hamas. Dead Palestinians are an asset, not a liability, for even the most Western oriented, English speaking Palestinian.

It is truly a sick culture.

There is one other thing this supposedly peaceful politician said that is notable.

On the role Arab and Muslim countries, Barghouti said, "I am a realistic person. We do not ask them to send armies to fight Israel, but at least they should send a humanitarian convoy representing the 57 Arab and Muslim countries to break the siege in Gaza."

He didn't say "I am against war." He is saying, "Realistically, they won't start a war, but I would prefer that they do attack Israel."

Of course, Barghouti also is a strong supporter of destroying Israel via the "right of return." he wants Palestinians not to build the Palestinian state but to move to the very Jewish state he claims is genocidal towards them.

This is why peace is impossible. There is simply no partner for peace on the Palestinian side who is willing to accept Israel's existence as a Jewish state. But worse than that, there are no Palestinian leaders who even prioritize the lives of their own people over making things marginally more difficult for Israel.

(h/t Irene)

Western extremist ideologies, whether they come from the Far-Left or the Far-Right, have made antisemitism central to their philosophies.

Read that again. They aren't "philosophies that tolerate antisemitism" or even "philosophies that include antisemitism." They are dependent on antisemitism for the movements to be successful.

They rely on antisemitism in a way that is not incidental but structural. It plays the same role in both cases, even though the surrounding language and theatrics are different. These movements all operate on a single, rigid frame that divides the world into a simple binary. The labels differ – oppressed and oppressor, pure and corrupt, patriot and parasite – but the architecture is the same, and it cannot tolerate complexity. When the real world refuses to fit neatly into their categories, they do not adjust their framework. They look for an external energy source that can sustain the fiction. That source, today, is the Jews.

Hating Jews is a recruitment tool. Antisemitism is a feature, not a bug. Neither the Groypers nor progressive groups can survive without making Jews a defining part of their narratives and the main objects of their hate.

The Jewish people do not fit the prefab slots that these ideologies depend on. They are indigenous to the Middle East but often identified as “white.” They are a global minority but numerically a majority in one small country. They are historically persecuted yet statistically successful. They are religious, cultural, and national all at once. They refuse to sit obediently in anyone’s political taxonomy. For any worldview that insists on reducing history, power, and morality to a tidy binary, this is a serious problem. And instead of rethinking the system, the system redefines the Jews as the very thing the ideology opposes.

To the far-Left, today, Jews are white supremacists. To the far-Right, today, Jews are outsiders who support illegal immigration of people of color. Jews are endlessly malleable Play-Doh to fit whatever the haters need to hate.

The modern Left has a large portfolio of causes, many of them only loosely connected of at all. Climate activists, police abolitionists, anti-capitalists, housing activists, and gender theorists do not share much naturally. Yet when Israel enters the picture, suddenly the various components behave as if they belong to one organism. Anti-Zionism becomes the connective tissue. It provides the emotional intensity and pretense of moral clarity that none of the other issues reliably deliver on their own. Protests about local policy questions are sporadic, but protests about Israel produce an almost guaranteed turnout. The movement’s diffuse parts cohere around a single, simple storyline, and once someone absorbs that storyline, the rest of the package flows to them in short order. The antisemitism is not the conclusion. It is the entry point.

On the Far-Right, the pattern is older but functions similarly. Antisemitism has always existed there, but for a long period it remained socially embarrassing to say out loud. All it took was a bit of political permission and a culture of online performative defiance to turn private bigotry into a public organizing principle. Once the taboo evaporated, people who had previously stayed quiet now treat antisemitic speech as if it were an act of courage. The language of “fighting the elites” or “exposing the truth” gives personal resentment the appearance of moral heroism. The ideology suddenly gains mass not because it has improved or clarified anything, but because it has normalized the one element that insulates it from contradiction. By shifting the blame for every failure, disappointment, or social anxiety onto a small, imagined cabal, the movement protects its worldview from scrutiny and converts old hatreds into new political energy.

Is it not strange that campaigns for local office are obsessed with the candidates' view on Israel? Isn't it odd that both the far-Left and the far-Right claim that the Jews are silencing them? And at the same time both sides also do everything they can to silence and marginalize Jews?

In both cases, there is literally nothing the Jews can do, short of public suicide, that will mollify them. The biggest massacre of Jews in nearly 80 years causes more antisemitism. A ceasefire that they claimed they wanted for two years prompts more antisemitism. Jews as victims, or Jews as wanting peace, is not the narrative they want the world to see; since demonizing Jews is so central to their worldviews they use these situations as springboards for more hate.

