Full Breakdown
National Post Column Invokes Jewish Law Against NDP Leader
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
Yoni Goldstein’s opinion piece in the *National Post* applied traditional Jewish legal categories—*rodef* (a pursuer who threatens lethal harm) and *moser* (an informer who endangers the community)—to Avi Lewis, the leader of the New Democratic Party. While the piece stopped short of an explicit call for violence, its language placed a living Canadian politician within a religious framework historically linked to political assassinations.
Background & Context
The concept of *rodef* obliges community members to intervene against an imminent threat. In 1995, Israeli extremist Yigal Amir invoked *din rodef* to justify the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was targeted for pursuing the Oslo peace process. Goldstein’s column begins with the biblical story of Korach’s rebellion and proceeds to portray Lewis—who identifies as an anti-Zionist Jew—as a modern equivalent of a dangerous rebel. The debate over Zionism and anti-Zionist Jewish voices in Canada is itself contested: the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs has sharply criticized Lewis’s characterization of Zionism, while Independent Jewish Voices Canada defends the legitimacy of anti-Zionist perspectives.
Data & Statistics
- Postmedia Network Inc., the owner of the *National Post*, is 66 % owned by the U.S. hedge fund Chatham Asset Management, founded by Republican donor Anthony Melchiorre.
- For the 2024–2025 fiscal period, the Canada Periodical Fund allocated $1,112,599 to Postmedia (see public accounts, page 32).
- In 2025, Postmedia received more than $900,000 from the Ministry of Canadian Heritage and the Canada Periodical Fund.
Official Statements & Responses
Postmedia’s corporate structure and reliance on public funding have been highlighted as reasons for heightened scrutiny of its editorial judgment. In a 2021 communication to shareholders, CEO Andrew MacLeod indicated that the company would likely be unprofitable without government support, describing taxpayer dollars as “key pillars” of its business strategy. No formal response from the *National Post* or its editorial team regarding the specific language of Goldstein’s column was provided in the sources.
Why It Matters
The publication of religiously framed rhetoric about a sitting political leader raises questions about the boundary between robust political criticism and the demonization of opponents. Because the *National Post* benefits from substantial public funding, the episode invites public debate over whether taxpayer-supported media outlets are exercising responsible editorial standards, especially when invoking concepts with a documented history of being used to justify political violence. The incident also underscores the broader issue of how religious language can influence public perception of political figures in a democratic society.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The sources do not contain an explicit statement from the *National Post* confirming whether the column was intended as a call for violence. Consequently, the extent to which the piece meets legal definitions of incitement remains unclear. Additionally, no response from Avi Lewis or his party is recorded in the available material.