Skip to content

Marcia G. Yerman

  • Home
  • Bio
  • New Media Experience
  • Contact
  • Home
  • Bio
  • New Media Experience
  • Contact

Marcia G. Yerman

  • Twitter
  • Women’s Issues
    • Feminism
    • Human Trafficking
    • Military Sexual Trauma
    • Women’s Health
  • Israel/Palestine
  • Environment
  • Culture
    • Book Reviews
    • Evolution of an Artist
    • Film Reviews
    • Music
    • Television Reviews
    • Theater Reviews
    • Visual Art
  • Interviews
  • Politics
  • Commentary
  • Human Rights
  • Events
  • Health
  • 0

    Human Rights / Interviews / Israel/Palestine / Spotlight

    December 30, 2025

     by Marcia G. Yerman · Published December 30, 2025

    Rabbi Arik Ascherman: Human Rights as a Jewish Religious Obligation

    Photo: Courtesy of Torat Tzedek

    In the days of the Old Testament, iconoclastic prophets were not always appreciated or heeded by the Israelites. Frequently, they were seen as nettlesome presences giving voice to truths that the populace was reluctant to confront.

    Rabbi Arik Ascherman fits the bill, down to the physical look. With a white beard and an elongated build, he could easily be envisioned in a garment of rough cloth with feet shod in sandals.

    When I met him on the Upper West Side of Manhattan in December, at a private home hosting a “parlor meeting,” Ascherman was simply dressed in a button-down blue shirt and dark pants. He had the look of an ascetic but was warm and open, especially given that in less than an hour he would be addressing a roomful of people.

    I had heard Ascherman speak numerous times on Zooms, always with passion and emotion, about the work he is doing with Torat Tzedek (Torah of Justice), an organization he founded in 2017 and for which he serves as Executive Director.

    His trip to the United States had a three-part agenda. He wanted to bring the story of how the human rights of Palestinians in the West Bank were being physically violated; to talk about his experiences in trying to stop the abuses; and to recruit more Americans to travel to Israel-Palestine for on-the-ground “protective presence” action. As with any non-profit, requests for financial support were part of the equation, especially given the extensive expenses of the struggle.

    I was interested in digging into Ascherman’s backstory and ideas, and in how he arrived at where he is today. I also wanted to speak to him in his capacity as a Rabbi, to ask questions that were crushing me about the ongoing use of torture by Israelis against Palestinians.

    Ascherman related that he knew he wanted to be a Rabbi by age six (fireman and paleontologist lost out). By the time he approached his Bar Mitzvah, Ascherman was heavily imprinted and “enamored” with the ethical values he believed Judaism had to offer. He didn’t necessarily see himself living in Israel, nor did he believe that all Jews had to.

    During our conversation, Ascherman prefaced numerous statements with “The God I believe in…” or “The way I understand Torah…,” setting them up as a precursor to his concept of “faith-based” human rights activism. The key to his philosophy and the starting point for his efforts is the deeply held belief that every person is made in God’s image and that their human rights have to be protected.

    Acknowledging what Ascherman termed “a dichotomy in the Bible,” he referenced the kinds of texts he focuses on, rather than the interpretations advocated by followers of Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Ascherman added, “Our religion is based in debate.”

    Posing the question, “Why bother fighting for Judaism?” Ascherman observed that in the state of Israel, his views of the Bible were “in the minority.” He emphasized, “But if you’re a person of faith, it’s not something you can turn off and on like a light bulb. Our fight is to show that our Judaism is equally valid. We can’t abandon the field. We have to fight for the soul of our people and our religion, for what we believe in, and to convince more people that this is the Judaism we should follow. Our tradition is too multilayered and complex for (the assertion), ‘Judaism says…’ ”

    Ascherman discussed Arthur Hertzberg, who called for the establishment of a Palestinian state in 1967, the Jewish socialist pioneers who thought they could unite the Jewish and Arab proletariat, and Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s concepts of Zionism.

    We traced Ascherman’s trajectory, beginning with his not being admitted to the Hebrew Union College because they wanted him to gain more experience in the “outside world.” In response, Ascherman connected to the Interns for Peace program, which builds Arab-Israeli relationships. He began to see Israel as a place where he could do Tikkun Olam and make a contribution. Ascherman was ordained in 1989 and established residence in Israel in 1994. He began his leadership role at Rabbis for Human Rights North America (1995-2016).

    Torat Tzedek has had other concerns on its radar, all of which reflect a push back against Israeli state injustices and inequalities. They have included rights for asylum seekers from Africa, legal petitions to the Israeli High Court, public housing support, setting up human rights Yeshivas, fighting the evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem, actions to stop home demolitions, and protections for Israeli Bedouin residents of the Negev.

    For Ascherman, the whole picture evolves from the Genesis quote (Chapter 1, Verse 27), that every individual is made in God’s image. Therefore, each person’s human rights must be protected. At this juncture, I asked him about the ongoing torture of Palestinians by Israelis. Ascherman’s response to me was the following: “Jews see themselves as the most oppressed people, which has left scars on their souls and anger.” Ascherman believes that the motivation for those “bad Jews” comes from a “xenophobic understanding of Judaism,” an “us against the world” mentality. In essence, he saw that this system of interpretation leads some Jews to a belief that “our past suffering privileges us.”

