Blog

Stephen Miller has long stood at the center of controversy in American politics, known most prominently for his hardline stance against immigration—a stance he meticulously shaped during Donald Trump’s first term as senior policy advisor. Miller rose to prominence early in Trump’s campaign, helping craft many of the candidate’s most divisive talking points on immigration, nationalism, and law enforcement. His influence extended far beyond immigration: he shaped key executive orders, wrote major speeches, drove cultural messaging, and orchestrated the purging of less ideologically rigid voices within the administration. Miller was not merely an advisor—he became Trumpism’s ideological enforcer.

Once in the White House, Miller quickly became one of the most powerful aides, often wielding more practical policy influence than Vice President Mike Pence, who served a largely ceremonial role. He was the central figure behind some of the administration’s most controversial moves, including the Muslim travel ban and family separation policies. His proximity to Trump and his mastery of bureaucratic manipulation gave him sweeping authority across federal agencies.

Today, more than 100 days into Trump’s second term, Miller’s power has only deepened. Now appointed Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor, he is no longer just crafting the vision—he is commanding its implementation. From shaping executive orders to steering the DOJ’s messaging strategy, Miller has become operational commander of the administration’s most ideologically driven agenda. Reports indicate he is behind proposals to suspend habeas corpus for migrants and expand federal crackdowns on sanctuary cities. His influence reaches into the Department of Justice, where insiders suggest he is directing legal strategy and prosecutorial priorities.

Compared to Vice President J.D. Vance, Miller’s power is more embedded and strategic. While Vance commands public attention and represents the administration, Miller operates from within the apparatus itself. He is not bound by the constraints of electoral politics and public approval—instead, he shapes the agenda through the mechanisms of bureaucracy, law, and executive authority. Behind the scenes, Miller continues to define not only immigration but the broader ideological and institutional framework of Trumpism.

Many consider Miller the mastermind of the administration’s cruelty toward immigrants. But beyond policy, Miller’s story raises a deeper question, particularly within the Jewish community: How can someone whose ancestors were refugees become the architect of such unforgiving policies?

Miller, a descendant of Jewish immigrants fleeing antisemitic persecution in Eastern Europe, now champions policies that deny others the very refuge his own family once sought. His family history reflects the broader narrative of Jewish survival—escaping violence, building anew, and carrying the moral memory of persecution.

That contradiction runs deeper than politics—it strikes at the heart of Jewish identity. Jews survived because empathy triumphed over cruelty. Miller’s legacy, by contrast, is one of wielding power not to protect the vulnerable, but to punish them. He has become a man who uses the language of security to justify exclusion and suffering.

Within the Jewish community, reactions have ranged from discomfort to outrage. Organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, HIAS, and Bend the Arc have condemned his rhetoric and policies. The ADL noted that Miller’s ideas “echo white nationalist talking points.” HIAS, founded to assist Jewish refugees, declared that Miller betrayed the very values his family depended on to survive. Even conservative Jewish voices have distanced themselves, warning that Miller’s path risks eroding both moral clarity and communal memory.

Miller’s own family has not remained silent. His uncle, Dr. David Glosser, published a widely read op-ed denouncing Miller’s policies as a betrayal of Jewish ethics and family history. His childhood rabbi, Neil Comess-Daniels, also issued a public rebuke, stating that Miller had “weaponized Torah” to justify cruelty. Holocaust educators like Deborah Lipstadt have warned that Miller’s language contributes to democratic backsliding and eerily mirrors propaganda from past authoritarian regimes.

Critics and scholars have further questioned whether Miller’s policies disproportionately harm people of color. The Muslim travel ban, asylum restrictions aimed at Central Americans, and favoring of European immigration all point to a pattern. Though Miller avoids overt racial language, the impact of his agenda reflects a deeply racialized vision of national identity—one that prizes exclusion over pluralism.

The cruelty of Miller’s approach was most evident in the family separation policy. Children were torn from parents, often without any tracking mechanism for reunification. Miller defended the practice, believing that pain would serve as a deterrent. Under his guidance, ICE escalated raids, detention centers filled with unsanitary and overcrowded conditions, and due process protections were routinely denied. These were not bureaucratic failures—they were features of Miller’s strategy. Today Miller has made ICE a paramilitary organization who seize people with military like force, no due process and then treat them like prisoners in terrible conditions.

Miller’s wife, Katie Miller (née Waldman), also plays a role in the administration. A fellow hardliner and former DHS spokeswoman, she defended family separation and detention policies. Despite private concern from her family, she has remained closely aligned with her husband’s views, making them a rare power couple within Trump’s inner circle.

This contradiction—between Jewish memory and exclusionary policy—underscores a deeper tension within American Jewish life. Miller represents a segment of Jewish-American conservatism that prioritizes tribal security and national identity over universal humanitarian values. It is a vision that echoes with historical irony: a people once deemed undesirable now producing a voice advocating exclusion.

Stephen Miller’s story is one of striking contradiction. He embodies the journey of a refugee family—and the betrayal of that journey’s values. His rise demands reckoning, not just from historians, but from a nation grappling with what kind of country it chooses to be.

Stephen Miller’s actions thus become more than policy—they become a moral mirror. His legacy is already taking shape, not just in what has been done, but in what is being normalized. With Trump back in power and Miller at the ideological core of the administration, cruelty is no longer a means to an end—it is the point. The danger is no longer theoretical. The machinery of exclusion is being rebuilt in real time, using law and fear as tools of control.

What October 7 Revealed About a Century of Betrayal

By Jerry M. Elman
A journey from Holocaust memory to uncovering the uncomfortable truth about why there will never be a Palestinian state.

I never expected to write this book. I certainly didn’t plan to finish it.

After publishing Miracles Through Hell, the story of my parents’ Holocaust survival, I thought I had said what I needed to say. That book was deeply personal—an act of remembrance and healing. It gave voice to silence and brought my family’s past into the light.

But something happened I didn’t anticipate.

As I gave presentations—about the Holocaust, about the history of Jew hate—audiences kept steering the conversation toward Israel and the Palestinians. These were mostly non-Jewish audiences, often in rural or conservative communities, and this was long before the world saw Hamas’s true face on October 7. They weren’t angry. They were curious. Confused. Eager to understand something they knew they’d never been taught clearly.

So I added a few slides. Then more. I began researching further—treaties, maps, speeches, original texts. I wasn’t looking for a book. I was trying to answer questions.

But what I found changed everything.

What started as research became something much larger. The presentations turned into writing. And the writing became the manuscript for Promised, Betrayed, and Lost: How a Palestinian State Never Came to Be.

Cover design for my upcoming book, Promised, Betrayed, and Lost

Even then, I stopped. I shelved it. I told myself it was too divisive, too raw, too complicated. I’m not an academic or a professional writer—I’m an engineer by training, someone who asks questions, searches for answers, and refuses to accept surface-level answers.

But I’ve always been something less common: an engineer who’s people-focused. Someone who values empathy and clarity just as much as the depths of science and technology. Throughout my career, I was the one who could take complex topics and make them understandable—translating difficult truths into language people could actually connect with. That combination shaped this book as much as the facts did. Because in a world drowning in slogans, people don’t just need more information—they need understanding.