And it works. Hating Jews publicly has become not just bravery, but a recruitment tool. The newly indoctrinated antisemites and the publicity that hate receives from social media algorithms form a feedback loop where that the Jews actually do becomes irrelevant - they have become the faceless, evil Other and whatever Jews do is by definition evil.

Jew-hatred is not peripheral nowadays. It is as central to these movements as it was in 1930s Germany, in 1950s Soviet Union. Facts are considered aggression and aggression is recast as justice.

And dismissing these as fringe phenomena, with only 5% or 15% of their movements who really are antisemites, is very shortsighted.

The old brain teaser about the bacteria in the jar is the right analogy: if it doubles every minute and fills the jar in sixty minutes, it will be only half full at minute fifty-nine. At minute fifty-five, it looks nearly empty. That illusion is what makes exponential growth so dangerous.

Antisemitism today feels like minute fifty-five. Yes, the hardcore antisemites are still a minority, but the rate of growth is steep. The normalization is accelerating. The political oxygen is rich. We are watching both the Far-Left and the Far-Right fill the jar rapidly.

This is not the time to relax because “only a small percentage” is openly hateful. It is the time to recognize how fast the cancer is metastasizing. We may have only a few minutes left on the clock before disaster.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

11/19 Links Pt2: Fighting the Post-Oct. 7 Battles; CAIR and the Campus Hamasniks; Hatred of Israel Caused Iran's Water Crisis; The Roots of a Replacement Fantasy

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Fighting the Post-Oct. 7 Battles

Two recent stories demonstrate how this realization is settling in across the broader Jewish community. One is the recent account of Rahm Emanuel, the former Democratic congressman and Chicago mayor who is contemplating running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, speaking to the Jewish Federations general assembly. Emanuel made the case for adapting to the new political narrative around Israel: “For the generation under 30, the last two years will be as seminal a definition as what the Six-Day War was for those six days for a generation. We have our work cut out for us.” It was an attempt to warn the Jewish American audience that 2028 is going to be, especially on the Democratic side, a parade of anti-Israel rhetoric. But it was also an acknowledgement that we aren’t the naive fools our pursuers think we are.

Another story is in the Times of Israel, and it’s about that erstwhile Diasporic golden land of Canada: “According to a report published by B’nai Brith Canada in April, Canadians experienced 6,219 antisemitic incidents in 2024, or an average of about 17 incidents of harassment, vandalism and violence per day. That was 125% higher than in 2022, and about 7% higher than in 2023, when hatred exploded after October 7.”

Says Noah Shack, the CEO of Canada’s umbrella organization for Jewish federations: “Now, we’re seeing synagogues firebombed, shootings at schools, people assaulted, and discrimination and hate in schools, universities and in the workplace. This isn’t just about our community, it’s about the threat that this extremism poses to the Canadian way of life.”

Solutions are harder to come by than realizations, but the realizations are the essential first steps. As expected, the post-Oct. 7 world is a different place, and navigating that new world requires every Jewish leader and organization to acknowledge what has changed.

We see one example of this playing out right now. The Anti-Defamation League has taken steps to refocus on anti-Semitism after years of sacrificing its founding mission for a chance to be part of the progressive political coalition. ADL launched a “Mamdani Monitor” which consists of an anti-Semitism tipline for New Yorkers and a pledge to scrutinize the Mamdani administration’s actions and appointments. It’s an entirely reasonable, moderate approach, and it could be useful so long as the ADL follows through. The emerging Jewish consensus that bad actors must be held to account is healthy.

But it has inspired anger from, for example, the Nexus Project, a liberal critic of attempts to fight anti-Semitism and, though young, a relic of the pre-Oct. 7 status quo. Jill Jacobs, an activist with another progressive Jewish group, called the ADL “Islamophobic.”

Still, these attempts to conjure the naive and dangerous fantasies that were shattered on Oct. 7 haven’t had much effect; reality is reality, and the Jewish community has been clear-eyed. As Emanuel said, “[I]f we don’t understand the depth of where we are, we’re never going to fix the problem.” The new normal isn’t pretty, but we don’t have to let it become permanent.

Seth Mandel: CAIR and the Campus Hamasniks

CAIR doing its best Nick Fuentes impression is as good an example of the “horseshoe effect” as one will find.