    By way of explanation, Ascherman launched into a story about Menachem Begin. “Do you know what his first act as Prime Minister was?” he asked me. “It was to bring Vietnamese boat people to Israel.” He paused and followed up with, “But he also pushed the settlement movement. Begin believed that the world that didn’t lift a finger to save Jews had no right to tell us what to do.”

    We discussed the two schools of thought bequeathed to the Jews from the Holocaust. The first is that the legacy of the Holocaust gives Jews a specific responsibility to speak out on behalf of others who are being oppressed and maltreated, versus those who believe that the “world owes us. We’re looking out for ourselves, and that’s it.” Ascherman told me that he believes “Israelis see themselves as oppressed,” which leads to their logic that “our survival comes first.”

    Ascherman brought several Jewish thinkers into the discussion. He mentioned Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, who had been prescient in his belief that having a state and the power that came with it could lead to internal conflicts, a shift toward an emphasis on state power, and a transformation away from Judaism’s spiritual aspects. Ascherman injected, “The Torah warned us not to behave as Egyptians, where might makes right.” It was hard not to think of Netanyahu’s speech, calling for Israel to become the “super Sparta of the Middle East.”  

    It was the 1967 war, Ascherman maintained, when Israel feared for its survival, which resulted in “messianic passions [being] released.” Ascherman invoked the beliefs of Yeshayahu Leibowitz, who advocated for the return of militarily conquered lands based on “moral reasons.” Leibowitz stated early on, “The Occupation is corrupting.” Yet, for other Jews, when “biblical lands” ended up in Israeli hands after the Six-Day War, they saw it as an “act of God,” commanding them to “settle and redeem the land.”

    As people began arriving, I posed a final question. “Do you think Israel is going to self-destruct?”

    “It could,” he responded. “It is very scary, this messianic fervor that has captured so many Israelis. I’ve spent most of my career fighting against occupation.  Any concept of a new order in the Middle East has to include justice for the Palestinians. We are violating the human rights of other people.”

    * * * *

    A group of around thirty-five people had seated themselves in the living room. Those present skewed older, but several were in their twenties, including a young woman I spoke to who was considering traveling to the West Bank.

    The host, Paul, introduced Ascherman. There was a simultaneous Zoom of the event underway, and a map projected on a screen, where a nine-minute video, “A Protective Presence,” was shown. The land illustration documented areas where the Palestinian communities were, overlapped by outposts, settlements, and complete zones controlled by settlers.

    Photo: Courtesy of Torat Tzedek

    “Rabbi Arik is praying with his body,” Paul said.  “On a daily basis, he confronts messianic settlers. He is a deep believer in tradition. We are at a crossroads of history. Where will our people stand?”

    Ascherman began to describe his engagement, which ranges from legal advocacy (helping a Palestinian landowner to file a complaint) to acting as a physical barrier between Palestinians and radical, often violent, settlers. “We have a finger in the dyke, but the dyke is disintegrating,” he said.

    Laying out the strategy of the settlers, Ascherman elucidated how they established shepherding outposts to take over and displace Palestinians from their lands. They bring in flocks with the mindset of, “If we can’t expel them from the West Bank, we’ll push them out of Area C to Areas A and B.”

    Although Ascherman has had successes, such as stopping the construction of a settler-built road, his tribulations have been extensive. He has been beaten, put in jail with no sustenance but water (“It was to get me out of the way!”), seen pogroms enacted upon Palestinian villages, and the cutting down of olive trees with chainsaws. “[Palestinian] communities are fleeing, sometimes at gunpoint,” he stated. “Judges in the Israeli high court don’t believe that the police can’t do the job.”

    Photo: Marcia G. Yerman

    In a lengthy (11/20/25) Times of Israel blog, Ascherman wrote a piece specifically directed to Israel’s President Herzog, refuting that the assaults upon Palestinians are only perpetrated by a small handful of “troubled youth.” Rather, as he told those gathered, “We have to accept the reality.  It’s not just a handful of youth. We have photos of soldiers working hand in hand with settlers.”

    When speaking about the complicity of Israeli security forces, Ascherman commented that some of the most violent days are Shabbat. He painted a picture of a “horde of settlers on the ridge,” Palestinian homes in flames, sheep stolen, and a volunteer with a broken arm.

    After setting the stage, Ascherman delivered his “ask.” It went beyond money, though they need that too in order to defray the cost of legal battles, and in one instance, 25,000 shekels to rebuild after an attack in October 2025. Ascherman was upfront when he said, “But tonight, I need more than that. I need your feet on the ground. There aren’t enough of us Israelis. We need you with us. If we had twenty people 24/7, it would be a game-changer. This is the reality we are facing right now.”