The times I stopped writing, people close to me who read my drafts pushed back. “You don’t sound like the experts,” they said, “but you make people understand what they never could before.”

I concluded they were right. And the work went on.

What I discovered was a history few have ever seen clearly, including myself. I realized that what I had grown up hearing and learning—what so many of us have absorbed—was a collage of distorted truths, media bias, propaganda, antisemitism, and political spin. And beneath that collage lay the real story: a Palestinian movement that never set out to build a nation—but to prevent one from ever existing.

And then came October 7, 2023.

The illusion died that day. The mask dropped. The true goals—of Hamas, of much of the Palestinian Authority leadership, and of too many who remain silent—were revealed. It was never about a homeland. It was about annihilation. It was fulfillment of a vision of hate and destruction started by one man during British rule. His legacy and control of the Palestinian culture lives on today.

Where the Dream Really Died

The idea of a Palestinian state didn’t collapse in 1967. Or in 1948. It died much earlier—with the British appointment of Amin al-Husseini as Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921.

Al-Husseini wasn’t a peacemaker. He was a political radical who viewed Jews not as neighbors, but as enemies. He incited riots, rejected every peace proposal, and during World War II, found common cause with Hitler. From Berlin, he broadcast Nazi propaganda in Arabic, recruited Muslims into the SS, and pleaded with the Nazis to extend the Holocaust into the Middle East.

He even fought to block Jewish children fleeing death camps from finding safety in Palestine.

That’s where the national movement began. Not with hope or sovereignty—but with hatred.

“Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.” — Amin al-Husseini, March 1, 1944, via Radio Berlin (Note, he always referred to Arabs, not Palestinians. The use of name “Palestinian People” started in 1964)

That legacy continued. Yasser Arafat—al-Husseini’s nephew, via his mother, carried the same ideology forward. And today, Hamas completes the chain. They didn’t hijack the Palestinian cause. They gladly inherited it.

Every offer—1937, 1947, 1967, 2000—was met not with negotiation, but with bloodshed. Even the 2000 Camp David offer, the most generous in history, was flatly rejected. There was no counteroffer. Just another war.

A peace offer by Israel after the 1967 Six Day War was answered with the following statement known as the Three No’s: “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”

It was never about building a nation.
It was never about preparing to govern.
It has always been about preparing to fight, no matter the consequences to their own people.

October 7: The Reckoning

What Hamas unleashed on October 7 wasn’t resistance. It wasn’t liberation. It was the deliberate slaughter of civilians, the mutilation of bodies, the kidnapping of children. And the response—from parts of the Western world—was even more terrifying.

Marches. Slogans. Justifications. Silence.

In cities across the U.S. and Europe, pro-Palestinian protesters flooded the streets. Some held signs praising Hamas. Some called October 7 “resistance.” College campuses erupted with chants of “Intifada” and “From the river to the sea,” slogans that openly call for the destruction of Israel. These weren’t fringe voices. These were faculty. Student leaders. Elected officials. Celebrities.

And among them were Jews.

Jews who claimed to stand for justice, while justifying terror. Jews who shouted slogans that erased their own history and undermined the safety of Jews everywhere. I understand the desire for peace. But peace built on denial is a lie. And when Jews turn against their own in the name of fashionable activism, they aren’t standing for justice—they’re standing for erasure.

The lie collapsed. This was not a people fighting for freedom. This was a movement fighting for vengeance.

A Century of Betrayals

The Palestinians were betrayed. That much is true. But not by Israel.

They were betrayed by Britain, who carved up the land and abandoned their promises.
By the Arab world, who used them as pawns and kept them stateless.
And by their own leaders—who rejected peace, time and again, and led their people down a path of perpetual loss.

But betrayal alone doesn’t explain what followed. Because at every critical juncture, the Palestinian people had a choice. And again and again, they chose leaders who refused to build a future—but who promised destruction.

They could have followed visionaries. They followed warlords.
They could have built cities. They built tunnels and rockets.
They could have created a state. They chose to deny another’s.

In 2000, even when offered nearly everything—a state, a capital in East Jerusalem, recognition, and international assistance—they didn’t negotiate. They didn’t counter. They walked away. And then they launched the Second Intifada. Because their identity had become wrapped not in building a future, but in destroying Israel’s.

A two-state solution was never truly an option. It still isn’t.

And in the process, they destroyed themselves. There is no one left to blame but themselves.

After World War II, when the Allies defeated Nazi Germany and forced its surrender, the German people didn’t blame the Allies for the ruins they faced. They blamed the regime they had empowered. They accepted responsibility. And then they rebuilt their country—stronger than before. They didn’t choose another generation of war and destruction. They chose something better.

The Palestinians made the opposite choice.

Entire generations have been raised to glorify martyrdom over prosperity. Children are taught that vengeance is justice. That land matters more than life. That dying is a destiny more meaningful than living. A society that teaches its young to die rather than dream is not seeking freedom—it is seeking sacrifice.

They embraced leaders like Arafat and Hamas—not despite their hatred, but because of it. Leaders who not only sought the destruction of Israel—but sacrificed their own people in pursuit of that goal. These leaders didn’t liberate Gaza. They turned it into a launchpad. They didn’t defend the West Bank. They radicalized it. And each time the world offered a hand, they slapped it away—then blamed Israel for the blood on their hands.

This is not just political failure. It is cultural self-destruction.

Vengeance, rooted in a lie, has consumed them. A lie that says there is no room for Jews. A lie that says their pain is sacred, but Jewish pain is expendable. A lie that says resistance—no matter how brutal—is heroic, even when it only leads to more graves.

The world cannot change this. Israel cannot change this. No one can.

Only the Palestinian people can.

Until they demand new leadership, new priorities, and a new national dream—one focused on life, not death—nothing will change. The cycle of destruction will continue. The terror will continue. The poverty. The isolation. The misery. All of it will continue. Because hatred will have remained their compass.

They deserve better. But they must choose better. No one can choose for them.

Why This Book Matters Now

Promised, Betrayed, and Lost: How a Palestinian State Never Came to Be is the book I never meant to write. But I couldn’t ignore what I discovered. Not just as a writer—but as a Jew, a son of survivors, and someone who believes truth matters more than comfort.

October 7 was not an isolated tragedy. It was a culmination. A reckoning. It showed the world what many refused to see: that ideology, not borders, is what fuels this conflict. And that peace will never come from pretending otherwise.

This conflict is not just about territory. It’s about memory, identity, and morality. If we can’t name the lies, we will never find the truth. And without truth, there can be no peace.

This post draws from the final chapters of my upcoming book, Promised, Betrayed, and Lost. As the manuscript nears completion, I offer this not as a historian, but as a second-generation Holocaust survivor, a researcher, and a witness to a history the world keeps rewriting to conform with a false narrative. The truth has been buried going back to British rule.

This book will be uncomfortable for some. But it is necessary—because peace without truth is impossible. And truth still matters. It always will. Lies and destruction do not build nations. And that is why there will never be a Palestinian State.

