It is sometimes hard to look back over the pages of the Jewish Independent and its predecessor, the Jewish Western Bulletin, knowing what has happened since the articles were published. From the 1933 optimism that there was hope for German Jewry, to the enthusiastic welcome of a seemingly short-lived El Al office in Vancouver, to colleagues who have passed away.
Vancouver hosted the largest convention in the city’s history over the weekend. About 50,000 members of Alcoholics Anonymous descended on the convention centre and BC Place stadium. Among the throngs was a booth representing Jewish Addiction Community Services – JACS Vancouver.
Rabbi Joshua Corber, the organization’s recently appointed director of addictions and mental health services, wanted the group to have a presence at the massive international confab. The booth shared information about JACS’s work, as well as literature from partner agencies in other cities.
For Elana Epstein, who attended the booth and greeted passersby, the experience was transformative – but not for the reasons she expected.
Epstein and her family have shared their journey with addiction and recovery openly, including in these pages (jewishindependent.ca/family-hopes-to-save-lives). She and husband David Bogdonov and their son Noah Bogdonov have become some of the most familiar faces in this community speaking about and advocating for awareness around addiction and recovery.
At a public event at King David High School last fall, the family shared the path they have been on since Noah began his recovery journey two years ago. The entire family has become engaged with this cause. Noah and Elana have both become professionals in the field – Noah recently moved to Calgary to launch a new recovery centre and Elana was credentialized and recently hired to lead JACS’s new family group, which began earlier this week.
But it was not recovery – or, at least, not recovery in the sense she anticipated – that uplifted her at the AA convention. It was the outpouring of empathy and words of encouragement she received from passersby to her as a Jew, and to the Jewish community more broadly.
A steady stream of people dropped by to peruse the information at the booth, but Epstein was deeply moved by the number who just expressed a few words of support for the situation Jewish people find themselves facing in today’s world.
This sort of acknowledgement is something that has been glaringly absent among her non-Jewish circles in Vancouver, she said.
“I personally needed it,” she said. “I haven’t felt that kind of outreach since the war started.” In one of her local circles, her experience has been quite the opposite.
Since Oct. 7, 2023, at the latest, most Jews have probably, consciously or unconsciously, at different times and in different spheres, become aware of dangers and vulnerabilities when we identify ourselves in public. Any reservations Epstein had quickly evaporated, leaving her “completely surprised.”
“Tears,” she said of her response. “Overwhelming gratitude. I really didn’t expect this and it is a beautiful thing. A really beautiful, heartfelt thing.”
There were other surprises – a lot of non-Jews subscribed to stereotypes that addiction did not exist in the Jewish community. For Epstein, though, it was the few words from a stream of strangers that raised her spirits.
Why did it take strangers from other cities to say the words she needed to hear? Maybe it is easier to speak with people you don’t know. By putting herself out there as a visible Jew in a primarily non-Jewish environment, she attracted the goodwill of people who wanted to share expressions of kindness. Are people who deal in addiction and recovery more sensitive to the pain of others? Is there some other explanation?
We would like to imagine this was an indication that the world is kinder than some recent evidence would suggest.
For one thing, there is a simple phenomenon: haters are loud. The chanters who march through the streets condemning Israel (and often Jews) are few but extremely vocal. Their stickers, spray-paint and graffiti might suggest numbers greater than they represent.
Empathy is quiet. Seeing a Jewish individual standing invitingly at a booth presents an opportunity for a few quiet words that maybe some people have been waiting to express.
It may be rare enough that it bears highlighting. It is still, though, a reminder that compassion abounds, often in places we least expect it. This is a small example – and just one – that modest acts of kindness have profound ripples.
As we enjoy the full bloom of summer, with its (hopefully) bright days and reinvigorating outdoor activities, we thought it was worth sharing that the world can be a more welcoming place than it sometimes seems.
We naturally share with friends our moments of disappointment and distress, seeking commiseration when the world lets us down. Remember also to share your moments of uplift, as this one individual chose to do. We need them.