    Pointing to the map, Ascherman said, “All the red is under settler control. Palestinians are still in their homes due to incredible bravery, but settlers are going after villages now.” He pinpointed his commitment to Palestinian villagers. “We have to try everything, because everything is on the line. If there is anything that can redeem what we’ve done…” His voice trailed off.

    Ascherman continued. “One thing I can promise [to Palestinians], you will not be alone.” His voice broke. “Like when our doors were broken down. You will not be alone. We will do whatever, whatever, whatever we can.”

    It was a highly emotional moment, and the room was completely silent.

    Then, it was time for questions. Several were about American national policy. Ascherman believes in pushing for support and activation of the Leahy law, which prohibits American arms sales when they are used in human rights violations. Ascherman underscored, “It’s for all countries. It’s not singling Israel out. It’s holding it accountable.”

    Margaret Olin, who was sitting next to me, rose to share her experiences in the West Bank. Olin is a photographer and a historian of visual culture. She spoke of going with Ascherman on his missions to the Jordan Valley several times. Later, she related to me, “Ascherman’s pure tirelessness impressed me no end. As I got to know him increasingly better, I found him always ready to do anything to help the cause. I do not know if I have ever met anyone as dedicated as Arik.”

    Before closing out the evening, Ascherman quoted Rabbi David Saperstein, who said, “There have been times when people have to take risks, and this is one of those times.”

  • 0

    Human Rights / News / Spotlight

    December 18, 2025

     by Marcia G. Yerman · Published December 18, 2025

    CIVICUS Monitor Releases New Report: “People Power Under Attack”


    Civicus, a worldwide alliance of civil society activist networks, has released its 2025 State of Civil Society report, and unsurprisingly, things aren’t good. It’s a snapshot of the world in 2025 and reflects the heightening of “right-wing populism” alongside rising autocracy.

    The statistics underscore that in current conflicts, civilians are targeted, war crimes have been committed, and international law is out the window. Children and women are the most impacted (while women-led organizations continue to be marginalized in peacebuilding spaces). There is evidence that journalists and humanitarian workers are being singled out for their efforts to document what is transpiring and in assisting populations on the ground.

    There is no dearth of hot spots from Gaza and Ukraine to Sudan, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

    The findings came to my attention because of the sections on the degraded status of the United States and Israel. America is now rated 56/100, which is “obstructed.” (Canada is “open” at 82/100) Israel is 39/100 or “repressed.” Saudi Arabia, with which Trump is seeking to build a stronger alliance, has a 05/100 “closed” rating.

    Each country gets its own page populated with articles. For the United States, a November drilldown outlines the “Expansion of law enforcement and continued suppression of critical voices.” The most recent post (6/2025) on Israel covered Gaza. The write-up featured conclusions that genocide had occurred, the International Criminal Court warrants, and the aid embargo information. On the domestic front, it documented “judicial reforms,” the crackdown on human rights organizations, and the violent response of police (Magav) to Israeli Jewish demonstrators in Jerusalem and other cities.

    There is a separate “Gaza Ground Zero” account with data. It states that “at least 1.9 million people (90 percent of Gaza’s population) have been displaced. 92 percent of homes have been totally or partially destroyed. 320 humanitarian workers and 170 journalists have been killed—some deliberately.” Also covered is the violence against Palestinians in the West Bank and Israel’s military actions in the Golan Heights and Lebanon.

    Back in America, the findings point to Trump’s extensive use of Executive Orders, including the nonsensical ones (the acquisition of Greenland). A highlight is that the winner of an election, even a fairly conducted one, can cause havoc in undermining the structures and underpinnings of democracy. Good to keep in mind as we approach the republic’s 250th birthday and next year’s midterms.

    Common threads are apparent worldwide. The populist right stokes economic fears, nationalism, and anti-immigration sentiment, mixed with “culture war” talking points, to foster an environment of ongoing turmoil. These approaches are combined with attacks on checks and balances, freedom of the press, and scapegoating specific groups.

    One of the most disturbing aspects is the proliferation of AI-generated propaganda and disinformation, spread through fraudulent social media accounts. Tech billionaires have chosen to align with the sources of “profit and power,” abandoning corporate social responsibility as a concept of the past, changing the equation dramatically. Additionally, Spyware is omnipresent.

    Trump’s behavior is unleashing parallel attitudes among other world “leaders” who were previously more moderate. Echoing Timothy Snyder, the findings note that despite severe challenges to democracy, there is “significant capacity for renewal,” which lies in “grassroots civic engagement” that can stymie “authoritarian creep.”

    Meanwhile, the situation in Europe is also not encouraging. England (the United Kingdom) does not have a rating change in this year’s report, but their 2024 rating was “obstructed.”

    I reached out to CIVICUS to get additional input. I was forwarded quotes by the Secretary General of CIVICUS, Mandeep Tiwana. He wrote:

    “We see a continued trend of attacks on people’s right to speak up, come together as a collective, and protest for their rights around the world. This year’s slide is led by states often seen as models of democracy such as the USA, France, and Italy. In a context of rising authoritarianism and populism, no country seems immune from this deeply worrying trend.