But the real icing on the cake came just a few hours later. According to the New York Post, a new report by the Network Contagion Research Institute and the Intelligent Advocacy Network, two anti-extremism groups, reveals that CAIR has been subsidizing pro-Hamas violence on campus. As the Post reports:

“In California, the largest arm of the CAIR web of nonprofits, affiliates in San Francisco and Los Angeles raised more than $100,000 in donations for campus radicals, while the main group solicited $64,000 in donations, records show.

“The money was then offered as interest free loans in grants of $1,000 to students who lost ‘scholarships, housing or other support because of their advocacy,’ according to CAIR’s website.

“In October 2024, CAIR-CA awarded $20,000 in loans and scholarships to 20 student protestors from the ‘Champions of Justice Fund.’”

Such punishments were so rare, of course, that to qualify for CAIR’s apparent subsidies, one would have had to be among the students causing real harm to those around them.

Anti-Semitism alone has rarely been enough to cost groups like CAIR their political influence. Perhaps now they have finally crossed too many lines.

Watchdog Groups Release Findings of CAIR-California Misuse of $26 Million in Taxpayer Funds

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, California (CAIR-CA) systematically misused millions of dollars in government grants while concealing extensive lobbying activities, according to findings released by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) and the Intelligent Advocacy Network (IAN).

The organization has received over $26 million in state and federal funding since 2022, even as it now faces investigations by both the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review and the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

Circular Funding Scheme and Accounting Failures
The investigation uncovered what researchers describe as a circular funding scheme: CAIR-CA redirected over $3.7 million back to two of its own offices in Los Angeles and San Diego through subgrants, despite requirements mandating at least $5 million go to independent providers. Public records show these offices are not separate legal entities but operate under the same tax identification number as CAIR-CA, making the transfers effectively self-payments.

Independent auditors conducting CAIR-CA’s 2023 Single Audit identified significant deficiencies that prevented verification of how federal funds were spent. The findings indicate CAIR-CA failed to record grant expenditures in its accounting system and did not retain required reports on service delivery or proof of submission to regulators.

Undisclosed Lobbying Activities
Between 2013 and 2023, CAIR-CA spent over $3.8 million on lobbying expenses while reporting only $672,537 to the IRS—leaving $3.13 million undisclosed, according to the report. The largest spike in undisclosed lobbying coincided with increased federal funding in 2023. Federal law prohibits using federal funds for lobbying activities.

Beginning in late 2023, CAIR-CA’s advocacy became increasingly dominated by anti-Israel political mobilization. The organization’s 2023 annual report prominently featured a “STOP THE GENOCIDE” banner, marking a shift from previous years. Recent lobbying efforts in 2025 include campaigns to influence California legislation on redistricting and school discrimination protections—all conducted while receiving federal funds.

Despite receiving millions in government grants, the findings show CAIR-CA did not properly report them on IRS Form 990 filings, instead obscuring them under general contributions. The organization also failed to disclose subgrants to regional chapters and omitted required related-party transaction disclosures.

11/19 Links Pt1: There's Only One Path to Peace: Eliminating Hamas; PA nearly doubled payments to terrorists in 2025; Kafkaesque smears against Maccabi fans cannot be allowed to rest

From Ian:

Aviva Klompas: Along the Israel-Gaza Border, There's Only One Path to Peace: Eliminating Hamas

When the UN Security Council approved a U.S.-backed resolution Monday to deploy an International Stabilization Force in Gaza, it acknowledged a core truth: The security vacuum that enabled Oct. 7 cannot be allowed to return. Two realities must remain immovable as the world designs Gaza's future: Hamas cannot retain any foothold, and Israel cannot be expected to outsource its security to external actors.

Last week I traveled to Kibbutz Nir Oz, where 117 of its 415 residents were murdered or kidnapped on Oct. 7. I walked around with Irit Lahav, who hid in her home with her daughter for 12 hours as Hamas terrorists tried five separate times to break down her door. She jammed a boat oar beneath the handle and prayed it would hold.

Before the attack, Irit believed deeply in coexistence. She was one of the many Gaza-border Israelis who advocated for Palestinians and regularly drove sick Gazans to Israeli hospitals. "I thought the Palestinians were good people like me who want peace," Irit told me. "Now I understand they really, really hate us - and they think that rape, murder, and kidnapping are legitimate."