While the odd recipe or food-related article can be found in the Jewish Western Bulletin even before it became the Bulletin, regular food columns or special sections seemed to have become a part of the paper under Sam and Mona Kaplan, who owned the paper from 1960 to 1999. The Independent has carried on the tradition, with its annual Food & Drink issue, which you hold in your hand, and with the inclusion of recipes in our three holiday issues, Rosh Hashanah, Hanukkah and Passover. One thing that becomes apparent in flipping through the archives is that tastes change, and not every recipe, or recipe name, withstands the test of time.
Israel’s decades-long conflict with Iran is no longer a proxy war, but a real war. Israel has bombarded sites associated with Iran’s nuclear program – as has the United States – and assassinated top military officials and nuclear program scientists. Israel also has targeted installations of the Iranian Revolution Guard Corps, the branch of Iran’s military that reports directly to the supreme leader and protects the nation’s Islamic identity from internal and external threats. Iran has launched missiles at Israel, as well as at a US military base. As of press time, a US-brokered ceasefire appeared to be holding.
Ending Iran’s nuclear program, or, at a minimum, setting it back, is the objective of Israel’s military operation. Regime change – a situation in which the Islamist government of the ayatollahs is replaced by something presumably better – is on the lips of Israeli and American leaders. But, as tempting and positive as that might sound, the immediate mission is more specific and tangible. Some express hope that the debilitated Iranian regime may be subject to internal rebellion. We should remember, though, that the Iranian regime fought an eight-year war with Iran that cost a million lives and millions more injured. That conflict, which ended in an effective stalemate, suggests massive loss of life is not a barrier to the ayatollahs’ ideological objectives.
Western countries, Americans especially, have seen the dangers of becoming entrenched in catastrophic military affairs half a world away, with decades-long engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan in which the people of the region by some measures are now worse off than ever.
We all prefer diplomacy to war, of course, and the discourse in the lead-up to Israel’s strikes on Iranian sites was focused on whether a negotiated resolution was possible. For now, however, negotiation is off the table, although a weakened Iran with a disabled nuclear program would presumably be more amenable to talking.
The objective of preventing end-times religious fanatics like those of Iran’s government from obtaining nuclear weapons is something that most reasonable people can get behind. But “mission creep,” the potential for a limited military plan to expand into a long-term engagement, is one of many dangers stemming from the current situation.
Underestimating the seriousness of the enemy is another threat. Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister in 1939, notoriously negotiated with Hitler and his name has gone down in history as someone who, put mildly, badly misjudged the preference for negotiation over force.
There have been dramatically conflicting reports about how close Iran is – or was – to nuclear weapons. Reports that Iran was on the cusp of nuclear capability were the justification for Israel’s attacks. Other reports suggest they were further away than Israel alleged. Perhaps no one knows but the Iranian regime.
We wish for peace. We also wish for a world where those who threaten peace can be contained. These basic truths can seem contradictory in the short term. But the long-term wish for peace, indeed the very survival of the Jewish people to judge by the explicit genocidal expressions from the top leaders of Iran in recent decades, requires that the nuclear program they have been constructing must never be allowed to near completion.
Interestingly, many voices who have condemned Israel’s approach to the war in Gaza are far more amenable to their approach with Iran. Although some people certainly view the Iranian threat and the Hamas threat as two prongs in the same war, the world seems more likely to acknowledge the urgent danger posed by Iran than they do the threat by Hamas, which is, at this point, limited primarily to Israelis. A nuclear Iran is viewed, by people in the West, as a direct threat to their own well-being – and that has seemed to focus their minds and create a common cause with Israel in ways the battle with Hamas has not.
Self-interest is a powerful force. A few leaders – notably Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said Israel is doing “the dirty work” for “all of us” – have acknowledged that the fight against Hamas and Iran are parallel battles. Others seem determined to view them as largely separate, as though existential threats to Israel are neither as concerning nor as world-changing as the Iranian dangers.
This may be true, in terms of scope, especially now that Hamas is widely seen to be massively weakened. However, the larger reality, as expressed by the German leader, remains: Israel is the frontline in a war that affects us all.