    Civic freedoms are the backbone of good governance and inclusive democracy, but fewer and fewer governments are willing to respect the agency of their people to freely and meaningfully participate in public life.

    We are witnessing a global emergency for civic freedoms.”

    Tiwana pointed to a few positive examples, such as Chile, Senegal, and Gabon. However, he emphasized, “These remain exceptions to a troubling global trend. Governments must act decisively: dismantle restrictive policies, end arbitrary detentions, and guarantee the right to protest. If they fail, they risk eroding the legitimacy that underpins their authority.”

    Ine Van Severen, who handles the CIVICUS Monitor, sent, “While each downgrade reflects the sum of particular incidents in a country or territory, together they show clearly that across the world, civic space is under sustained attack by governments and anti-rights actors. She explained, “The detention of protesters and activists has become the preferred method of governments to silence those who dissent or publicly disagree with the authorities [who] must stop detaining people and breaking up protests, and instead start listening to and engaging with people’s demands.”

    It’s not uplifting to see the United States on the CIVICUS watchlist with the text, “The United States appears to be sliding deeper into the quicksands of authoritarianism.” But this is where we are.

    An important thought to bring into 2026 and the upcoming battle to reclaim “people power.”


    Images: Courtesy of CIVICUS

  • 0

    Israel/Palestine / Spotlight

    November 17, 2025

     by Marcia G. Yerman · Published November 17, 2025

    Standing Together Solidarity Activists Come to Brooklyn

    On November 12, in the cool Brooklyn evening air, a line several people abreast snaked around the block that houses St. Ann and the Holy Trinity Episcopal Church. They were waiting patiently to enter the impressive sanctuary that seats over 600 people.

    “What’s going on?” one passerby asked me. I told her that Sally Abed and Alon-Lee Green, the co-directors of Standing Together, were on a panel. “Do you know who they are?” I followed up. “Yeah, I’ve heard of them,’ she replied before walking away.

    A young guy was handing out leaflets about the need to primary Rep. Dan Goldman. (He had the right crowd.) Ironically, the evening’s moderator, City Controller Brad Lander, has been dropping hints that he is interested in Goldman’s seat.

    I was standing next to Rabbi Abby Stein (A tenth-generation descendant of the Baal Shem Tov, founder of the Hasidic movement), who gave my friend an impromptu primer about the views of various Hasidic sects on the state of Israel and the role of the Crusaders in the history of Jerusalem.

    Inside, New York City Friends of Standing Together had their volunteers checking people in, handing out literature for an upcoming training session, and announcing their presence by wearing deep purple T-shirts that read, “Where there is struggle, there is hope.” A one-pager announced its mission with the sentence, “Find your voice in the struggle against authoritarianism in Israel-Palestine and here in NYC.”

    When everyone was finally seated, the three speakers came to the podium. The audience greeted them with a big round of applause. Lander began the conversation, announcing that they had both given him the courage to address the Occupation publicly.

    Abed, who went first, said, “We come here holding so much grief and pain. We are in this together. We are one movement fighting authoritarians here in the United States and Israel-Palestine. It is a war against all our humanity.” Pointing out that the Israeli army now holds 50 percent of the Gaza Strip and that the bombing and starvation continue, Abed emphasized, “This is by no means a ceasefire. The West Bank is on fire. The West Bank is screaming.”

    A new mother, Abed, 34, was the first member of the Joint List to serve in the Haifa City Council. She discussed building “a new alternative to the politics oppressing us,” creating a society where “justice, peace, and liberation” were linked to advancing better housing, transportation, education, and other municipal concerns. She noted that “a decade ago, there was no space to be a Palestinian citizen of Israel” while being herself. “Our political project is the most revolutionary thing I can do.”

    Green thanked the crowd for its warmth and enthusiasm and shared his backstory. Born in Tel Aviv and raised by a single mother, he became aware of economic injustice early on. While working at a coffee shop chain, he challenged his boss, who was skirting fair-wage regulations, by organizing a strike that led to the formation of the first National Waiters’ Union in Israel. This experience helped him feel a sense of personal agency. There was a Palestinian-Israeli who was in leadership during the eighteen-month struggle, which sparked an “aha” moment for him – that a shared collective interest could advance an agenda.

    Lander reflected on how the “model of solidarity” he and Mamdani espoused during the Mayoral campaign seemed to enrage many. He posed the question, “How do you think about the ongoing work when so many are threatened?”

    For Abed, who has been with the movement for eight years, it’s a dual path that embraces her desire to reach Jewish Israelis while being insistent on speaking out about her identity as a Palestinian. She questioned, “What does it mean to be part of Israeli society, especially with the current high levels of hate? When the government called for genocide, citizens normalized it.”

    Continuing, Abed stressed, “When you are serious about trying to change a society you are part of, you have to understand that society.” Abed qualified the political spectrum as ranging from the “fascist extreme right to the mild center.” This thinking yields a toolbox comprised of “military control, incarceration, and taking over Gaza.” With Israelis feeling very isolated, Abed probed, “How do we present to the Israeli population the radical idea of peace?”