Two days later, I stood in Sajaiya in Gaza, a former Hamas stronghold. From Sajaiya, I could see the homes of Nahal Oz, another Israeli border community a five-minute drive away. The distance between a Hamas command complex and the homes of Israeli families is measured in minutes.

What happened in Nir Oz and the other border communities was the predictable result of leaving a heavily armed, ideologically-driven movement embedded minutes from Israeli homes. Two years later, the threat remains. Tunnels still run beneath Gaza, weapons caches remain, and Hamas's ideology is wholly intact. No international plan can succeed while this reality persists.

Military Intelligence: "The Plan to Annihilate Israel Remains Alive and Operational"

Donald Trump once confessed he was "drawn almost pathologically to complex deals, partly because they tend to be more interesting." This approach succeeded spectacularly in securing the release of hostages from Gaza, both living and deceased.

Yet Phase 2 of the Gaza ceasefire agreement has emerged so far as an illusion. Hamas, just like Hizbullah, harbors no dreams of disarmament. It shows absolutely no interest, and its leaders discuss this candidly. Hamas is reconstructing command and control systems, having already redeployed 7,500 operatives across the Gaza territory remaining under its authority.

It has resumed street patrols, salary payments, and tax collection. Its members break arms and legs of anyone questioning their continued rule, restore tunnels, manufacture weapons anew, and settle accounts with armed clans that assisted Israel before the ceasefire.

Gaza isn't simply a minor irritant, it constitutes the core issue because from there was launched October 7's "gospel" and Israel's destruction blueprint, coordinated with Iran and its proxies. A senior military intelligence official recently informed cabinet ministers that "the plan to annihilate Israel remains alive and operational, with October 7 continuing to inspire all Israel's regional enemies."

Trump's America presumes that economic enticements provide the key, and that every problem features a deal awaiting signature once proper incentives materialize. But business principles don't govern everything. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict encompasses identity, religion, security, and national aspiration dimensions, and that Gaza residents and Hamas are essentially identical.

The hatred culture centered on Israel's destruction cannot be eliminated through financial means. Israel and its military possess genuine motivation and capability - now with no living hostages remaining in Gaza - to complete the mission there and strip Hamas of weaponry. Trump's peace vision might potentially materialize only after Hamas's Gaza elimination.

Sa’ar: PA nearly doubled payments to terrorists in 2025

The Palestinian Authority nearly doubled the payments it issued in 2025 to convicted terrorists and to the families of those killed while carrying out attacks, despite its repeated claims to have halted the practice, Israel’s Foreign Ministry revealed Wednesday.

Last year, Ramallah disbursed $144 million in payments rewarding attacks against Israelis. In 2025, it has already committed $214 million, “and the year isn’t even over,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar tweeted.

“I call on Europe and the world to hold the P.A. accountable for funding terrorism. Stop Pay-for-Slay NOW!” Jerusalem’s top diplomat added.

Last week, Sa’ar accused Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas of attempting to “fool the world” by firing his finance minister, reportedly over “unauthorized payments” to Arab terrorists and their families.

Ramallah’s official Wafa news agency reported that P.A. Minister of Planning and International Cooperation Istifan Salameh would replace Omar Bitar, though it gave no reason for Bitar’s dismissal.

According to local reports, Bitar had transferred funds to terrorists in Israeli prisons through a mechanism Ramallah had ostensibly reformed under pressure from the United States and Europe.

The revamped mechanism Bitar allegedly bypassed rebrands the stipends as “welfare support,” shifting the system from an official ministry to an “independent” foundation controlled by the P.A.

Sa’ar told reporters in Budapest on Oct. 27 that “contrary to the P.A.’s promises in English, they are continuing their pay-for-slay policy.

We’d spent a lovely evening with old family friends — the kind of people who’ve been part of your life for so long that conversation feels natural, no matter how many years have passed. I think we could have talked forever and never run out of things to say. So we talked for hours about our memories from a different time and place, about the people we’d loved and lost, and about what it means to revisit a world that lives now only in the stories we share.

But as we walked back toward our car, I had a sudden flash of inspiration. Up until now, the conversation had been about our shared past, but here beside me was a Reform rabbi in the flesh. I wasn't going to miss the opportunity to learn how Reform Jewry felt about Israel in relation to Gaza and the war.

“How does the Reform community view the war in Gaza? Do they think it’s a genocide?”