Trump’s Crackdown on Campuses and Immigrants Is a Warning Jews Can’t Ignore

In moments like this, memory matters. History matters. And for Jews, that history isn’t theoretical—it’s personal, generational, and painfully familiar. We have seen what happens when a society turns on free expression, when political leaders use fear to justify silencing dissent, and when minority groups are used as pawns to advance dangerous ideologies.

Yes, university leaders have failed. Some have ignored rising Jew-hate. Others have enabled it. A few have even encouraged or excused it, cloaking bigotry in the language of social justice or anti-colonialism. Jewish students have felt isolated, unprotected, and unwelcome—especially in moments of heightened tension surrounding Israel. These are real problems, and they demand serious action, accountability, and cultural change within academia.

But the answer is not a political power grab.

And it’s certainly not a president threatening to take over universities and use the federal government to silence speech. That’s not justice. That’s authoritarianism.

That is why Jews must not be silent about Donald Trump’s plan to crack down on college campuses under the guise of fighting antisemitism. It is not about protecting Jewish students. It is not about combating hate. It is about using us—again—as the justification for a much larger and more dangerous assault on democracy itself.

When Support Isn’t Support

This isn’t a defense of Jews. It’s a test run for authoritarian control.

Trump’s promise to take over universities and punish dissenters is not support for Jews—it is political theater. It’s designed to energize a base, silence critics, and stoke the culture war. And disturbingly, too many in the Jewish community are applauding it, thinking that finally someone is standing up for us. But they’re not.

Let’s be clear: Trump’s so-called support for Israel has never been about Jews. It has always been about evangelical power, Christian nationalism, and a political agenda that uses Israel as a symbol while ignoring the lived realities of Jewish life and safety—both here in America and around the world.

Evangelicals don’t support Israel because they care about Jews. They support it because it plays a role in their apocalyptic theology—where Jews either convert or perish at the end of days. Their version of “support” is conditional, instrumental, and entirely self-serving. That’s not love. That’s not protection. That’s exploitation.

The Language of Hate Returns

And the rhetoric doesn’t stop with campus protests. Today, immigrants are being labeled an invasion. They’re being rounded up, caged, and vilified—just as Jews were in Europe’s darkest decades. This language—“invasion,” “infestation,” “vermin”—is not accidental. It is meant to strip people of their humanity. To make cruelty feel justified.

But there is no invasion. What’s happening at the border is not a war—it’s the result of outdated, broken immigration laws that no longer reflect our nation’s needs or values. These are laws that Republicans have refused to reform—not because reform is impossible, but because political chaos serves them. Eighteen years ago, President George W. Bush proposed compassionate immigration reforms, but his own party rejected them. President Biden tried again and was blocked. The dysfunction is deliberate. The suffering is political strategy.

And history tells us plainly: when nationalism and hate are unleashed, we always end up the target.

My Parents Knew What This Was

My parents revered this country because everyone was allowed the freedom to speak out. That universal freedom—available to all, not just the powerful—is what kept Jews in America safe. It’s what made this country different from the one they fled. I am glad they did not live long enough to see what is happening today. Because what they would see is a reliving of their own personal experiences in the 1930s in Europe. And what that led to. They would see the slow, strategic unraveling of rights, masked as law and order. And they would recognize the danger before most Americans could even name it.

Our families didn’t come to this country because it was perfect. They came here because they believed it offered something better—freedom, refuge, dignity. If we, of all people, cannot recognize the warning signs when they appear, then we have failed those who came before us and those who will come after.

Why Jews Must Not Stay Silent

Authoritarianism doesn’t come all at once. It chips away—at speech, at protest, at rights. It begins by labeling protestors as enemies and immigrants as invaders. And yes, it often begins by claiming to defend Jews.

But when dissent is criminalized, when books are banned, when ideas are punished—Jews are never far behind. We should know that. We do know that.

So why are we helping it happen?

To those who believe that cracking down on universities “the Trump way” is a sign of strength, I ask: What happens when your ideas are the ones being silenced? When your children are the ones being monitored? When your loyalty is once again questioned because you are Jewish?

Trump’s actions aren’t support. They are a smoke screen. And too many Jews are mistaking it for safety.

I will always stand up for Israel’s right to exist and defend itself. I will always speak out against Jew-hate in any form. But I will never applaud the destruction of democratic freedoms in the name of protecting Jews. Because that has never worked. And it never will.

We should know better.

Written by Jerry Elman, April 4, 2025

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
—James Madison

A Government That Still Looks Like Ours—But Isn’t

Imagine walking into a federal building in Washington five years from now. The Constitution still hangs behind glass. The flags still wave. The Pledge of Allegiance still opens school days. On the surface, nothing appears broken. But beneath the marble and metal, something unrecognizable is taking root.

Federal agencies have been gutted. Civil servants dismissed. New rules dictate what can be taught, which books are banned, and who gets to feel safe. Policies are no longer debated in public—they are declared by executive fiat. And the people running those agencies aren’t experts or public servants. They’re loyalists, chosen for their ideology and obedience.

It’s not a coup. It’s not a dictatorship. It’s something far more insidious: a restructuring of American governance under the illusion of continuity. The blueprint for this transformation exists, published in broad daylight. It’s called Project 2025.

And its goal is not to rewrite the Constitution with ink—but to render it meaningless through control.

A Vision 60 Years in the Making

Project 2025 is not a sudden invention. It is the culmination of more than six decades of conservative planning—a political vision that took root with Barry Goldwater in the 1960s, matured under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, and has now crystallized into a well-funded movement that sees democracy not as sacred, but as something that must be tamed to serve a higher ideological purpose.

Goldwater believed government was inherently the enemy of liberty. Reagan declared in his 1981 inaugural that “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.” That message became gospel to a new generation of conservatives—politicians, think tanks, televangelists, and billionaires who would spend decades building an infrastructure to dismantle the very government they aspired to run.

Now, with Project 2025, that long-term vision is laid bare: a government stripped of independent checks, re-staffed with partisan loyalists, and governed from above by a president whose powers are nearly absolute.

The Enemy Within: How Immigration Became the ‘Invasion’

James Madison warned that tyranny would come “in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” That enemy has now been declared: immigrants.

The language of Project 2025 and its advocates is unmistakable. Immigration is not described as a challenge, or even a crisis—it is an “invasion.” This is not accidental rhetoric. It’s military language, designed to frame migrants—many fleeing war, famine, and gang violence—as enemies of the state.

In this worldview, the U.S. is under siege, and the president becomes a kind of wartime commander-in-chief. Immigration policy becomes national defense. The Constitution’s guarantees of due process, asylum rights, and human dignity? Collateral damage in the name of sovereignty.

And when a people believe they are at war, they will tolerate anything done in the name of victory.

The Evangelical Crusade Behind the Curtain

Project 2025 is not just political—it is deeply evangelical, shaped by a specific vision of Christian America. Its leaders speak not of pluralism, but of “moral restoration.” They see secular government as a threat to divine order, and believe America’s decline stems from the rejection of biblical authority in public life.