You may not know there is an election underway. Voting to elect delegates to the Canadian Zionist Federation closes Sunday, so you still have time to cast your ballot.
Although some of us have been receiving emails urging us to vote, it’s likely that most of us don’t even know there is campaign going on. It’s not front-page news.
Those chosen in the CZF election on Sunday will become delegates to the 39th World Zionist Congress, in Jerusalem, in October. (The legendary First Zionist Congress was convened by Theodor Herzl, in Basel, Switzerland, in 1897.)
Even if you haven’t yet heard about the elections, we think it’s worth taking a few moments to familiarize yourself with the slates, their platforms, and the role of CZF in connecting Canadian Jews to Israel. We encourage you to take this opportunity to have a small but important voice in the future of Zionism and our relationship with the Jewish homeland. Registering to vote costs $2.
The Canadian Zionist Federation is a national affiliate of the World Zionist Organization, and is comprised of 11 national Jewish Zionist organizations. These include the religiously affiliated groups ARZA Canada, “the Zionist voice of the Canadian Reform movement,” the Conservative movement’s MERCAZ Canada, and the Orthodox Eretz HaKodesh; political groups affiliated with Israeli parties, including Likud Canada, Herut Canada and Meretz Canada; ethnically oriented groups like Shas Olami, affiliated with the Sephardi and Mizrahi Orthodox party Shas, and Mizrahi Canada; and a linguistic grouping, the Canadian Forum of Russian-Speaking Jewry, as well as the non-denominational, non-partisan youth group Young Judaea, and Ameinu Canada, “a national, multi-generational community of progressive Jews in Canada, the United States, Australia and Brazil.” The slates in this election reflect and overlap within and across these groupings.
The World Zionist Organization styles itself as “the parliament of the Jewish people,” and it convenes every five years. WZO sets priorities for the Zionist movement worldwide. It is the main global voice on policy around Israel-diaspora relations, on such topics as Jewish education funding abroad, aliyah and religious recognition. The WZO allocates hundreds of millions of dollars in funding through Zionist institutions like the Jewish Agency, Keren Hayesod (United Israel Appeal) and Jewish National Fund.
Through the Canadian Zionist Federation – and then via the World Jewish Congress – each of us is granted a say in these essential issues. If you care about Israel and its relationship with the diaspora, and you would like to have a voice in the direction of that relationship, this is one important avenue.
Take time to peruse the platforms of the various groups vying for your vote. You may want to place particular attention on issues around the preservation of Israeli democracy, and legal protections and social equality for women and minorities in the country. Perhaps one or more of the platforms will reflect your views on how Israel can work toward peace while protecting its citizens and ensuring the long-term security of its borders.
Read the materials and see which slate best reflects your opinion on how many millions of dollars should be spent to strengthen Jewish life in Israel and worldwide. These elections – and the decisions to be taken at the Congress to which the delegates will be sent – represent the values and priorities of world Jewry.
Israel and Jews collectively are at an unprecedented moment – and while, by definition, every moment is unprecedented, especially in Jewish history, this feels different.
Perhaps you didn’t know you were eligible to vote. Maybe you were only vaguely aware of the Canadian Zionist Federation and what it does. You had probably heard of the First Zionist Congress but maybe didn’t know that the through-line in Zionist history continues from Basel in 1897 to Jerusalem in 2025.
Now you know a little more. Dive deeper. And, on or before Sunday, vote at czf.ca.
In putting together the Jewish Independent’s special 95th Anniversary issue last month, I came across so many articles of interest. Too many, of course, to include in one issue or series of issues. But I figured it’d be fun to have some random glimpses back into our community’s history. This is the first “Flipping through JI archives” column that will appear through to the end of the year. I hope you enjoy it as much as I will.
July 27, 2001: This clipping isn’t so random. It’s the first Summer issue we put together. Pictured are Pat Johnson (reading), Kyle Berger (fishing and backpacking) and me (playing tennis and baseball). The late Baila Lazarus, who took the photo, is cheering the city’s nightlife.