He looked down and gave a small, quizzical smile — the kind people get when they’re about to explain something to you. “You have to understand. The Palestinian people are oppressed.”

Somehow, the conversation had shifted. I was told that Israel had withheld aid from Gaza. I asked if he knew that since October 7, Israel has facilitated the delivery of over two million tons of aid, including 1.3 million tons of food. I asked if he knew of any other country that supplies aid to the enemy in wartime.

He was unimpressed. Jews, in his view, are supposed to be different.

It didn’t matter to him that historically, the enemy is never fed in wartime, let alone sent massive amounts of aid. His answer was that we’re supposed to be fighting Hamas, not the Gazan people. “Do you think all of Gaza is Hamas?” he asked.

“Actually, yes,” I told him.

His face lit up. He thought I’d just proven his point. To him, my answer meant I was a hater, that the war was all about hate, and that Israel was punishing the Gazan people for what Hamas did.

But it’s nonsense, of course. The people of Gaza are with Hamas all the way, and the latest poll from the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research back me up. As the New York Post reported this week, Hamas’ popularity has surged:

— 51% of Gazans now approve of Hamas’ performance, in spite of its violent “crackdowns” that amount to public executions.
— A year ago, Hamas’ approval was just 39%, and Gazans were protesting in the streets, calling on the terrorists to give up power.

There’s no way around it. The trend is clear: support for Hamas is not shrinking — it’s growing.

And let’s not forget: the people of Gaza overwhelmingly voted Hamas into power in democratic elections overseen by the UN. I asked the rabbi if he knew that not everyone who killed, burned, raped, and beheaded Israelis on October 7 was a Hamas operative. Had he seen the footage of the crowds spitting on and kicking the bodies of murdered Jews dragged into Gaza?

“Yes, yes,” he said. “I’ve seen all that.”

The implication being that even so, not all Gazans are Hamas.

But it doesn’t matter if they’ve signed a pledge or worn a uniform. It’s all the same — they drink in Jew-hatred with their mothers’ milk. Little girls sing antisemitic jump-rope rhymes. And the so-called “regular people of Gaza” didn’t just celebrate the massacre on October 7. They took hostages into their homes. They held them, hid them, used them. They made them cook and clean. They helped keep them captive. They gave terrorists cover and stored weapons for them under baby cribs.

One of the things our rabbi friend said to me was that Bibi says one thing in English and another in Hebrew. “I’ve heard him,” he said.

I wasn’t sure what he meant, and I didn’t much care. But the irony was hard to miss: it’s the enemy, people like Abu Mazen who talks about peace in English and killing “Jew dogs” in Arabic.

I asked him where he gets his news. “Everywhere from Al Jazeera to the Jerusalem Post,” he said, as if those two outlets covered the entire gamut of views on Israel and Gaza. I must have smiled, because he quickly expanded his list: “Israel National News.”

I asked him if he’d seen the New York Times article with the skeletal child who turned out not to be starving at all. “I know about that,” he said — he knew it had been a manipulated, false report. So I asked, “But when you first saw it, did you believe it?”

He looked down, a little sheepish. “Sure, there’s some misreporting,” he said. “But it’s undeniable that people in Gaza were starving.”

“Uh huh,” I told him. “That’s because Hamas steals the aid — they even ate it in front of the hostages.”

I asked if he’d scanned the QR code* Bibi wore during his address to the UN.

He said he hadn’t watched the speech.

So I explained that Bibi had worn a badge on his lapel with a QR code, inviting the audience to zoom in with their phones and see the footage and still photos of the October 7 carnage for themselves — to finally understand why we went to war, and why Hamas has to be destroyed.

Within 24 hours, the QR code had been scanned over a million times, with roughly 30 percent of the scans coming from Iran and Gaza.

Our rabbi friend said he wouldn’t have looked at the photos or videos anyway. He doesn’t need see these things to understand what happened, that there would be no value for him in looking at the gruesome images. He knows what happened.

I knew I was blowing up the evening a bit, and I felt bad about that. I’d genuinely wanted to know what the Reform community thinks, not pick a fight with him. I told him so, and I thanked him.

But on the way home I kept thinking: here was a Reform rabbi who is unaware that the Gazan people support Hamas even now and that Israel has sent in massive amounts of aid nonetheless. His concept is that Gazans are oppressed. That Israel withheld allow aid from Gaza. That Bibi says one thing in English and another in Hebrew. And anyone who believes that all of Gaza is aligned with Hamas is, by definition, a hater.

