American Jews Confront a Harsh Dilemma Over Self‑Defense and Political Loyalty

In a recent JNS TV video released on 17 September 2026, editor‑in‑chief Jonathan Tobin hosted Tablet magazine editor‑at‑large Liel Leibovitz for a heated discussion about what he described as “the bigger problem” facing Jews in the United States and Europe. The conversation, recorded for the Think Twice podcast, centered on a disturbing incident at a New York City synagogue where a deranged attacker disrupted services and assaulted a congregant, and on the broader question of whether diaspora Jewry is prepared to defend itself when threatened. Leibovitz’s remarks, as captured in the footage, linked the episode to a perceived passivity among many American Jews and to political pressures that, in his view, compromise communal security.

The New York Synagogue Attack as a Flashpoint

Leibovitz recounted the New York incident in vivid detail, noting that when the assailant entered the house of worship, “not a single person present attempted to restrain him or defend the person who was assaulted.” According to the video, worshippers simply “sat back and waited for security to rush in and save them.” The lack of immediate physical response, he argued, is symptomatic of a deeper malaise within diaspora communities that has grown into what he called a “hospice” rather than a thriving congregation.

He framed the episode as a litmus test for communal resilience, asking whether the expectation of safety has become an excuse for inaction. “If Zionism taught us anything, and indeed if Judaism taught us anything,” Leibovitz said, “it’s that our expectation should never ever be to be safe. Our expectation should always be to be free.” In this view, freedom entails “the door wide open” and a readiness to “defend ourselves against our haters.” The implication is that the American Jewish community has drifted away from this principle, opting instead for a “risk management” mindset that, in his assessment, leads to “doom.”

The video did not provide statistics on how often such attacks occur, but the emphasis on this single event underscores the emotional weight it carries for the participants. By highlighting the absence of any layperson’s intervention, Leibovitz suggested that the community’s reluctance to act could embolden future aggressors, a concern that resonates with security officials who routinely stress the importance of vigilance in public worship spaces.

Political Pressures and the “Quiet Part”

Leibovitz extended the discussion beyond the synagogue walls to the political arena, focusing on statements made by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. According to the report, Nessel advised Jews to “prioritize the interests of the Democratic Party over their own safety and even the existence of Israel,” specifically by supporting a Senate candidate described as an antisemite, Dr. Abdul El‑Sayed. Leibovitz characterized Nessel’s counsel as “speaking the quiet part out loud,” implying that such guidance reveals an underlying willingness among some leaders to subordinate Jewish security to partisan goals.

He went further, asserting that “the inconvenient truth is that by deed, if not by word, every single one of our so‑called communal leaders practice the same exact thought process” as Nessel. In other words, the leadership’s actions, whether overt or covert, align with a political calculus that places liberal partisan concerns above the immediate safety of the community. This accusation is rooted in the perception that many American Jewish organizations have been reluctant to confront antisemitism when it emerges from left‑leaning quarters, preferring instead to maintain a low‑profile stance.

The video’s narrative links this political dynamic to concrete policy debates, such as the Trump administration’s efforts to “root out DEI policies that enable antisemitism in academia, immigration and the threat from Islamists.” Leibovitz argued that diaspora leaders, by failing to champion these initiatives, are effectively echoing Nessel’s approach—prioritizing liberal political alignment over direct measures that could protect Jews from hate‑driven violence.

The Call for Self‑Defense and Training

Central to Leibovitz’s argument is the notion that “free people are armed and trained and ready to defend themselves.” He contrasted this ideal with what he perceives as the mainstream American Jewish community’s emphasis on “risk management,” which he believes encourages a passive posture. The video suggests that a shift toward self‑defense training could transform the communal response to threats, aligning diaspora practice with the historical Israeli emphasis on preparedness.

While the report does not detail any specific training programs or statistics on current security measures within American synagogues, the implication is clear: a more proactive stance—potentially involving firearms training, physical security drills, and community‑wide readiness—could deter future attacks. This perspective mirrors ongoing debates within Israel, where the IDF and various civilian defense initiatives stress the importance of a “ready and armed” citizenry, especially in volatile border regions.