    On the possibility of a new political party in Israel to advance a fresh vision, Green responded that joint slates are an aspiration, but that Standing Together will not launch its own party. “We are resisting occupation, building communities, and mobilizing the public. We have 7,000 registered members, some of whom are in political parties.” Green underscored, “Peace is not on the menu.” Challenging the current system and making that an option is. Green envisions a “peace and equality party composed of Israeli Jews and Palestinians.” He remarked on the mindset as it stands. “It’s an us or them mentality. If you want to be safe, you have to control them [Palestinians].”

    Standing Together has been working with Palestinian Israelis to promote activism, including helping to get relief into Gaza. Together, they gathered 400 aid trucks, although only 250 were allowed in. They formed a “Humanitarian Guard” to protect convoys under attack by right-wing Israelis. Their members also regularly participate in “protective presence” activities to defend Palestinian farmers from settler violence during their olive harvest.

    Shifting focus to the United States, the topic of “gatekeeping” at American college campuses came up. Green stated his unequivocal belief: “We are not part of a football match [where you] dehumanize the other. If your politics is canceling the other, you’re part of the problem.” There was an acknowledgment of the disagreements among various groups on “tactics and language.”

    During the Q&A period, the issue of BDS arose, including the fact that Standing Together has been called out by The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (a founding member of the BDS movement). Like Jews, Palestinians are not a monolithic movement in their views or approaches. (See Peter Beinart on this BDS claim.)

    With a call to recognize a “shared humanity” as a basis for moving forward, Green repeated the oft-stated phrase: “No one is going anywhere.” Which led back to Lander’s question, “What kind of relationship do we want to be in with each other?”

    Lander called on the audience to contact their elected officials about blocking the sale of bombs to Israel. As Abed pointed out, “What is happening in Israel-Palestine is being subsidized by the United States government and your tax dollars.” Her analogy was, “Israel right now is a drunk lunatic, with the USA giving them shots.”

    The evening closed with Lander prompting Green and Abed to share, “What gives you hope?”

    Green said, “After these two years of seeing videos of Gaza, being with hostages, being in jail, and getting death threats, the movement is still together. I don’t have certainty of a timeline.” His belief is that fighting for a difference in an on-the-ground reality is a form of hope.

    “What is hope?” asked Abed. “Belief in our collective ability to make change. I want to live in my homeland. I want a safe life. I want the Jewish people to be part of this beautiful homeland. The idea is so simple.”

    Photo credits: Gili Getz

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    There are currently numerous organizations mobilized to contact elected representatives on the “Block the Bombs Act” (H.R. 3565). You can do so as an individual constituent by calling both the district and the Washington office number. This link will direct you to your representative.

  • 0

    Culture / Spotlight / Visual Art

    October 30, 2025

     by Marcia G. Yerman · Published October 30, 2025

    “Blacklisted: An American Story” An Exhibit More Timely than Ever

    Civil Rights Congress
    America’s “Thought Police”: Record of the UnAmerican Activities Committee, 1947
    Courtesy of the Unger Family

    The New York Historical‘s exhibition, “Black Listed: An American Story,” extended through November 2, is a presentation not easily forgotten. A traveling show originated by the Jewish Museum Milwaukee, previously mounted in Los Angeles, and expanded by The New York Historical, the lessons of the “Hollywood Red Scare” couldn’t be more relevant to the moment.

    My interest in the Blacklist began in eighth grade when my social studies teacher screened “High Noon.” He explained that the film was not just a Western, but rather a portrayal of townspeople who lacked the courage to speak or act in opposition to threatening forces out of fear. He informed us that the writer, Carl Foreman, had been blacklisted

    The exhibition is handsomely mounted, with placards that tell the story in vibrant graphics of black, white, grey, and red. There are over 150 objects on display, including pamphlets, personal items from the families of those targeted, letters, and court documents. Using clips from films of the period, as well as footage of testimony from the hearings, a complete sensory environment is created

    Photo: Courtesy of Glenn Castellano, The New York Historical

    When the show opened in April, the president and CEO of The New York Historical, Dr. Louise Mirrer, said, “Our aim with Blacklisted is to prompt visitors to think deeply about democracy and their role in it. The exhibition tackles fundamental issues like freedom of speech, religion, and association, inviting reflection on how our past informs today’s cultural and political climate.”

    The narrative begins with a black screen carrying the words, “The Blacklist 1947.

    It describes how, “In 1946, Conservatives took control of the House and Senate.” Aided by “vocal anti-Communists,” they pressured the executives of the movie studios to root out any in the industry suspected of having present or previous ties to Communist ideology.

    Guiding the viewer, the accompanying text for the items on display underscores that America has previously been tainted by illiberalism, prejudice, and movements driven by anxiety and apprehension. It gives the dates of the Blacklist as 1945-1960 and ascribes its rise to the post-World War II reaction to the spread of “global Communism during the Cold War. (1947-1991)” More specifically, it references the apprehension stoked around the “power and influence of the Soviet Union.”

