Asked about these critiques, Greenblatt said that the ADL, as one of the oldest anti-hate organizations in the country, has become a convenient target for partisans, inside and outside the Jewish community, who are frustrated by the persistence of bigotry and eager to discredit their ideological opposites. \u201cI think this blame game is bad for America, and I think it\u2019s lethal for our Jewish community,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/image-1.png\")
<\/p>\n
Rabbi David Ingber, left, interviews Bret Stephens after the New York Times columnist delivered remarks at the 92nd Street Y in Manhattan, Feb. 1, 2026. (Peter Jamus\/Michael Priest Photography)<\/p>\n
The State of World Jewry speech has been a tradition at the influential New York cultural center since 1980, and has been given by, among others, Israeli diplomat Abba Eban, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel and the French philosopher Bernard-Henri L\u00e9vy.<\/p>\n
For the third year in a row it has been delivered by a prominent center-right pundit. Like Stephens, author and podcaster Dan Senor<\/a> (2025) and journalist Bari Weiss<\/a> (2024) suggested that the strongest response to a community reeling from antisemitism in the wake of the Oct. 7 attacks is for Jews to turn inward and invest in their own institutions rather than seeking inclusion or protection within broader coalitions.\u00a0<\/p>\n Elsewhere, writers on the Jewish left, including Eric Alterman in the Forward<\/a> and The New Republic<\/a> and Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times<\/a>, have focused on what they see as a gap between a conservative Jewish establishment and a liberal Jewish majority troubled by the extent of the war in Gaza. While condemning the Hamas attacks and antisemitism on the left and right, they argue that anti-Zionism is not necessarily antisemitism, and Jewish groups should prioritize liberal, democratic values over unconditional defense of Israel.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think that we made an ideological choice,\u201d Ingber told JTA, when asked about the recent lineup of speakers. \u201cIt\u2019s where the center of gravity is at this moment. Voices like [Stephens\u2019 and] Bari\u2019s and Dan\u2019s are seriously engaging with the complexity of this situation, and in some ways mirror a little bit of what\u2019s happening more broadly in Israel\u201d and beyond.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think it means that we endorse their worldview, but it means that the Jewish community is benefitting from their platform,\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n Stephens, who told Ingber that he was a \u201cgadfly\u201d on the typically liberal opinion pages of the New York Times, laid out four arguments in his talk: that the fight against antisemitism is largely ineffective; that antisemitism functions as a perverse compliment rooted in resentment; that Jews should stop trying to disprove hatred through achievement or moral suasion; and that Jewish survival depends on building independent institutions rather than seeking acceptance from broader society.<\/p>\n Stephens questioned whether decades of investment in education, advocacy and monitoring \u2014 the core strategies of organizations such as the ADL and campus advocacy groups \u2014 have produced measurable results, even as antisemitic beliefs and incidents have increased.<\/p>\n \u201cDoes anyone think the fight against antisemitism is working?\u201d he asked.<\/p>\n As evidence, Stephens pointed to polling data showing that \u201cone in five millennials and Gen Zs believe the Jews caused the Holocaust<\/a>,\u201d as well as the persistence of antisemitic rhetoric in media, politics and academia during a period when Jewish institutions are, he said, more engaged and better funded than ever.<\/p>\n