The plan calls for:

• Restoring prayer and religious instruction in public schools.
• Expanding public funding for Christian private schools through vouchers.
• Rolling back LGBTQ+ rights under the guise of religious liberty.
• Elevating a specific interpretation of Christianity as the foundation for policy.

This is not about freedom of religion. It is about freedom for one religion to dominate, while others are tolerated—or silenced. The Constitution’s First Amendment was written to protect belief from the state. Project 2025 seeks to infuse the state with belief, so that law becomes an extension of theology.

The result is a government that claims divine legitimacy, and a citizenry increasingly divided between those who conform—and those who are cast out.

The Billionaire Class Has Chosen Sides

This movement has not grown in isolation. It has been nourished, funded, and shielded by a class of billionaires who see in Project 2025 a chance to remake America in a way that protects wealth, silences dissent, and deregulates everything but morality.

Libertarian tycoons like the Koch network, political donors from Silicon Valley, hedge fund magnates, and fossil fuel barons have all found common cause with the Project 2025 vision. For them, it is the perfect marriage: authoritarian control to protect their economic dominance, cloaked in the language of patriotism and faith.

They see regulation as theft. Taxes as tyranny. Unions as threats. And democracy? A nuisance—too messy, too slow, too unpredictable.

They fund think tanks, pay for disinformation campaigns, underwrite politicians, and fill the airwaves with narratives designed to make you believe this is about “freedom.”

But their freedom is not for everyone. It’s the freedom to dominate. And Project 2025 is their crowning achievement.

The Constitution’s Skeleton: Still Standing, No Longer Alive

The genius of this movement is that it does not destroy the Constitution. It simply hollows it out. The text remains. The courts remain. The elections happen. But the meaning fades.

• Agencies are repurposed to serve the president, not the public.
• Civil servants become tools of enforcement, not guardians of law.
• Rights become conditional, dependent on religious and political alignment.
• Immigration becomes invasion.
• Opposition becomes sedition.
• Dissent becomes betrayal.

All of it, wrapped in flags. Signed in the name of liberty. Defended with the words of the very Constitution being dismantled.

This Is Not Just About Trump

Let’s be clear: this is not just about one man. While Donald Trump’s name may appear most often in the headlines, Project 2025 is a machine—built by strategists, funded by billionaires, and evangelized by media outlets, pastors, and influencers.

If not him, it will be someone else. The playbook has been written. The infrastructure is in place. The appetite has been whetted.

We Are the Last Line of Defense

The Constitution cannot save us. It is only as strong as the people who defend its spirit—not just its text.

If we do nothing, Project 2025 will march forward—not as a revolution, but as a reformation, changing the shape of our country without ever admitting it has done so.

We must:

• Speak out.
• Stay informed.
• Protect independent journalism and education.
• Refuse to accept the framing of neighbors, immigrants, or teachers as enemies.
• Defend civic institutions, not for their perfection, but for their necessity.

But here is the deeper truth—one that should shake us from complacency: the movement behind Project 2025 knows exactly what it is doing.

• They have studied every institutional weakness.
• They understand the bureaucratic plumbing of government more deeply than most voters ever will.
• They know the laws, the appointments, the schedules, the procedures, the loopholes.
• They know which judge to file with.
• They know which phrases to use in press releases.
• They know how to make authoritarianism look like reform and theocracy sound like morality.
• They know the script—and they’ve spent decades rehearsing it.

And the opposition? It is shocked, confused, still clinging to the belief that this is just politics as usual.

• It is splintered, tangled in fights about tone, language, ideology, purity tests.
• It has no unified message, no counter-strategy that even comes close to the laser focus of this movement.
• And most damning of all, there is no single leader—no one rallying voice—standing clearly and forcefully against it with the vision, discipline, and courage needed for this moment.

What that means is this: the forces seeking to dismantle constitutional democracy in America are not improvising.

They are executing a plan.

A methodical, deliberate, and coordinated campaign to change what government is, what citizenship means, and who holds power.

And unless the rest of us recognize this—not just intellectually, but emotionally, morally, and urgently—we will lose something we may never get back.

The Constitution will remain, but its light will flicker.

And when our children ask how it was allowed to happen, the answer will not be that we were overpowered.

It will be that we were out-organized, out-messaged, and too slow to believe it was real—until it already was.

By Jerry Elman

As Passover approaches—a time of remembrance, resilience, and family gathering—Jews around the world are once again being warned of escalating danger. According to a recent threat assessment by the Israeli National Security Council (NSC), Hamas is expected to increase its efforts to attack Jewish and Israeli targets abroad. The report highlights a troubling trend: as Hamas faces mounting military pressure and deteriorating conditions in Gaza, its leadership and operatives are turning outward, seeking soft targets globally.

Where the Threats Are Concentrated

The NSC has identified Europe, North America, and parts of the Middle East as key areas of concern. Several regions are specifically mentioned or implied through recent arrests, intelligence findings, and ongoing investigations:

Europe: A Growing Hub of Hamas Activity

• Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands: In December 2023, Hamas-linked cells were arrested in these countries for allegedly plotting attacks on Jewish institutions. A few months later, Bulgarian police discovered a weapons cache connected to the same network.
• Sweden: The Swedish Security Service (Sapo) has linked Iranian operatives to incidents involving explosions and gunfire near Israeli embassies. Iran is reportedly using local criminal gangs to execute violent acts under the guise of organized crime.
• France and the UK are also at risk due to their sizable Jewish populations, visible community centers, and history of antisemitic attacks.

North America: Lone Wolves and Imported Radicalism

• Canada has seen a troubling spike in Molotov cocktail attacks and shootings at Jewish centers and synagogues. These incidents may be fueled by both imported ideology and radicalized individuals within.
• Australia also made the list with a car bombing attempt and multiple arson attacks—clear signs of operational intent reaching beyond traditional Middle East conflict zones.
• The United States, while not named directly in the NSC report, remains a primary concern due to the recent surge in antisemitic incidents and high-profile protests with extremist undertones.

The Sinai Peninsula

The NSC explicitly warns Israelis not to travel to the Sinai Peninsula—a popular yet highly volatile tourist destination—describing it as a “high-risk area” due to ongoing jihadist activity and historical precedent of kidnappings and attacks on Israeli citizens.

How Hamas Executes Attacks Abroad

The tactics Hamas is expected to use are not new—but their reach and precision have evolved significantly. Here are the main methods the NSC and global intelligence services are watching closely:

1. Covert Cells Embedded in Diaspora Communities

Hamas often relies on sympathetic networks or individuals who blend into local populations. These sleeper cells—activated on short notice—can acquire weapons, conduct surveillance, and launch attacks with little warning.

2. Collaboration with Organized Crime

In countries like Sweden, Iran and Hamas have allegedly recruited from within local criminal gangs. These actors have access to weapons, safe houses, and the ability to evade police surveillance. Their motivations may be financial, ideological, or coerced.

3. Digital Lures and Business Traps

The NSC warns that Iranian-backed operatives continue to use fake business proposals and deceptive online personas to lure Israeli citizens—especially businesspeople and dual nationals—into traps abroad. The intent: kidnapping, assassination, or extortion.