Leibovitz’s stance also raises questions about the balance between security and the traditional values of open worship spaces. The suggestion that congregants should be prepared to physically intervene in an attack challenges the long‑standing norm of leaving security to professional personnel. Nonetheless, the urgency expressed in the video reflects a growing frustration among some diaspora voices that current safeguards are insufficient.

Implications for Israeli‑Diaspora Relations

The themes raised in the JNS video have direct relevance to Israel’s relationship with diaspora Jewry. Israeli officials, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to senior IDF officers, have repeatedly emphasized the need for global Jewish communities to maintain vigilance against antisemitism. The video’s critique that “the mainstream American Jewish community … still harps on about risk management” echoes Israeli concerns that diaspora complacency could undermine collective security.

In recent years, Israeli diplomatic channels have engaged diaspora leaders on security cooperation, offering training and advice on how to protect synagogues and community centers. The video’s call for “armed and trained” congregants could be seen as a push for deeper integration of Israeli security expertise into diaspora settings, a trend that has already manifested in joint seminars and the export of Israeli security technology to the United States.

However, the political dimension introduced by Leibovitz—particularly the criticism of leaders who align with liberal parties—adds a layer of complexity. Israeli officials often navigate a delicate balance: supporting diaspora security without appearing to interfere in domestic political alignments. The video’s portrayal of an “inadequate response” could pressure Israeli policymakers to more overtly endorse self‑defense initiatives, potentially straining relations with diaspora groups that are wary of politicizing security.

Broader Regional Context and the Threat Landscape

Leibovitz’s reference to “the threat from Islamists” situates the diaspora security debate within the larger Middle East security environment. While the video does not elaborate on specific incidents, the mention aligns with Israel’s own concerns about extremist ideologies that cross borders. In Israel, the IDF and the Ministry of Defense continuously monitor the diffusion of radical narratives that can inspire lone‑wolf attacks abroad.

The discussion of DEI policies and their alleged role in enabling antisemitism reflects a broader debate about how institutional frameworks can either mitigate or exacerbate hate. In Israel, similar debates have unfolded over the role of educational curricula and public discourse in countering extremist propaganda. The video suggests that diaspora communities may be vulnerable to policy environments that, intentionally or not, provide cover for hateful speech.

By linking these policy concerns to the practical need for self‑defense, the JNS report underscores a convergence of ideological and security challenges. The implication is that without a robust, community‑wide commitment to preparedness, diaspora Jews could become soft targets in a global climate where extremist ideologies are increasingly transnational.

Potential Paths Forward and Community Debate

Leibovitz’s remarks have sparked a conversation that is likely to continue within American Jewish communal circles. On one side, there are those who agree that a more assertive stance on self‑defense is necessary, arguing that “free people are armed and trained” should be a core tenet of communal life. On the other side, critics may caution against militarizing places of worship, emphasizing the importance of maintaining an open, welcoming atmosphere.

The political criticism leveled at leaders who prioritize liberal party interests over communal security adds another layer to the debate. If community leaders are indeed “practicing the same exact thought process” as Nessel, as Leibovitz claims, then the pressure to align security policies with broader political agendas could intensify. This tension may force organizations to reassess their advocacy strategies, potentially shifting toward a more bipartisan approach that places security above partisan considerations.

Ultimately, the JNS video serves as a catalyst for a broader reflection on how diaspora Jewry can reconcile the values of openness and hospitality with the pragmatic need for protection. Whether this leads to widespread adoption of self‑defense training, changes in communal leadership attitudes, or a re‑evaluation of political alliances will depend on ongoing dialogue among community members, security experts, and political leaders. The episode captured on 17 September 2026 thus marks a pivotal moment in the evolving discourse on Jewish safety and identity in the United States and beyond.

By Hannah Berg, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: JNS TV video report (17 September 2026); JNS TV; Global1.News