    At stake were First Amendment rights, which fell by the wayside when “political and corporate interests superseded civil liberties,” driven by a specific vision of national security. As a result, people lost their jobs. Others, afraid of the same fate, either remained on the sidelines or succumbed to coercion to save themselves.

    There is plenty of backstory. When the Espionage Act of 1917 was enacted, its goal was to disallow “false statements” that could hamper the war effort. Soon, the Act became an instrument of censorship, with foreign-language newspapers as prime targets. The Sedition Act of 1918 criminalized speech or printed matter that qualified the American government with commentary characterized as “contempt, scorn, or disrepute.”

    The efforts to muzzle speech and dissension intensified in 1919 and 1920, after a steel strike, when Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer spearheaded federal raids on organizations, resulting in the arrest of thousands. During this period, Emma Goldman was deported, the labor movement lost traction, and J. Edgar Hoover got his start as a rookie agent overseeing the raids.

    A copy of the New York Tribune from January 1920, overlaid with white lettering on a red background, shows the context of “The First Red Scare” with headlines screaming, “3,000 Arrested in Nation-Wide Round-up of Reds.”

    Examined is the impact of the Great Depression, detailing the economic landscape of the 1930s and 1940s, which prompted many to search for alternative solutions. The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) was an interracial organization that actively sought equality for Black Americans. Jewish Americans were also heavily involved (almost fifty percent of membership) due to their political beliefs and concern about rising worldwide fascism and Nazism.

    Before America entered World War II, several films addressed the crisis in Europe. “Confessions of a Nazi Spy” (1939) and Charlie Chaplin’s “The Great Dictator” stand out as examples.  However, Congressional representatives who did not want to see America get involved in the fight called out specific films as being enmeshed with “a Jewish plot to push the country into war.” Pearl Harbor temporarily changed the equation as Roosevelt enlisted Hollywood to create content and storylines supporting the war effort.

    A “Guide to Blacklist Terms” frequently used during the era is outlined. Fellow Traveler and Red-baiting are included, along with descriptions of the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC), the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and the New Deal.

    And then it’s time for Senator Joseph McCarthy.

    The name of the Republican from Wisconsin has become synonymous with the era, with McCarthyism as a descriptor of discrediting a person based on their political beliefs. Although he wasn’t part of the Hollywood Blacklist hearings, McCarthy’s allegation of having a list of Communists in the State Department and the Military kept him in the spotlight from 1954 through 1957, when the Senate censured him.

    When HUAC subpoenaed forty-five individuals in the Hollywood sphere, from actors to screenwriters and executives, the composition of the Committee was predominantly Republicans and Southern Democrats, who vehemently opposed the tenets of Roosevelt’s New Deal. Witnesses were categorized as “friendly” or “unfriendly.” Those considered friendly benefitted from Congressional immunity. The infamous question, “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” was posed to the latter.  There were also inquiries about their memberships in “professional guilds.” The one director and nine screenwriters who refused to answer those two questions were charged with contempt of Congress. They became known as The Hollywood Ten

    The Hollywood Ten, 1950
    L to R: Samuel Ornitz, Ring Lardner Jr., Albert Maltz, Alvah Bessie, Lester Cole, Herbert Bieberman, Edward Dmytryk), 1950
    Courtesy of Photofest

    Ronald Reagan gets his own section of information. At the time, he was serving as the president of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). He didn’t publicly endorse the Blacklist. However, he confidentially gave over fifty names to the FBI of those he believed had ties to some iteration of Communism.

    HUAC disproportionately targeted Jewish Americans during the Red Scare. If a witness was considered unfriendly, they were rarely allowed to deliver a statement. Yet writer and Hollywood Ten member, Samuel Ornitz, was able to submit, “I wish to address this Committee as a Jew, because one of its leading members is the outstanding antisemite in the Congress…I refer to John. E. Rankin.” The Congressman was also known for his virulent racism and was called a “white supremacist.”

    The Civil Rights Congress (1946), which worked to secure justice for Black Americans, especially in the South, published a pamphlet calling out HUAC. In response to their efforts, the HUAC labeled them as subversive. The group dissolved a decade later.

    In November of 1947, in response to the HUAC hearings, Hollywood studio heads met in Manhattan at the famed Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, which became known as the Waldorf Conference. On November 25, they released a statement affirming their commitment not to hire anyone with any connection, past or present, to the Communist Party.

    At that time, they also announced the dismissal of the Hollywood Ten. Finances and profits were the top factors. Louis B. Mayer, head of MGM, verbalized that the “first job must be to protect the industry and draw the greatest number of people into theaters.”

    The exhibit makes a point to acknowledge the short-lived pushback from top film stars who formed The Committee for the First Amendment. In a statement calling out the “moral wrongs” of the hearings, the group included well-known names. Many would end up blacklisted. Others would publicly recant their original views. A page from the March 1948 issue of “Photoplay” features a photograph of Humphrey Bogart with the title, “I’m no Communist.”