June 13, 2008: Baila Lazarus, z”l, took most of our staff-filled Jewish Independent Summer covers, and she took this Rockower Award-winning one, which I absolutely love. With the help of Sue Cohene of Kol Halev Performance Society, we – left to right, Ron Friedman, Leanne Jacobsen, Josie Tonio McCarthy, me and Steve Freedman – donned period clothing to play a round of croquet in Cohene’s backyard.
June 28, 2002: Spot colour has been used in the paper since the 1940s, albeit sparingly. In the 1960s, bright red print or text frames would highlight stories the paper’s publishers thought urgent. Less dramatically, the Jewish Western Bulletin and Jewish Independent logos would be in spot colour. It looks like holiday issue covers have been printed in full colour since 1999, but this photo seems like the first we ran as part of an article. Too bad it wasn’t for a happier story!
March 26, 1992: Israel Bonds has long advertised in these pages. This article notes the organization’s inaugural Canadian dollar investments.
May 17, 1934: Safeway was a regular advertiser in the paper’s early years. Imagine berries from Aylmer in tins! Those two cans for 15 cents translates into about $3.36 in today’s dollars and, according to its website, Safeway has a deal on about the same amount of fresh strawberries for $3.99 (down from $6.99). The 59-cent cost of a three-pound tin of Crisco (with a free pie plate!) translates into $13.21, but you’d have to pay slightly more today, $14.29. And, there is no size equivalent to the pound of coffee on Safeway’s website, but based on the price per 100 grams it lists, it’d cost you $13.35 today, but 35 cents in today’s dollars is only $7.83.
King Charles was in Canada this week, delivering the Speech from the Throne. It was a monumental moment in many ways, not least because it was the first official visit by the monarch since he ascended to the throne. For those of us whose entire lives have been lived under the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, it remains a fascinating and jarring challenge to the tongue to hear the phrase “the King of Canada.”
Paging through back issues of the Jewish Western Bulletin, which preceded the Jewish Independent, one of many striking things is the efforts that Jewish individuals, businesses and other advertisers have taken, over the decades, to express loyalty to king (or queen, as the case more commonly has been) and country.
Knowing what we know of antisemitic tropes, we suspect that this had more than a little to do with the stereotype of “dual loyalty.” Throughout history, Jews have been accused of being more loyal to their “tribe” than to their countries of domicile. Since 1948, this antisemitic idea has been applied to Israel, whose interests Jews today are often accused of prioritizing above the interests of their own countries, like Canada.
The sort of hyper-patriotic and monarchist messages we saw in the pages of this paper in decades past have largely disappeared. The trope of dual loyalty is not the most prevalent or dangerous threat to Jewish security in Canada or most other Western countries at the moment. Put succinctly, those who want to take offence with Jewish Canadians are less likely to go the extra step and accuse us of dual loyalty. They just cut to the chase and contend that any support for Israel at all is evidence of ill-will or immorality.
As we have turned the pages of the past in preparing for this special anniversary issue, that is just one small example of social change reflected from issue to issue in 95 years as an institution in this community.
As much as things have changed, so a great deal has remained the same. It is amusing, heartening and sometimes frustrating to see the repetitive nature of (we suppose) humankind in general and Jewishkind in particular across 10 decades. So many of the same discussions and arguments that our people were engaged in locally and globally 60 or 70 years ago remain on our lips today. More encouragingly, the leaders, activists and influencers (we certainly didn’t use that latter word until far more recent issues) of our community have often shared the same surnames, from the 1930s through to today, and so many new surnames – Jews from myriad different backgrounds – have joined the list of community contributors. The continuity combined with the growth in number and diversity is reassuring.
So much has changed in 95 years, such that the originators of the newspaper you hold in your hands (or, by a previously unimaginable magic of futuristic wonder, are reading on some whirring space-age illuminated rectangle) could not have foreseen.
These are not easy days for print media or, really, legacy media of any variety. We believe, and we hope you share our certainty, that the product we put out, as the latest iteration of a 95-year commitment to informing and reflecting our community, has value today, as it has across most of the past century.