4. Lone-Wolf Radicalization

Fueled by online propaganda and the war in Gaza, individuals who feel compelled to “act” independently pose an enormous threat. These attackers are hard to detect, can strike without coordination, and often use crude but deadly means—knives, firebombs, vehicles, or firearms.

Arafat’s Shadow: The 1970s Revisited

These tactics may feel like modern threats, but they follow a familiar playbook from decades past. In the 1970s, Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) used similar strategies to export the conflict beyond the borders of Israel.

Arafat’s PLO orchestrated hijackings, embassy takeovers, and coordinated attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets around the world, all designed to force global recognition of the Palestinian cause. Notable examples include:

• The 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, where 11 Israeli athletes were murdered by the PLO faction Black September.
• The 1973 Rome airport attack, in which PLO terrorists gunned down civilians indiscriminately.
• Airline hijackings throughout the 1970s, forcing governments to negotiate and drawing international attention to their cause—often at the cost of innocent lives.

Like Hamas today, Arafat’s strategy was rooted in spectacle and terror. His goal was to internationalize the conflict, creating fear in Jewish communities and applying pressure on Israel through global public opinion. The difference now is Hamas has new tools—digital communication, online radicalization, encrypted messaging, and cooperation with Iran and transnational criminal networks.

The evolution from Arafat’s physical hijackings to Hamas’s virtual traps and covert terror cells marks a shift in method, but the underlying philosophy remains chillingly familiar: make Jews everywhere feel vulnerable. By targeting Jewish and Israeli civilians abroad, Hamas hopes to turn the global Jewish community into pawns in a broader ideological war.

Iran’s Hand in the Global Web

The NSC emphasizes that Iran remains the chief enabler of international terrorism targeting Jews and Israelis. It provides funding, training, logistics, and intelligence to Hamas, Hezbollah, and other proxies. Iran’s goals go beyond supporting the Palestinian cause; it seeks to destabilize Israeli security, weaken Western alliances, and spread its ideological influence globally.

Iran’s alleged recruitment of gang members in Sweden, its links to embassy attacks, and its online disinformation campaigns highlight a growing hybrid warfare strategy that merges statecraft with terrorism.

The Broader Climate of Hate

The NSC notes that the “climate of hate against Israelis and Jews due to the ongoing war” has made it easier for terrorist groups to justify or incite violence. In such an environment, propaganda spreads fast, narratives are weaponized, and legitimate criticism of Israeli policy is often hijacked by those seeking to dehumanize Jews.

A Time for Resolve

This threat assessment should serve as a wake-up call, not only to Israelis abroad but to Jewish communities and their allies everywhere. History teaches us that terror does not remain confined. What began with airplane hijackings in the 1970s evolved into bombings, then into rockets, tunnels, and now, global digital-age plots.

But history also teaches us something else: resilience. Jewish communities have faced terror before. We do not crumble—we adapt, protect, educate, and unite.

Like the terror movements of the past, Hamas aims not only to destroy but to demoralize. Yet history has shown: when Jews stand united in truth and resolve, no force of hate can defeat us.

By Jerry Elman, March 27, 2025

As the son of Holocaust survivors, and as an author focused on the history of hatred toward Jews, the Holocaust, and the Israel-Palestinian conflict, I’ve grown accustomed to backlash. I receive it from both the far right and the progressive left — from those who openly hate Jews, and from those who disguise their Jew-hate by attacking Israel. Virtually all of it is online with my blogs and posts. This doesn’t surprise me anymore. I’ve accepted it as part of the cost of writing and speaking out about the Jewish experience, identity, and survival.

But what continues to trouble me — deeply — is the blowback I receive from fellow Jews who support the MAGA cause. Even from fellow second generation survivors who know the outcome of the 1930’s in Germany.

Their attacks and vitriol are, at times, as bad or worse than those from people who wish to see Jews erased from history. To these Jews, loyalty to Donald Trump and his support for Israel are all that matter. They treat any criticism of Trump as betrayal — even when it involves his embrace of white nationalists, his antisemitic tropes, or his alliances with people who deny the Holocaust or dream of a world without Jews.

Yet I don’t hate these Jews. I don’t attack them back. In fact, I understand the trap they’ve fallen into. And that’s what worries me most — because their loyalty to Trump may offer short-term validation, but it is a long-term threat to the safety and future of all Jews.

Trump’s Support for Israel: Transactional, and Rooted in Evangelical Prophecy

There’s no question that Trump advanced key policies that Israel welcomed: moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights, withdrawing from the Iran deal, and supporting normalization with Arab states through the Abraham Accords. These actions were not minor — they were geopolitically significant, and they won Trump support from many Israelis and pro-Israel advocates worldwide.

But his support for Israel was never about Jews. It was about politics — and prophecy.

Trump’s most loyal and powerful political base is the white evangelical Christian movement, and for many of them, support for Israel is driven not by love for Jews, but by belief in an apocalyptic theology.

In this theology — particularly among dispensationalist evangelicals — the return of Jews to Israel is a necessary step in fulfilling biblical prophecy. Once gathered in their land, Jews play their final role: as the catalyst for the Second Coming of Jesus. At that point, in this belief system, they must either convert or perish.

To evangelicals, Israel is not the fulfillment of Jewish sovereignty. It is the setting for a Christian endgame.

This is the theological bedrock undergirding much of Trump’s Middle East policy. His pro-Israel gestures helped maintain the loyalty of this religious voting bloc. In their eyes, he was chosen — even divinely ordained — to advance the timeline of God’s plan. Evangelical leaders praised him in biblical terms, calling him a “modern-day Cyrus.”

This is not support grounded in Jewish values, Jewish safety, or Jewish continuity. It is support that uses Jews as pawns in someone else’s prophecy — one that ends with our erasure.

Why Trump is Cracking Down on Campus Antisemitism — And Why It’s Not Because He Cares About Jews

In recent months, Trump has begun positioning himself as a hardliner against antisemitism on college campuses, promising to punish universities that allow “pro-Hamas” or “anti-Israel” protests. This has won him praise from some Jewish conservatives — but we must be clear-eyed about what’s really going on.

Trump isn’t doing this out of solidarity with Jews. He’s doing it because:

1. It aligns with his “anti-woke” crusade.
   He’s using Jewish pain to attack liberal universities and progressive student movements — not to address antisemitism itself.
2. It fits his law-and-order strongman image.
   Framing protests as dangerous chaos, and portraying himself as the one who will “crack down,” fuels his brand of authoritarian control.
3. It allows him to demonize the left while ignoring right-wing antisemitism.
   Trump focuses only on campus-based, progressive antisemitism — while completely ignoring the rise of antisemitism among his own far-right base.
4. It appeases evangelical and pro-Israel donors.
   Evangelicals want to see pro-Palestinian activism crushed, and Trump is happy to oblige if it means securing their votes and financial support.

This is not a principled stand against Jew-hate. It is a political strategy that instrumentalizes Jews to score points against perceived enemies. And history teaches us what happens when Jews become a tool rather than a people.