    Photo: Courtesy of Glenn Castellano, The New York Historical

    In 1950, the Hollywood Ten, convicted of being in contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions posed by HUAC, received jail sentences of up to one year in federal prison. They sought to overturn the decisions, but a federal court upheld the sentences, ruling that the First Amendment did not apply to their case. After the Supreme Court lost two of its most progressive members to unanticipated deaths, the new Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

    And so, the years of shattered careers, uprooted lives, and fractured families commenced.

    Writers were able to use what were termed “fronts,” submitting their work under the name of other authors who had no accusations against them. However, actors and directors didn’t have that option. Many moved to another country, while others began new livelihoods such as teaching. Many ended up aiding HUAC when they believed they had no other options. A noteworthy anecdote references the actor Robert Vaughn, who chose to attend graduate school, where he made HUAC the theme of his dissertation.

    Americans associated with the Communist Party had to “forfeit” their passports. Those who had escaped to other nations were forced to relinquish their passports to the American Embassy in the country where they were living. It wasn’t until 1958 that the Supreme Court restored passport rights.

    The exhibit highlights individual stories of those who were adversely affected, those whose lives ended due to health issues related to stress, and those who took their own lives. A panel entitled

    “Premature Death” featured a list of individuals, including Philip Loeb, who committed suicide. A photograph of Loeb describes his contributions to the fields of acting and labor. He was a cast member of the well-received television show “The Goldbergs” and a leader in the Actors’ Equity Association. His name was familiar to me because my mother had studied with him at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts.

    Actor John Garfield, the child of Russian Jewish immigrants, had been active in anti-fascist and anti-Nazi movements. His wife had been a party member, but he had never been a Communist. Blacklisted in 1951, he died of a fatal heart attack at 39 years old.

    The composition of the HUAC committee members, which was rife with racists, antisemites, and opponents of the New Deal, created an incendiary environment. According to the exhibit’s accompanying material, numerous HUAC committee members viewed their mission as shepherding a return to the social order of entrenched hierarchies that Roosevelt and World War II had dislodged. Klu Klux Klan defenders amplified a white supremacist agenda and went after Black actors with a vengeance. Paul Robeson was a top target, as he was outspoken about his beliefs as a Communist.

    Also examined and motivating the HUAC inquisitors were the matters of “gender and sexuality.” Within a framework that feels all too familiar, they designated heterosexuality, patriarchy, and the framework of the nuclear family as the norm. The concept of gender equity was seen as the outgrowth of Communist beliefs.

    The “Lavender Scare” was part of the effort to root out the “enemies within.” The 1953 Executive Order 10450, signed by President Eisenhower, ousted gay and lesbian employees from federal jobs. It existed in tandem with the second Red Scare. The story of choreographer and dancer Jerome Robbins, whose parents were Polish Jewish immigrants, is recounted. A previous member of the Communist Party, Robbins gave names to HUAC in an effort to protect his privacy and advance his career in film.

    In the early 1940s, the FBI had already begun looking at movies through a specific lens to determine whether any Communist subtext or “messaging” was apparent. Information on several classic films is offered. For each, there is a synopsis, awards, Blacklist connections (Communists appear in red), with an FBI analytical overview. An example of the depth of insight is encapsulated in the single-sentence appraisal of the 1946 Frank Capra classic, “It’s a Wonderful Life.” The assessment stated: “This picture represented a rather obvious attempt to discredit bankers.”

    Some of the actors driven out of the film and television industries found a modicum of relief in the New York theater. In 1951, the Actors’ Equity Association voted for a resolution condemning the Blacklist. In 1953, Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” won the Tony for Best Play of the year. It was widely recognized as an unequivocal indictment of HUAC.

    The exhibition posits that the Blacklist “does not have a clear end.” During the 1960s, many screenwriters and actors delivered important creative output after their banishment. In the 1980s, the Writers Guild of America (WGA) began the task of “restoring credits” to those Blacklisted writers whose names had not appeared on their work. By 2000, the correct credit lines had been reinstated on 95 percent of films through new prints and home video.

    In 1960, Dalton Trumbo received recognition for his movies “Spartacus” and “Exodus,” which opened the door. His script for “Roman Holiday,” which won an Oscar for best story in 1953, had been given to Ian McLellan Hunter, a front. His wife accepted a posthumous award for this accomplishment in 1993.

    In Watkins v. United States, a 1954 case in which HUAC subpoenaed John T. Watkins, an activist with the United Auto Workers (UAW), he said he refused to “ answer certain questions that I believe are outside the proper scope of your committee’s activities.”  After being convicted of contempt, he appealed to the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Earl Warren pronounced, “Who can define the meaning of ‘un-American’?” It had taken the Supreme Court of the United States eight years to roll back the powers it had bestowed on HUAC.

    In addition to being a thorough presentation that delves into a previous period of ignominy in American history, the parallels to today’s America are frightening.

    Yes. It can happen here, and in a more nefarious way than in the 1950s, because of technology.

    The questions of moral choices, speaking out against government injustice and malfeasance, and First Amendment freedoms are on the table.