As attention spans have shortened and the media landscape has refracted, keeping eyes on these pages is a challenge. At times, we content ourselves with the belief that the stories we write today will only increase in value as, at some unimaginable future time, and perhaps using some heretofore unimagined technological phenomenon, researchers or people with an avocational curiosity about the past, will finger through what we have written to understand better who we were and, therefore, how the Jewish community of the future became what it is, just as a review of our archives helps us understand how we came to be who we are today.
That a small, plucky newspaper operating on a shoestring at the remote edges of the Jewish universe could survive, and occasionally thrive, across 95 years is, even in the context of the much longer, always extraordinary, history of the Jews, something of a miracle.
This is a moment for us to thank everyone who made this possible, many of whose names have appeared in these pages across the years and many who have not. As a reader and supporter of the Jewish Independent, you are now part of that long legacy of people who have made this moment happen. Thank you for making this milestone possible. More importantly, thank you for making possible our present and our future.
In the closing days of the recent federal election campaign, CBC’s flagship news program, The National, found it newsworthy enough to run a segment about how many Canadian Jews were supporting the Conservative party, many for the first time. Concerned about the security of Israel and of Jewish communities here in Canada, these voters were attracted by the Conservative party’s pro-Israel expressions and concern for Jewish security domestically.
From this news report, and anecdotally, we know that among those first-time Conservative voters were traditional Liberal and New Democratic party supporters. Canadian Jews have generally leaned more progressive than the general population and, in the 20th century, were far more associated with the Liberal party. This election, however, there was a large number of Jews who made the choice to prioritize the security of our community and support for Israel above some of the other things that might generally determine their ballot choices. This is understandable – but it should never have come to this.
Traditionally, in the United States and Canada, there was a multi-partisan consensus that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself. More than this, certainly, Canada’s very identity is founded on the idea that cultural communities feel welcomed and included. But both of these assumptions have frayed, and Jewish voters responded to this changed reality.
The New Democratic and Green parties contain individuals who are highly critical of Israel, including many even high-profile candidates who contest the country’s very right to exist. It is not a surprise that Jews would perceive this opposition to Jewish self-determination in Israel as indifference to the security of Jewish people everywhere.
Meanwhile, as the Conservative party has become even more entrenched as a pro-Israel party, the Liberal party has taken a range of sometimes contradictory positions.
On social media and in a flurry of emails throughout the election campaign, Jewish community members at times accused the Liberal party of being irredeemably antisemitic. But middle-of-the-road political parties tend to be big-tent affairs and this creates tensions. Within the Liberal party, both its parliamentary caucus and its grassroots membership, there are pro-Israel and anti-Israel voices, as well as, we would venture to guess, a large number of people who wish this no-win issue would just go away.
It should never be the responsibility of a Canadian cultural community to beg, plead or lobby for respect for their personal and collective security. Any party that aspires to government should guarantee this as a matter of course. Even so, a political party is, in the end, nothing more than the people who make it up.
Admittedly, our parliamentary system and traditions place a great deal of authority in the prime minister’s office, with power trickling down to cabinet ministers, caucus members, party officers, activists and eventually to grassroots members. Without being too idealistic or delusional about the ability to alter the trajectory of a large ship, the most effective way to influence a party’s policy is still to get involved in it.
It is sometimes said that, if you don’t vote, you can’t complain about the government. This is facile and simply untrue – everyone, in a democracy, is free to both skip the election and kvetch about the outcome. The point, though, is that, small-l liberal Canadian Jews who cast a vote that didn’t align with their values except on Israel and Jewish security might solve their ideological dissonance by getting involved in the party that best represents them on issues other than Israel and Jewish security. If they were able to drag those parties back into a multi-partisan consensus around Israel’s right to defend itself and about the full inclusion of Jews in Canadian multiculturalism, they might not be forced to make such a difficult ballot choice in future elections.
We are all busy. Asking people to take time out to attend often-dull local meetings of federal political parties is kind of a big ask. But those people who felt a moral tug at being “forced” to vote against their social and economic views have an opportunity and a challenge – as does anyone who seeks to influence a party’s policy, either to change it or to support it.