---

Trump’s Antisemitic Tropes and Public Statements

Despite his strong pro-Israel policies, Trump has repeatedly used antisemitic language and tropes:

• In 2015, addressing a group of Jewish Republicans, Trump said: “You’re not going to support me because I don’t want your money. You want to control your politicians.”
• In 2019, he accused Jews who vote Democrat of “disloyalty,” invoking the age-old charge of dual loyalty — the dangerous lie that Jews cannot be trusted as full citizens.
• In 2022, he warned American Jews to “get their act together” and appreciate what they have in Israel — “before it’s too late.” The tone was not supportive. It was threatening.

These are not minor missteps. They are deeply rooted antisemitic ideas that have been used for centuries to marginalize, isolate, and target Jews for violence.

And yet, I am still met with silence — or worse, justification — from Jewish Trump supporters who insist that none of this matters because he was good for Israel.

Empowering Extremists and Embracing Jew-Haters

Beyond rhetoric, Trump has repeatedly aligned himself with individuals and movements that traffic in overt Jew-hate:

• He equivocated after the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, where chants of “Jews will not replace us” rang through the streets, saying there were “very fine people on both sides.”
• He dined with Kanye West (Ye) after Ye had gone on a spree of antisemitic tirades — and invited Nick Fuentes, a Holocaust-denying white supremacist, to the same table.
• He amplified QAnon and other far-right conspiracy theorists who push antisemitic narratives about global control, “replacement,” and the demonization of George Soros.

This is not accidental. Trump’s playbook has always been to accept praise from anyone who supports him — even if they hate Jews — and never condemn them unless forced.

Admiring Authoritarians — Past and Present

Trump’s admiration for authoritarian rulers is also cause for alarm:

• He’s praised Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orbán — both leaders who have presided over governments that tolerate or promote antisemitic conspiracies.
• Reports from former aides have claimed he once praised Adolf Hitler’s ability to command loyalty and control crowds — though he denies it, the pattern of admiration for dictators is clear.

History has shown what happens when Jews place trust in strongmen. When our loyalty is traded for temporary power, we are often discarded when it’s no longer politically convenient.

The Broader Risk to the Jewish People

The danger isn’t just in Trump’s words or associations. The real threat is the normalization of antisemitism, the collapse of democratic norms, and the erosion of the pluralism that has protected Jews in America for decades.

• In authoritarian systems, Jews do not thrive. We are scapegoated. We are hunted.
• White nationalism — emboldened under Trump — is inherently antisemitic. It targets Jews, immigrants, people of color, and anyone who doesn’t fit a narrow, Christianized definition of America.
• When Jews prioritize Israel to the exclusion of everything else — even democracy, rule of law, and civil rights — we play into the dual loyalty narrative. We isolate ourselves and lose essential allies.
• And when fellow Jews attack other Jews for warning about these dangers, we are not just divided. We are vulnerable.

Conclusion: A Bargain That Cannot Be Sustained

Yes, Donald Trump delivered policy victories for Israel. But they came at the cost of normalizing antisemitic rhetoric, empowering Jew-hating extremists, and undermining the democratic fabric of America.

Some Jews have embraced him anyway — out of fear, frustration, or a desperate need to believe that someone powerful is finally “on our side.”

But support that’s built on evangelical prophecy, authoritarianism, and hatred of the other is not real support. It is a bargain that cannot last — and one that has historically ended in tragedy.

As the son of Holocaust survivors, I will not stay silent. I will not be bullied into supporting Israel for the wrong reasons by those who confuse transactional politics with lasting security. I love Israel — deeply. But I also love truth. And I know that Jewish survival, whether in Israel or the diaspora, must never come at the cost of our values, our dignity, our memory, or our safety — especially in places like America, where democracy is our shield.

We’ve seen this before.

We should know better.

In the U.S., when children are massacred in their classrooms, politicians offer the same empty script: thoughts and prayers. Calls for action are dismissed as politicizing tragedy, while grieving families endure skepticism, conspiracy theories, and even harassment.

Yet, when it comes to those who oppose Donald Trump or challenge the ultra-wealthy, the response is not sympathy but condemnation, threats, and accusations of treason.

The latest example? Trump recently declared that individuals who vandalize Teslas in protest of Elon Musk are “domestic terrorists.”

Think about that. Damaging a car is now terrorism. Meanwhile, school shooters who slaughter children are framed as troubled loners or victims of a broken system.

In Trump’s America, a dented fender is a crisis. A murdered child is an afterthought.

Selective Outrage, Selective Justice

This is not new. When Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, attacking police officers, they were called patriots. Meanwhile, election officials who upheld democracy were labeled traitors and subjected to death threats. Judges and jurors overseeing Trump’s legal troubles require security, while Trump spreads lies about them.

Now, this logic extends to property. Those who damage a billionaire’s car? Terrorists. Those who fire AR-15s in elementary schools? Just the price of freedom.

If Americans showed as much outrage over school shootings as they do over a scratched Tesla, we might have solved this crisis long ago. Instead, some members of Congress wear AR-15 lapel pins while the parents of dead children are told to move on.

The Priorities Are Clear

What does it say about our country when property destruction provokes more fury than mass murder? The answer is stark: In today’s political landscape, corporations and billionaires matter more than children.

It’s time to reject this upside-down value system. True threats come not from those protesting billionaires but from those who defend objects over lives.

No child’s life should be worth less than a luxury car. No family should have to fight harder for justice than a billionaire. And no politician should get away with pretending otherwise.

Overnight between March 17 and March 18, Israel launched its strongest round of airstrikes on Hamas targets in Gaza since the ceasefire began in mid-January. These strikes were not arbitrary but came in response to Hamas’s repeated violations and its well-documented pattern of using ceasefires not to protect civilians, but to prepare for more war. While Hamas plays the victim, it is responsible for the suffering of the people of Gaza—doing nothing to help them, instead using every ceasefire to recruit new fighters, build more terror tunnels, and rearm for the next attack.

Hamas’s Ceasefire Deception

Since March 1, when the first phase of the ceasefire expired, Hamas has blatantly disregarded its commitments. It refused to release hostages on agreed-upon dates—March 1, March 8, and March 15—despite the fact that by now, at least nine captives should have been freed. Instead, Hamas issued a deceptive statement claiming it was “ready” to release American hostage Edan Alexander and four deceased hostages. But this was just another manipulation, using hostages as bargaining chips rather than as a true sign of goodwill.

At the same time, Hamas misled international mediators like U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, who played a key role in securing the January ceasefire. Witkoff proposed a bridging deal after March 1 to resolve the impasse. Israel agreed. Hamas stalled.

Hamas’s Real Agenda: War at Any Cost

During the ceasefire, Hamas had every opportunity to help the people of Gaza—yet it did nothing. Instead of using the lull in fighting to rebuild homes, repair infrastructure, or provide aid to civilians, Hamas focused on one thing: preparing for the next war.