    The museum produced a “Family Guide,” with a paragraph that asked an important question for people of all ages:

             “Political blacklists are a way of taking away people’s voices. If you are not allowed to participate or speak, no one can hear your ideas. You might lose friends, jobs, and your home. As you go through this exhibition, think about who is being allowed to speak and who is being silenced.”

    Mattachine Society of New York “If You Are Arrested…”, New York, NY, 1960 Courtesy of the New York Public Library Digital Collections

    Founded in New York in 1955, Mattachine Society was one of the earliest gay rights organizations and part of the homophile movement. While protecting the privacy of its members, Mattachine provided resources to LGBTQ+ New Yorkers navigating discrimination, harassment, and the risk of arrest during the Lavender Scare.

Environment / Spotlight

October 4, 2021

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published October 4, 2021 · Last modified January 1, 2024

UNICEF: “Every Child Deserves a Livable Planet.”

Children are less physically able to withstand and survive severe weather occurrences. Ironically, they contribute the least to factors creating the climate crisis while suffering the most significant impacts.

Culture / Film Reviews / Human Rights / Interviews / Israel/Palestine

July 13, 2021

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published July 13, 2021 · Last modified January 1, 2024

“The Tinderbox” — Documentary Looks at Israel/Palestine Conundrum

With a shift in American and Israeli leadership, the armed hostilities between the Israeli government and Hamas in May, and street riots within mixed Israeli cities, Diaspora Jews are beginning to question the traditionally...

Culture / featured / Film Reviews / Israel/Palestine

December 10, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published December 10, 2025

“Holding Liat”- Grief as a Microcosm of Politics

Three months later, the film accompanies Liat to Yad Vashem, where she leads her class through an exhibit on the Warsaw Ghetto. She focuses on the separation wall that divided the Jews from the Poles and the Germans. It obviously has a specific meaning for her.

Events / featured / Israel/Palestine / NYC / Spotlight

October 4, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published October 4, 2025

Aziz Abu Sarah and Maoz Inon: Building the Road to Peace

“We need to go back to the Judaism of our prophets,” Maoz told me. “The opposite of what Israel is now. We can’t wait for the prophets. Where is Shalom?”

Commentary / Human Rights / Israel/Palestine / NYC / Spotlight

September 23, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published September 23, 2025 · Last modified September 25, 2025

Hopes for the Jewish New Year 5786: “The Possibility of Beginning Again”

Clearly, it will be the people who can hold two narratives simultaneously that will lead the fight for change in the “Holy Land.”

Book Reviews / Culture / Spotlight

August 16, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published August 16, 2025

Citizens of the Whole World: Delving into Anti-Zionism and the Cultures of the American Jewish Left

For many readers, the text will be a primer on unfamiliar names and coalitions, and the first “criticisms” of Zionism from the Jewish left in the 1930s and 1940s.

Events / featured / Human Rights / Israel/Palestine / NYC / Spotlight

August 8, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published August 8, 2025

American Jews Say “No More” in NYC Rally

A long-time fixture in New York politics and former President of the human rights organization, American Jewish World Service, Ruth Messinger, told me, “I’m here because Torah states we can’t stand idly by. Starvation is not an appropriate weapon of war.”

Culture / Environment / Film Reviews / Spotlight

May 11, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published May 11, 2025

“Water for Life” – Fighting for Land Rights in Latin America

“Water for Life” tells of community leaders from three separate Latin American countries who banded together with other like-minded people to make a difference. Grassroots action creates positive change in the world.

Book Reviews / Culture / Human Rights / Spotlight

May 8, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published May 8, 2025

“Postcards to Hitler:” A Story of Individual Resistance

Reading Postcards to Hitler: A German Jew’s Defiance in a Time of Terror during the first one hundred days of the Trump regime, it was impossible not to see the equivalencies to America and to feel inquietude at the parallels.

Events / featured / Politics / Spotlight

April 25, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published April 25, 2025

Rep. Mike Lawler: Bipartisan or MAGA?

“What’s dangerous about Rep. Mike Lawler is that he presents as a moderate, but he’s not.

Culture / featured / Film Reviews / Israel/Palestine / Spotlight

April 23, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published April 23, 2025

“There is Another Way” – Moving Toward Israeli-Palestinian Collective Liberation

A voiceover comments on Israelis and Palestinians. “We find that we actually have something in common. That willingness to kill people we don’t know.”

Culture / Film Reviews / Israel/Palestine / Spotlight

February 16, 2025

 by Marcia G. Yerman · Published February 16, 2025 · Last modified February 17, 2025

“From Ground  Zero: Stories from Gaza”

The contrast between the utter destruction of decimated buildings with the beach and waves of the Mediterranean Sea is palpable. There is a metaphorical analogy between stark constriction and elusive freedom.

  • Next Page »
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram

"The Jump Rope Line" by Marcia G. Yerman is included in the Seal Press anthology Dancing at the Shame Prom.

Published at:

  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact

Marcia G. Yerman © 2026. All Rights Reserved.