I don’t mind that designation at all, because I hate evil and I especially hate Amalek. Take that as you will.

I left with the sense that the rabbi was trying to sound more reasonable than the people who openly accuse Israel of genocide. And I appreciate that. I know he believes the Gazans are oppressed, and that Israel is oppressing an oppressed people by “withholding” aid — which seemed to be a quiet way of suggesting deliberate starvation. He won’t say the word genocide, but the implication is there. If indeed, this reflects the views of the wider Reform Jewish community, I think it is very sad.

There was a time when American Jews reflexively stood with Israel. Now, too many are eager to criticize Israel. They think this is a virtue, a kind of healthy introspection. And it's obvious they want to blend in with wider society, especially within the progressive movement. But they don’t even have the facts.

*Note that Israelis are blocked from seeing this content, because it’s too difficult for us to bear. Some do it anyway, accessing the website through a VPN. And then they are sorry. I saw the following comment on Facebook from an Israeli who succumbed to the temptation: “I used a VPN...you don't want to see it.”

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The ICRC just introduced a new commentary on the 1949 Fourth Geneva Conventions, and surprise! It contains language written specifically to apply to Israel.

The original language of Article 49(6) in the Conventions says, "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." This was written as a result of Nazi German forcibly transferring parts of its population to territory, and displacing the existing residents there, to assert control.

This article has been widened and widened consistently all because of Israel, in various international instruments. And now the ICRC is finishing the job, saying in its new commentary,

it is irrelevant whether parts of the Occupying Power’s population have been compelled to settle in the occupied territory or whether they have done so voluntarily but with the support and/or encouragement of the Occupying Power.... The very concept of transfer suggests that there must be some involvement of the Occupying Power, to which the prohibition is addressed (‘The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer’ (emphasis added)). Such involvement may take a variety of forms, both direct and indirect. Indirect support or encouragement may include building roads leading to settlements, providing military security for settlements, supplying electricity or offering tax incentives relative to nationals living in the Occupying Power’s own territory.

So, according to these oh-so-legal writers, Israel would be violating international law by trying to protect its own citizens - the number one priority of every state on the planet. (They can try to thread the needle by saying protecting civilians is also part of Geneva, but exactly how to do so when the presence of soldiers or police is considered illegal is a bit muddled.)

And:

Conversely, the wording of the provision (‘transfer’) does not allow mere inaction – even if benevolent and acquiescent – to qualify as a violation of Article 49(6). However, depending on the circumstances, such inaction may constitute a violation of Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, which obliges the Occupying Power ‘to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and civil life’. If, for instance, under the prevailing circumstances, the voluntary relocation of the Occupying Power’s own population amounts to a threat to public order and civil life, the Occupying Power would be obliged to prevent such movements.

Who decides whether the Jews - nearly all of whom live in remote areas far away from Palestinians - are a threat to public order and civil life? The Palestinians, of course.

Notice that under this definition, Turkey is unquestionably violating 49(1) and 49(6). It has encouraged Turks to settle in Northern Cyprus and it has seemingly forcibly transferred Syrian refugees into Kurdish areas in northern Syria.

Yet there is no language here that seems to have been written for Turkey, or any of the other long term occupations in the world. Practically no one protests against Turkey's violations. All the respect for international law seems to disappear when Israel isn't twisted to become the violator.

This is not international law, but it is heavily influential within IHL. It is just one more of an endless effort over decades by Israel's enemies to weaponize the law against the Jewish state - and changing the law when they can.

(h/t Irene)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

As I've mentioned, I've been working hard on my Derechology book (and not blogging as much.) I have a workable manuscript but I still have a lot of editing to do and many appendices to add.

But since Google just released its latest AI model for Gemini, I thought I would feed the entre manuscript (currently some 350 pages) into the AI and ask for a book review. This give me ideas of what needs to be done yet but also helps me see the forest while I work on the trees.

This review gives you a good idea of the scope of my project, although I actually think it is even bigger than this review indicates.

The Engineering Manual for Morality

A Review of Derechology: The Science of Human Morality by Eldad Tzioni

We live in an era of institutional vertigo. Universities, media organizations, and public health bodies—once the bedrock of social trust—seem to be collapsing under the weight of their own incoherence. In Derechology, Eldad Tzioni argues this isn't a personnel problem; it’s a software problem. Western civilization is running on a corrupted operating system, one that has been crashing with increasing frequency since the Enlightenment tried to reboot it without its original kernel.