• Recruitment: Hamas expanded its ranks, bringing in more fighters instead of focusing on humanitarian relief.
• Tunnel Construction: It diverted resources to build more terror tunnels rather than helping families rebuild their homes.
• Rearming: Hamas worked to replenish its stockpile of rockets and weapons, prioritizing military strength over civilian well-being.

Hamas does not care how many Gazans die. It does not care about reconstruction. It does not care about peace. It has one goal—war. And yet, the world continues to blame Israel, while ignoring the fact that Hamas has spent every ceasefire strengthening its terror infrastructure instead of helping its own people.

Israel’s Response

With Hamas continuing to hold nearly 60 hostages, rejecting negotiations, and using the ceasefire as cover to prepare for another round of war, Israel had no choice but to respond militarily. The overnight strikes mark the strongest military action in months, testing Israel’s new Chief of Staff, Eyal Zamir, and making it clear that Hamas will not be allowed to turn back the clock to October 6, 2023.

Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office made this position clear in a statement:
“Israel will, from now on, act against Hamas with increasing military strength.”

Meanwhile, Hamas follows its usual playbook—threatening hostages, spreading disinformation, and making unverified claims about civilian casualties to manipulate global opinion.

Hamas Left Isolated as Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis Step Back

While Hamas provokes war, it finds itself increasingly abandoned by its usual allies. Iran, Hezbollah, and the Houthis—once vocal in their support—are stepping back, each facing its own growing challenges.

The U.S. has intensified airstrikes against the Houthis, who had previously threatened to launch ballistic missiles at Israel in support of Hamas. But now, with American warplanes from the USS Harry S. Truman targeting them, the Houthis are forced to focus on their own survival instead of aiding Hamas.

Iran, meanwhile, is distancing itself, wary of direct confrontation with the Trump administration. The White House has made it clear that Tehran could be held accountable for attacks on U.S. and allied forces. In response, Iran is working to publicly downplay its role in backing the Houthis, even as it continues its destabilizing activities behind the scenes.

The World’s Double Standard

The latest escalation in Gaza is just one part of a larger regional conflict. Arab states have backed an Egyptian-led plan for Gaza’s reconstruction, but they also face competing priorities. The U.S. is conducting strikes on the Houthis, Syria is facing increased tensions with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Israel has stepped up its military action against Hezbollah strongholds in Lebanon and southern Syria.

Yet despite Hamas’s clear pattern of using ceasefires to prepare for war, much of the world continues to blame Israel. Instead of holding Hamas accountable for putting its own people in harm’s way, international critics focus on condemning Israel for defending itself.

Hamas miscalculated. It believed it could manipulate negotiations, hold hostages indefinitely, and use international pressure to secure another temporary ceasefire while it regrouped for the next round of war. But this time, Israel is taking decisive action.

The question is no longer whether Hamas will face consequences—it already is. The real question is how much longer it can sustain its campaign of terror before it collapses under the weight of its own lies, failed strategies, and growing isolation.

Written by: Jerry Elman March 18, 2025

History warns us that democracy is fragile. The early days of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 provide a chilling reminder of how quickly a leader can dismantle democratic institutions under the guise of national security and efficiency. Today, as President Donald Trump approaches his 60th day in office, similarities have emerged between his rapid fire early actions and those of Hitler in the first two months of his chancellorship. While the historical contexts are different, the patterns of authoritarian consolidation bear close scrutiny.

Hitler’s First 58 Days: The Foundations of a Dictatorship

On January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. Within weeks, he set into motion policies that would transform a struggling democracy into a totalitarian regime:

• Reichstag Fire and Emergency Decrees: On February 27, 1933, the Reichstag (parliament) was set on fire. The Nazis blamed communists and used the incident to justify the Reichstag Fire Decree, which suspended civil liberties, authorized mass arrests of political opponents, and paved the way for one-party rule. The decree was framed as a necessary measure to protect Germany from internal threats, but it effectively dismantled the rule of law.
• Enabling Act: Passed on March 23, 1933, this law gave Hitler the power to enact laws without parliamentary approval, effectively ending Germany’s democratic system. With this legal maneuver, he centralized power and removed legislative checks on his authority.
• Targeting of Minorities and Political Opponents: Hitler swiftly used his power to purge Jews, socialists, and other so-called enemies of the state from positions of influence, laying the groundwork for the atrocities to come.

These actions, framed as necessary for national security and stability, eliminated Germany’s democratic guardrails, enabling Hitler to consolidate power.

Trump’s Early 2025 Actions: A Repeating Pattern

Since his return to office on January 20, 2025, Donald Trump has taken steps that mirror the tactics of authoritarian leaders, including Hitler:

• Executive Overreach: Trump has issued a sweeping series of executive orders, many of which target immigration, government institutions, and civil liberties. These include attempts to end birthright citizenship, reinstate controversial travel bans, and accelerate mass deportations, all justified under the guise of national security.
• The ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ (DOGE): Created under the leadership of Elon Musk, DOGE has cut over 77,000 federal jobs and terminated contracts, effectively gutting key agencies. This move echoes Hitler’s strategy of consolidating power by eliminating bureaucratic resistance and weakening governmental oversight.
• Suppression of Dissent: The administration has aggressively purged officials seen as disloyal, restructured agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and signaled intent to investigate media outlets critical of Trump’s policies. This echoes Hitler’s early attacks on the press and political opponents.
• Targeting of Immigrants and Minorities: Immigration raids have expanded, including arrests at churches and schools—previously protected spaces. Political rhetoric has escalated, portraying immigrants as an existential threat to the nation, reminiscent of Nazi propaganda that dehumanized Jews and other marginalized groups.

Why Aren’t People Protesting in Mass Numbers?

Despite the alarming trajectory of Trump’s administration, widespread street protests have not materialized at the scale seen in previous moments of national crisis. Several factors contribute to this passivity:

• Normalization of Extremism: Years of political turmoil have numbed many Americans to the shocking nature of authoritarian actions. The public has grown accustomed to political chaos, leading to resignation rather than resistance.
• Fear of Repercussions: Crackdowns on protesters, aggressive law enforcement tactics, and rhetoric labeling dissenters as “domestic terrorists” have discouraged mass demonstrations.
• Media Fracture and Disinformation: With partisan media controlling much of the narrative, many Americans remain unaware or misinformed about the severity of Trump’s early actions.
• Lack of Unified Opposition: Unlike in past movements, there is no singular, cohesive force organizing mass protests. Democrats remain divided on strategy, and traditional Republican leaders have largely remained silent, unwilling to challenge Trump’s consolidation of power.
• False Sense of Action Through Social Media: Too many people believe that posting memes and commentary on Facebook or Twitter constitutes active resistance. In reality, this is merely communication with like-minded individuals. While it may create an illusion of engagement, it does not translate into tangible opposition or meaningful resistance against authoritarian policies. It makes people feel better, but it accomplishes zero real resistance. Mass protests and organized action have historically been the only effective ways to counter such political shifts.

Why Are Both Republican and Democratic Leaders Acting Passive?

