Satmar's Folly

A Jewish supporter of Mamdani celebrating his victory (JTA)

Satmar Chasidim are not what I would call far-left progressive Jews. Far from it. If anything, they are the quintessential capitalists. Many Satmar Chasidim have amassed great wealth through highly successful business ventures. And yet, they joined their progressive Jewish brethren in supporting Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani.

How is it possible that the most religious-looking Jews—who have been frequent targets of antisemitism—endorsed a man considered by many to be an antisemite because of his virulently anti-Israel views? A man who has already inspired antisemitic acts immediately upon confirmation of his election Tuesday night?

Well, if you know anything about Satmar’s views on Israel, it’s not hard to understand why. They basically agree with Mamdani’s beliefs about the Jewish state. Both Mamdani and Satmar do not believe the Jewish people have a right to their own state in our time. Satmar has opposed Zionism in all its forms from its very inception. The founding Satmar Rebbe, R’ Yoel Teitelbaum, called the founding spiritual head of religious Zionism, Rav Avroham Yitzchok HaKohen Kook, an Ish Tzar V’Oyev—“a man who is an oppressor and enemy” of the Jewish people. That phrase, taken from Megillas Esther, was used in the Bible to describe Haman—the “Hitler” of that era.

Rav Kook was not some minor religious Zionist figure. He was in fact considered the Gadol HaDor by Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer, who was himself regarded as the Gadol HaDor by his contemporaries. But to the Satmar Rebbe, Rav Kook’s support for a Jewish state was enough to use language about him that is normally reserved for people like Hitler.

When I read those words in one of the Satmar Rebbe’s published works, I lost my respect for him. It does not surprise me, therefore, that Satmar joined forces with Jews whose understanding of Judaism is anathema to anyone who believes in the dictates of the Torah. Apparently, when it comes to opposing the State of Israel, that overrides every other consideration.

I am, however, a bit more cynical about their support. I think they supported the man they knew was going to win anyway. So why not get on the bandwagon early and get on his good side? Satmar is very skilled at obtaining favors from government officials. That is surely the case here too, as noted in JTA:

Rabbi Moishe Indig, the Satmar Hasidic rabbi who endorsed Mamdani in a split in his community, stood out for wearing a black suit and kippah rather than the typical blue“Jews/tenants/hot girls/etc. for Zohran” T-shirt.

“We have large families; we could use affordable housing and a better life, hopefully,” Indig said about his community, adding that he felt “great” about Mamdani’s win.

Mamdani could not be more pleased to have Jews who look like Satmar in his corner. It helps water down accusations of antisemitism against him. So it’s a win-win for both sides. Mamdani’s anti-Israel bona fides surely don’t hurt him in Satmar’s eyes, and Mamdani’s professed determination to fight antisemitism is believable to Satmar considering how many progressive Jews enthusiastically supported him.

This little episode only serves to make Satmar even greater outliers than they already are. I don’t know how anyone can support them. To break from the majority of the Jewish world—which includes Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform rabbis and advocacy organizations as diverse as Agudah and the ADL—takes them outside the pale of Orthodox Jewry. You cannot side with an enemy of Israel for the sake of gaining favors for your own narrow constituency. That is pure evil. It legitimizes the anti-Israel protesters and the violence that will surely follow. It helps place the entire Jewish community at greater risk of harm and endangers all Jews living in Israel—including Satmar. (Yes, there are Satmar Chasidim who live in Israel and benefit from it, even as they continually condemn it at every opportunity.)

It is said that the original Satmar Rebbe would defend Israel against non-Jews who wanted to see its demise. To his credit, he understood that there was a difference between being against a Jewish state on theological grounds and being against it for antisemitic reasons. At the same time, I blame him for how his community has morphed into doing the opposite—joining with antisemites, whether Jewish or non-Jewish. If he were alive today, he might be beside himself at what his Chasidim have done.

But he has only one person to blame. And it isn’t Rav Kook.