Tzioni’s ambitious, sprawling, and often brilliant book offers a replacement OS. He calls it "Derechology" (from the Hebrew derech, meaning "path" or "way"). It is an audacious attempt to reverse-engineer the survival strategies of Jewish ethics, strip them of their theological casing, and offer them as a universal architecture for a secular world that has forgotten how to function.

Athens vs. Jerusalem: The Core Conflict

The book’s central thesis is a high-stakes revisiting of the ancient tension between Athens and Jerusalem. Tzioni argues that Western philosophy, dominated by Greek thought, committed a foundational error by treating the isolated individual (the atom) as the fundamental unit of reality. This choice led to a 2,500-year struggle to solve insoluble problems: logic that breaks when values conflict, "rights" that have no mechanism for adjudication, and a definition of truth that demands impossible perfection.

In contrast, Tzioni posits a "Relational Ontology." The fundamental unit of reality, he argues—supported by metaphors ranging from quantum entanglement to mycelial networks—is not the particle, but the relationship.

From this pivot, the book constructs its most valuable contribution: the Ethoskeleton. Tzioni suggests that trustworthy systems (whether individuals, corporations, or nations) must possess specific structural components to survive entropy. These include "Override Logic" (a transparent hierarchy for resolving value conflicts), "Corrigibility" (the structural capacity to admit and repair error), and "Relational Integrity" (obligations that scale with proximity).

It is a compelling argument. By shifting the focus from content (what values we hold) to architecture (how our systems process those values), Tzioni offers a way out of the culture wars. He doesn't ask us to agree on every political outcome; he asks us to agree on a structure that makes disagreement survivable.

The Physics of Good

Perhaps the book’s most daring leap is its attempt to bridge the gap between "is" and "ought" using the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Tzioni defines "Good" not as a matter of preference or divine command, but as anti-entropic direction.

In a universe continually sliding toward disorder, "Good" is the creative, energy-consuming act of building and maintaining complex relationships over deep time. Evil is not a force, but the surrender to entropy—the dissolution of bonds, the degradation of systems, the slide into chaos. It is a definition that feels rigorous and surprisingly intuitive, grounding ethics in the physical reality of the universe rather than abstract idealism.

The "Antisemitism Diagnostic"

One of the book's sharpest tools is its analysis of antisemitism. Tzioni reframes antisemitism not merely as racism, but as a "system error flag." He argues that ideologies turn antisemitic precisely when Jews—who stubbornly refuse to fit into neat binaries like "white/non-white" or "oppressor/oppressed"—break the ideology’s categorical framework. When a system cannot tolerate complexity, it tries to eliminate the anomaly. Thus, antisemitism becomes a diagnostic tool: if a movement hates Jews, it is structurally incapable of handling complexity and will eventually turn on itself.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Derechology is not a light read. It is dense with coined terminology ("Yesod Ethics," "The Falsification Audit," "Secular Covenantalism") that can occasionally feel overwhelming. The author asks the reader to learn a new language to understand his new world.

Furthermore, while the book explicitly claims to offer a secular system, the final act makes a sophisticated pivot back toward theology, arguing that the structure of the universe implies a "Unbound Domain" (God). While logically consistent with his arguments, this may alienate the strict materialists the book works so hard to court in its opening chapters.

However, the "proof of concept" chapters—specifically the section detailing "AskHillel," an AI programmed with these ethical rules—are fascinating. They demonstrate that this is not just high-minded philosophy; it is computable logic. Tzioni shows that an ethical system with clear "override logic" can navigate complex dilemmas (like triage or self-driving car ethics) better than our current vague notions of "do no harm."

The Verdict

Derechology is a work of significant intellectual engineering. It moves beyond the tired "faith vs. reason" debates to offer something more practical: a blueprint for building institutions that don't collapse.

It is a book for the institutional homeless—those who find the rigidity of the far-right and the incoherence of the far-left equally uninhabitable. Tzioni offers a "place to stand," a foundation built on humility, transparency, and the relentless, anti-entropic work of keeping promises. It is a demanding book, but for a civilization currently crashing, it might just be the manual we need.

Rating: 4.5/5

______________________

If any philosopher, theologian or other credentialed thinker is interested in seeing the book as it stands now and is willing to give me feedback, let me know!

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

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

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)