The political establishment’s lack of urgency in responding to Trump’s authoritarian actions raises serious concerns:

• Fear of Political Fallout: Many Republican leaders remain loyal to Trump or fear backlash from his base. Even those who once opposed him hesitate to act decisively, fearing primary challenges or political exile.
• Institutional Paralysis: The mechanisms designed to hold leaders accountable—Congress, the courts, and the media—have been weakened by years of partisan conflict and erosion of public trust.
• Democratic Leadership’s Hesitation: While some Democratic leaders have spoken out, many have opted for a cautious approach, prioritizing electoral strategy over immediate action. Their belief in preserving institutional processes may be blinding them to the urgency of the crisis.

Parallels and Warnings

The similarities between Hitler’s and Trump’s early moves are alarming:

• Erosion of Democratic Norms: Both leaders relied on legal loopholes and emergency measures to bypass democratic institutions, using fear and nationalism to justify their actions.
• Weaponizing Government Institutions: Just as Hitler dismantled checks and balances through the Enabling Act, Trump is gutting regulatory agencies and consolidating power within the executive branch.
• Scapegoating Marginalized Groups: Hitler blamed Jews and communists for Germany’s struggles. Trump has targeted immigrants, liberals, and political opponents as threats to American identity and stability.

Learning from History

History does not repeat itself exactly, but patterns emerge that demand attention. Hitler’s first 58 days laid the groundwork for dictatorship. Trump’s first few weeks in office are raising serious concerns about the erosion of democracy in the United States. While the U.S. still has strong democratic institutions, their ability to withstand these assaults depends on active resistance and vigilance.

If history teaches us anything, it is that silence enables authoritarianism. As we watch these events unfold, it is crucial to remember the past, recognize warning signs, and take action before democratic institutions are irreparably damaged. The lessons of history are only useful if we are willing to learn from them—and act accordingly. To date, America has fallen in the the trap of ignoring history.

Written by Jerry Elman, January 27, 2025

Eighty years ago, the world stood still as Auschwitz was liberated, revealing the unimaginable horrors inflicted upon the Jewish people. It was a moment of reckoning, a grim reminder of the cost of unchecked hatred and silence in the face of evil. The liberation of Auschwitz became a symbol of both the resilience of the Jewish people and the responsibility of humanity to ensure “Never Again” was more than just a phrase. Yet, as we mark this solemn anniversary, one cannot help but wonder: have we truly learned anything from history?

Today, Jew-hate persists, but it’s no longer confined to the extremist fringes of society. It wears many disguises, often hidden behind political ideologies or cloaked in rhetoric that seeks to normalize hostility against Jews. The bitter truth is that Jew-hate thrives across the spectrum: from the far-right, from progressives, and tragically, even from within the Jewish community itself.

The Far-Right’s Hatred

On the far-right, Jew-hate is blatant and often violent. It manifests in conspiracy theories about Jewish control of media, finance, and politics. It fuels white supremacist ideologies that see Jews as a threat to their imagined purity of race and culture. In recent years, we’ve seen synagogue shootings, Nazi salutes at public rallies, and chants of “Jews will not replace us.” These are not relics of the past; they are stark reminders that the hatred which fueled Auschwitz has not been extinguished.

The Progressive Betrayal

On the other end of the spectrum, progressives—who pride themselves on championing human rights—too often find themselves complicit in Jew-hate under the guise of anti-Zionism. Criticism of Israel, which is valid and necessary in any democracy, often crosses the line into demonization, delegitimization, and double standards. For some, Israel has become the world’s scapegoat, much like Jews have been for centuries. Progressives who support every marginalized group but find excuses to exclude Jews from their activism reveal a deep hypocrisy that echoes historic patterns of exclusion and prejudice.

The Painful Reality of Jewish Infighting

Perhaps most painful is the division within the Jewish community itself. Political differences have become a weapon to attack one another, as Jews on the left and right hurl accusations of betrayal, self-hatred, or complicity. Instead of recognizing the shared threats we face, we allow our disagreements over Israeli policy, social issues, or political affiliations to fracture our unity. There is nothing more dangerous for Jews than when we turn our aim against one another solely for political differences. Have we forgotten that division makes us vulnerable? Have we learned nothing from our history of exile, persecution, and genocide?

Survivors of Auschwitz and other horrors of the Holocaust would be heartbroken to witness what is being seen today. They endured unimaginable suffering, clinging to the hope that future generations of Jews would stand together against hatred and division. To see Jews spewing hatred toward one another solely because of political beliefs, or because of loyalty to a party and its leader, would be a profound disappointment. Such behavior would be viewed as no better than the blind loyalty people proclaimed to the Nazi Party and Hitler himself.

Even more troubling is the vitriol from second-generation survivors, those who carry the legacy of their parents’ unimaginable suffering. Some of these individuals, instead of drawing strength and unity from their heritage, now unleash venomous attacks against fellow Jews who hold differing political views. It is a betrayal of the resilience and solidarity that Holocaust survivors fought to preserve. Shockingly, some even imply that those Jews who disagree with them deserve to be ostracized—or worse, eliminated. This toxic rhetoric mirrors the very dynamics of hatred and division that led to Auschwitz.

Even organizations that were once pillars of Jewish defense, such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), have fallen into patterns of capitulation. Recently, even the Prime Minister of Israel and leading Jewish organizations have defended individuals with a history of Jew-hate. For example, Elon Musk, during President Donald Trump’s second inauguration on January 20, 2025, made a gesture that many interpreted as a Nazi salute. I sure as hell saw it as a sieg heil, facial gesture and all! This action justfiably drew widespread criticism and concern. However, the ADL characterized Musk’s gesture as an “awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm,” downplaying its potential significance. Similarly, Prime Minister Netanyahu defended Musk, stating he was “being falsely smeared” and calling him “a great friend of Israel.” These defenses—motivated by a desire to maintain favorable relations or financial support—risk undermining the principles of dignity and justice that survivors and their descendants strive to uphold. Excusing such actions under the guise of diplomacy or expediency is to betray the very principles survivors fought to preserve.

A Call for Unity

The lessons of Auschwitz should be seared into our collective consciousness. It stands as a permanent reminder of what happens when hate is allowed to fester, when division is exploited, and when humanity fails to protect the vulnerable. Today, we must confront a harsh reality: “Never Again” is not guaranteed. It requires vigilance, unity, and a willingness to stand together against hate in all its forms—even when it comes from within.

To those on the far-right: your Jew-hate is a continuation of the same poisonous ideologies that led to Auschwitz. To progressives: your selective outrage and willingness to excuse Jew-hate disguised as anti-Zionism betray the very principles you claim to uphold. To Jews: our survival depends on unity, not conformity. We do not have to agree on everything, but we must agree on one thing: that we will not let political differences tear us apart.

The Road Ahead

As we remember the liberation of Auschwitz, we honor the victims by committing to action. We must educate the next generation about the Holocaust and the dangers of hatred. We must challenge Jew-hate wherever it arises, whether from the right, the left, or within our own communities. And above all, we must resist the temptation to let our differences divide us.

Eighty years later, the question remains: will we allow history to repeat itself, or will we finally learn from it? The choice is ours. Let us honor those who perished by ensuring their suffering was not in vain. Let us remember, and let us act.