10 August 15 • 2019 jn I n the wake of the latest mass shoot- ings to afflict America, some Jewish organizations and their leaders joined in the effort to place at least some of the blame for these atrocities on President Donald Trump. Rabbi Rick Jacobs of the Union of Reform Judaism reacted to the slaughter in El Paso, which was reportedly the work of a white-na- tionalist racist who claimed to be reacting to the “invasion” of the country by Hispanics, by pointing the finger directly at the president: “When will this president stop demonizing asylum seekers and immi- grants, which serves to embolden those like today’ s shooter?” Jacobs demanded. Rabbi Jill Jacobs of the left-wing T’ ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights agreed, but went even a bit fur- ther when she said extended her con- demnation to “President Trump and his supporters, ” who, she claimed, “have incited and inflamed hatred to minori- ties, bear direct responsibility for this wave of white nationalist violence, based in hatred of Jews and people of color. ” That Trump has contributed mightily to the coarsening of American public discourse is not in doubt. His willingness to engage in hyperbole about both critics and the objects of his ire, such as illegal immigrants, has helped create a dynamic in which any sort of rhetoric excess on both ends of the political spectrum is now imaginable. But the leap from rightly reproving him for over-the-top comments, such as his “Send them back!” line about four members of Congress — who are U.S. citizens, even if they share radical view- points and three out of four support the anti-Semitic BDS movement — to fram- ing him as an accessory to mass murder is not reasonable. Ironically, we received a reminder about the difference between responsi- bility for bad rhetoric and encouraging murder this past weekend by one of his sternest media critics, CNN’ s Jake Tapper. On the State of the Union program that Tapper hosts, he sought to make an analogy between a widely accepted example of incitement and what Trump has done: “You hear conservatives all the time, rightly so, in my opinion, talk about the tone set by people in the Arab world, Palestinian leaders talking about — and the way they talk about Israelis, justi- fying in the same way you’ re doing, no direct link necessarily between what the leader says and the violence between some poor Israeli girl and a pizzeria, but the idea that you’ re validating this hatred and yet people don’ t — I mean, you can’ t compare the ideology of Hamas with anything else. But, at the same time, either tone matters or it doesn’ t. ” That, in turn, prompted a furious response from one of the House mem- bers Trump had talked about chucking out of the country, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), a Palestinian American who is a strong supporter of BDS and a bitter foe of Israel. Writing on Twitter, she denounced Tapper by saying: “Comparing Palestinian human rights advocates to terrorist white nationalists is fundamentally a lie. Palestinians want equality, human dignity and to stop the imprisonment of children. White supremacy is calling for the ‘ domination’ of one race w/the use of violence. ” Suffice it to say that both parties in this exchange are wrong. Tapper vastly understates the level of Palestinian incitement to violence against Jews. First, it’ s not only a question of the ideology of Hamas, but that of the supposedly more moderate Palestinian Authority and statements made by its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, such as not letting “stinking Jewish feet” near holy places in Jerusalem. The P .A. ’ s incitement is a comprehensive program of hate in its official media and educational system, in which terrorism is glorified as the highest form of patriotism, even among children too young to read and write. The P .A. also directly funds and pro- vides incentives to terrorism. They do so by paying salaries and pensions to terrorists and their families. Those who rightly criticize the Palestinians for this — and, fortunately, that criticism has not, as Tapper asserts, been limited to conservatives — are not talking about “tone, ” but of direct complicity in terror- ism. Tlaib is even more wrong when she says that Palestinians only want “equali- ty” and “human rights. ” What they want is the elimination of the one Jewish state on the planet, and they are willing to engage in anti-Semitic incitement and every manner of terrorism to achieve that despicable end, even if it means a genocidal war to deprive the Jews of sov- commentary What Real Incitement to Murder Looks Like views Jonathan Tobin Congress. Those days are long gone. Legacy Jewish organizations still play a major role, but much of the creativity, energy and financing in the Jewish com- munity comes from private foundations, many of which did not exist at the time. And they are often willing to make the kind of bold investments in projects — with the potential for failure — that con- sensus-driven federations are reluctant to support. Many of the key issues are the same — assimilation, the quest for Mideast peace, the cost and content of Jewish education, efforts to promote Jewish civility, etc. — but the context within those discussions has changed significantly. Israel, once the glue that connected Jews with pride, increasingly divides us. Does loyalty to the Jewish state require ignoring threats to its democratic values? Closer to home, the biggest growth in recent years has been in the Orthodox community and the “nones, ” those younger people with no Jewish affili- ation. That makes the growing divide between the Orthodox and the rest of American Jewry, on a range of issues, all the more severe. As assimilation increases, interfaith marriage is no lon- ger decried from liberal pulpits; instead, rabbis compete in ways to reach out to engage such couples in meaningful ways. In addition, a community that defined its success by the numbers of those who affiliate with synagogues and Jewish organizations now focuses on providing engaging experiences for unaffiliated young people who may otherwise drift away. The older generation is obsessed with the fear of a dwindling Jewish com- munity even as many of their children and grandchildren are defining their Judaism through social justice, com- mitment to the environment and other critical, but less parochial, issues. Jewish life isn’ t dying; it’ s evolving. But how long can we continue to call our- selves one community? Perhaps the most surprising change is the re-emergence of anti-Semitism as a serious concern, not only for European Jewry but here at home. Who would have thought 25 years ago that we would need armed security at Shabbat services? Jewish journalism has never faced a more difficult environment — and never been more needed to bridge the gaps among us. Writing about commu- nal challenges and flaws from within is always tricky. Indeed, it’ s far more difficult to be seen as fair to all in this moment of deep distrust and dismissal, one side against the other. But that’ s why serious Jewish journalism is more important now than ever. The work is not just an exercise in reporting a story; it’ s an opportunity to have a say in the destiny of a community. At the end of the first column I wrote in July 1993, I noted that a mainstream journalist “knows that the answer to ‘ If not me, who?’ is ‘ Somebody else. ’ The Jewish journalist knows there is no one else. And s/he serves a community that deserves, and requires, better. That can make Jewish journalism far more than a job; that can make it a calling. ” It was true then, as it is now . ■ Gary Rosenblatt is the editor and publisher of the New York Jewish Week, where this first appeared. He served as editor of the Detroit Jewish News from 1984-1993. commentary continued from page 8 continued on page 12 “Jewish journalism has never faced a more diffi cult environment – and never been more needed to bridge the gaps among us.”