Israel or Liberal Zionism: It‘s Not a Binary Choice.

Summary:

This piece makes the argument that a State of Israel existing in peace and security is in the interests not only of Israel, but of Diaspora Jewry as well. However, the policies of an increasingly authoritarian, ultra-nationalist Israel are not in the interests of Diaspora Jewry. But the choice is not binary—to support or not to support Israel. We can support the existence and security of the State of Israel while rejecting its policies. Indeed, we must do both.

The Forward recently published another in a vast series of  hand-wringing analyses of the rift that seems to be growing between American Jewry and Israel/Zionism. The topic seems to have become something of an attraction to journalists, as journalist Ethan Bronner just published a review of two books on the subject in the April 9, 2020, issue of The New York Review of Books.

What strikes me as especially disappointing about all of the analyses is that they all seem to offer us a strict binary choice: liberalism or Israel/Zionism. It turns out to be a false choice which entirely misframes the issue.

It is high time to recognize the reality of Israel/Diaspora relations. The truth is, the interests of world Jewry coincide, in many respects, with the interests of the State of Israel: the revival of the Hebrew language and of Jewish culture generally; Jewish ties to the Land of Israel; the struggle against anti-Semitism; the changing image of the Jew from hapless alien to self-assured citizen. But in other respects, the interests of world Jewry in general, and American Jewry in particular, do not coincide with the interests of the State of Israel. Consider where American Jewry stands right now and how we got here.

During the latter half of the 20^th century, American Jewry has reached a kind of apex in terms of its political, economic and cultural success. There is no need to defend this statement in terms of the first two of these areas; it is patently true. As for our cultural success, it is true that synagogue affiliation is down, yet the statistics seem not to take into account the many more creative and “outside-the-box” associations that flourish among American Jews, particularly among young American Jews: the independent minyanim, Lab Shul, Moishe Houses, the 6^th and I Synagogue in downtown Washington, DC. Yes, the denominations are all fizzling, but if read correctly, a new American Jewry is being born.

Of course, much of this success is due to the perseverance of the Jewish members of “The Greatest Generation”: the growth and proliferation of synagogues, Jewish schools, summer camps, JCCs and Jewish defense organizations.  But we must not discount the contribution of a political culture that developed in the latter half of the 20^th century, a political culture that placed a heavy premium on pluralism and human rights. I recall experiencing anti-Semitism in my youth. I also recall that it seemed to have begun to wane significantly sometime in the mid- to late-1960s.

In fact, a number of friends of mine recall what were described as neighborhood covenants: official, legal contracts that enjoined homeowners from selling to Jews and Negroes. Growing up in Pittsburgh, I knew there were neighborhoods where Jews could or would not live, but I don’t recall hearing about covenants. It was only during the time that I spent in Cleveland and now in the DC area that I have heard these stories. So when did these covenants end? Oh, sometime in the mid- to late-1960s. What happened in the mid- to late-1960s? How about the Civil Rights Movement, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the subsequent Fair Housing Act of 1968, which made these covenants illegal?

I wonder if this waning of anti-Semitism is not also connected to the document titled Nostra Aetate promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church in 1964 as part of the Second Vatican council. Nostra Aetate officially repudiated anti-Semitism, a trend that has been officially endorsed by any number of main stream Protestant churches. Going beyond the repudiation of anti-Semitism, the Presbyterian Church USA recognizes what it calls a “two covenant theology,” whereby God’s covenant with the Jewish people remains eternally intact, thereby repudiating a 2000-year tradition of Christian supersessionism, the belief that God’s covenant with the Jews is obsolete and has been replaced by the Christian testament. What American Jews have discovered is that their alliance with other minority groups in the fight for pluralism and civil rights for all has been an important element in the success of the Jewish community in America

Consider one other aspect of the American Jewish experience. We Jewish boomers all recall the immigrant grandparents and great grandparents with whom we grew up. Even my children, though they may not have met these immigrant ancestors, have seen pictures of them and heard their stories. The American Jewish experience is an immigrant experience. Moreover, the Holocaust is never far from our minds, and so ultra-nationalist, anti-immigration and xenophobic expressions are repugnant to most American Jews. Moreover, Jews along with other minorities and immigrant groups depend on the vibrancy of American democracy, the Constitution, the rule of law, equal justice to guarantee their rights.

This, then, is the dilemma that confronts many if not most American Jews as we address our connection to Israel. How can we maintain these values and these alliances, which are clearly in our interests as Americans, and at the same time express our support for an increasingly authoritarian, ultra-nationalist, racist, irredentist and xenophobic Israel? Is it no wonder that minorities in America struggling for equal justice and civil rights are suspicious of American Jewish support of Israel?

The answer is to eschew the binary choice. The liberal American Zionists in our midst will continue to support the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security. That is where our interests overlap. But liberal American Zionists will also recognize that Israel’s drift to the political right is not in the interests of American Jews, and therefore have the right—indeed the communal duty—to object. We must support Israel’s interests where they overlap with ours, but we must also advance our own communal interests where they don’t!