Jews played, and continue to play, a major role in the history of American comedy, and Jewish humor has been a much-discussed topic at least since Sigmund Freud wrote Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. But while many assume the Jewish penchant for jest is a modern and perhaps secular phenomenon, Sarah Rindner points to its ancient and religious roots:

The Talmud notes the important role of laughter in the religious psyche. One story recorded in Ta’anit 22a describes a conversation between the sage Rabbi Broka Ḥoza’ah and Elijah the prophet. Rabbi Broka asks Elijah which people in the marketplace will merit a place in the World to Come. . . . Elijah highlights several people who would not obviously pass for righteous: a jailkeeper dressed in non-Jewish clothing and a pair of jesters.

Elijah reveals that the jailkeeper’s outward appearance hides a hidden holy agenda that one would never have guessed. The jokesters, too, are more righteous than they seem, Elijah reveals. But while the jailkeeper’s saintliness is hidden, the jokesters’ virtue hides in plain sight. The very reason one might think they are not particularly saintly—the fact that they make their living lightening the mood and distracting people from their sorrows—is precisely the source of their greatness.

Rabbi Naftali Loewenthal, a London-based scholar of Jewish mysticism, . . . explained that comic irony fosters [a different] kind of perspective, helping a person balance the forces of the divine soul pushing for good and the temptations of the world. Humor “takes the air out of the urges within a person,” and in doing so clears a space for him to connect with something that transcends the narrow self.

Yesterday I saw an unconfirmed report that the Biden administration has offered Israel a massive arms deal in exchange for a promise not to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. Even if the report is incorrect, there is plenty of other evidence that the White House has been trying to dissuade Jerusalem from mounting such an attack. The thinking behind this pressure is hard to fathom, as there is little Israel could do that would better serve American interests in the Middle East than putting some distance between the ayatollahs and nuclear weapons. Aaron MacLean explains why this is so, in the context of a broader discussion of strategic priorities in the Middle East and elsewhere:

If the Iran issue were satisfactorily adjusted in the direction of the American interest, the question of Israel’s security would become more manageable overnight. If a network of American partners enjoyed security against state predation, the proactive suppression of militarily less serious threats like Islamic State would be more easily organized—and indeed, such partners would be less vulnerable to the manipulation of powers external to the region.

[The Biden administration’s] commitment to escalation avoidance has had the odd effect of making the security situation in the region look a great deal as it would if America had actually withdrawn [from the Middle East].

Alternatively, we could project competence by effectively backing our Middle East partners in their competitions against their enemies, who are also our enemies, by ensuring a favorable overall balance of power in the region by means of our partnership network, and by preventing Iran from achieving nuclear status—even if it courts escalation with Iran in the shorter run.