If Jews have been made to feel unwelcome in some political parties, that is the fault of the parties themselves and it is victim-blaming to suggest that a lack of Jewish engagement justifies policies that isolate Jews. Still, changing, or supporting, parties’ policies will be best achieved by more Jews and allies engaging at the grassroots level. If successful, Jews will be able to vote their consciences knowing that their security as Jewish citizens of Canada – and our country’s commitment to the security of the state of Israel – is safe no matter which party wins.
You may have received anxious emails or other messages from friends in the last few days. Throughout the community, there is concern about a Vote Palestine campaign for Monday’s federal election. Emails and social media posts are flying.
However wrongheaded you may think this advocacy campaign is, its proponents are doing exactly what they should be doing during an election campaign. They are highlighting the issues that are important to them and encouraging others to support them. You may disagree with the approach and policies, but there is nothing fundamentally different in what they are doing from what plenty of Jews and community organizations are doing right now.
The Vote Palestine campaign is an initiative of several groups of usual suspects, including Independent Jewish Voices and other anti-Israel groups. The platform, which federal election candidates can choose to endorse, calls for a two-way arms embargo on Israel; ending Canadian support for settlements (whatever that means); combating anti-Palestinian racism and protecting pro-Palestine speech; recognizing the state of Palestine; and funding Gaza relief efforts, including through UNRWA, the controversial UN body that has been at the centre of this conflict for almost 80 years.
By press time, 124 New Democrats, 44 Greens and 13 Liberals had endorsed this platform. Given that there are 343 electoral districts in the country and the three largest parties are running candidates in almost every seat, the number of endorsers should be, frankly, a bit of an embarrassment for the campaign’s organizers. Almost all the endorsers are candidates for the New Democratic and Green parties. Of the Liberals who have signed on, just one is in British Columbia: West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country incumbent MP Patrick Weiler.
Most of the candidates who have endorsed the campaign and its platform are unlikely to be elected. That, though, is largely beside the point. The issue, we believe, is not the Vote Palestine campaign, but our community’s overwrought reaction. It is a symptom of a particular sort of impulse that seems to believe people do not have a right to raise issues in an election campaign in the manner that the Vote Palestine organizers are doing.
Though they may not have come across your social media feeds or in other ways to capture your attention, there are probably scores of organizations right now campaigning for or against policies that are important to you. Many organizations are encouraging Canadians to vote based on candidates’ positions on such things as the climate crisis, taxes, housing, and the cost-of-living. Agree or disagree with the positions, many of these campaigns fulfil an important civic purpose, assuming they comply with our country’s election laws around third-party advocacy spending.
The next time you receive an email or catch wind of some sort of advocacy campaign that you disagree with, here is how you should respond: take the anger and energy that you would otherwise direct into sharing your outrage with your friends and family and redirect it instead to something positive, a result you desire and hope to achieve.
Here are a few ideas …
Find out which of your local candidates share your values on the issues most important to you. If you find one that suits you, express your support. Get a lawn sign to let your neighbours know who you support. Donate to their campaign.
Offer to volunteer – it’s not too late! Election day is the most intense time in a campaign. You can drive voters to the polls or otherwise help your preferred candidate. (Check out cjpac.ca for more info.)
Ensure that friends and family go out to vote. Contact them over the weekend to make sure they plan to cast a ballot.
On Monday, message or telephone everyone you know who agrees with you on the issues most important to you and make sure they have voted. Suggest they block out at least an hour or maybe two or even three – advance voting statistics tell us Canadians are deeply engaged this election, so high turnout is expected. Prepare for lineups. Bring water and snacks for yourself and your neighbours in line.
Check the voting card you received in the mail to confirm your polling place so you know where to go on election day. If you did not receive a card in the mail, go to elections.ca right now and ensure you are registered to vote.
Democracy is threatened in countless places around the world. Voting is a right and a privilege we should never take for granted.
Meanwhile, as we know from the flurry of messages making their way around the community in the past few days, people who may disagree with you are planning to vote. They are organized and ready to mobilize. The most important thing you can do in response is to make the trek to your polling place and mark a single X on a ballot.