I note the I'm a secular Democrat. Many of my friends are secular Democrats. And I don't think any of them would have told a pollster, since the suicide bombings began, that they "sympathized with the Palestinians" over the Israelis, even if they supported Palestinian's long-term aspirations to statehood. ... Keep in mind, the result for all those polled (in the Post-ABC survey Kohut seems to be talking about) was 49-14 in favor of Israel. ... There must be something funny in how "secular Democrat" is defined. Do you have to actively check off a box labeled "secular"? Are you denied "secular" status if you ever set foot in a church or synagogue? ... Either the Post-ABC poll is screwed up, or advocates for the Palestinians have been more successful than anyone thought. One Zogby or another has reason to be happy. But which one? ...
John Marshall pointed out the obvious explanation -- Mickey is Jewish and so are lots of his friends.
To further explain, this is the perfect example of why he have scientific polls in the first place.
Otherwise, we would be left to ask a bunch of our friends. At that point, flipping a coin becomes more accurate and useful as a measure of public opinion.
But while we're on the subject of Jews and the left (I'm saving my exposition on Jews and the GOP for a later date, when I have more time on my hands), why do Jews align with the left? Dennis Prager (Moment, Jun./Jul. 2002) is shaking his fists at the heavens over the issue. He has a few ideas, but nothing earth-shattering:
With few exceptions, the liberal world is at best neutral toward Israel; and with equally few exceptions, the conservative world is pro-Israel.
Examples are easy to find. The most consistently liberal institutions in America are the universities and the mainstream news media, which are either hostile to Israel or see no moral distinction between Israel and its enemies (which is hardly different from hostile).
... In the religious world, the same rule applies. The mainstream, i.e., liberal Protestant, churches are usually either hostile to Israel or neutral, while the conservative and evangelical Christians are overwhelmingly pro-Israel.
Why Jews so overwhelmingly align themselves with people, institutions, and a political ideology that is so morally wrong on the Middle East and so hostile to the most important issue in Jewish life—the well- being of the Jewish state—is one of the great puzzles of contemporary life. In the words of a friend, Jews possess a suicidal naivete.
... I want to ask liberal Jews who understand the moral gap between Israel and its enemies: How do you resolve the cognitive dissonance you must experience? Virtually every institution you revere is a moral failure when it comes to Israel (and America for that matter). The university, which you venerate, is largely an anti-Israel moral wasteland. And the New York Times, which you read avidly, has always had a cold spot in its heart for Israel. Like many liberals, the New York Times is more interested in fighting conservative Christians than in fighting Muslim anti-Semitism, as virulent an anti-Semitism as that of the Nazis. That is why, for example, it has given so much space to the anti-Jewish comments made by the Rev. Billy Graham in private some 30 years ago, yet it has ignored the revival of the blood libel in Arab newspapers.
Prager suggests there are two explanations.
One is psychological. Many Jews, scarred by the Holocaust and other eruptions of Jew-hatred, either consciously or subconsciously believe that if they side with those who hate Jews, they will not be hated. It is a form of the Stockholm Syndrome...
... The second reason is ideological. Many Jews have substituted liberalism for Judaism as their religion and source of values, and will therefore not easily give up their liberalism.
Like most such screeds, it is too short and too simplistic.
Dialogue and debate must continue.
Comments:
- Mike Silverman wrote:
I think the entire premise that liberals do not support Israel is a false one. Look at the recent debate in Congress about Israel. Among the strongest supporters of Israel are such people as Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Paul Wellstone, Nancy Pelosi, and Barbara Boxer. These are among the most liberal members of Congress.
Support of Israel is bi-partisan and deep.
As for the cultral aspect of supporting liberal policies, it is simple. Jewish people have always flourished under governments that have supported cultural tolerance and progressive economic policies. I mean, sure it is great that Jerry Falwell supports Israel (for his own selfish reasons of course), but why should that require me to buy into right-wing support of gay-bashing, reduction in womens rights, and despoling of the environment? - I responded:
As I've said, I will deal with this topic in more depth later.
Support for Israel is a bi-partisan issue in much of American society, thank God. But this nation is the exception to the rule. The Left is almost uniformly hostile to Israel in other countries, and even in much of our own academia.
But I must clarify one of your points before I leave: Falwell is not just being opportunistic in supporting Israel. Evangelicals of all stripes do so for purely religious reasons. Many of them firmly believe that Jews are the chosen people and that Israel is their Holy Land. - Judith said:
I am not a conservative because I am pro-choice, a feminist, gay rights supporter, active in egalitarian Jewish congregations, and other issues I can't think of right now. Not only that, there is still a lot of anti-Semitism lurking among the far right.
The question should not be: why aren't American Jews conservative? But: why does the liberal left abandon all their principles when it comes to Jews, thereby leaving a power vacuum for the right to move in? - And Michael Gold retorted:
I think the Jewish identification with Liberalism originally began with the emergence and embrace of egalitarian ideologies like Socialism as the grand emancipator of the Jewish people from life-by-royal-fiat that we had been living essentially since Roman times. (Jews flourished under many rulers, up until the point that less sympathetic ones swept the successes away)
I think the Moment article states this but it bears repeating. Through Socialism, many Jews bought into a vision of inclusion in a "collective" that sought to replace their religious beliefs with a view towards accepting a more 'scientific' faith - that emancipation would occur through collective ('state') fiat.
This might be one explanation of the emergence of today's secular "ethnic-Jew" by the replacement of the notion of holy separateness and moral absolutes with a desire to conform to secular life.
Many facets of socialism were directly applicable and Jews identify with them, in particular notions of what we now call Social Justice or Tikkun Olam - what was originally called Tzedaka by our ancestors.
What resulted from the migration of this secularized/Socialist-leaning group to the US was a strong identification with ideology that we now term as liberal, and to the political parties that represent that point of view.
The confusion that many of my more liberal friends express as to why they perceive they are being abandoned, I believe, stems from the influence of people in that movement that adhere even more closely to those collectivist ideologies.
To those further-to-the-left, the evil is capitalism, the global economy and the erosion of the power of the state that forms the basis of their route to emancipation. America and its laissez-faire ideals is seen as anathema. Israel as a free-market democracy, and recipient of US economic largesse, also becomes anathema-by-association. Add to the mix a population of dispossessed Arabs incited to revolution and you have the recipe for left’s abandonment of Jews and Israel. What makes this dangerous is that it is so easy for the more hateful among the left to sprinkle on old racist stereotypes of Jews and money. This last point should not be taken lightly. The hate comes from all directions.
In effect, the left is not abandoning liberal Jews. On the contrary, this is the inflection point where most moderately liberal-jews have, in point of fact, abandoned the left. - Then Arnold Kling piped in:
The reason that some on the left appear to abandon their principles on Israel is that they have no principles to abandon. All they have is a crude class-warfare outlook that defines their enemies.
The worst of the left is an echo of Marxism. There is a belief that the world divides into "oppressed" and "oppressor" classes. Moral worth does not reside in behavior, but in class membership.
From there, it is an easy step to place Palestinians in the "oppressed" class where they can do no wrong and Israelis in the "oppressor" class where they can do no right.
Liberals who do hold genuine principles should distance themselves from the simplistic oppressed/oppressor model. Otherwise, I think that conservatives will hold the only reliable moral compass. - And Ralph Phelan wrapped it all up:
Where has the Left abandoned its principles?
The Left loves Castro, and they also love Arafat.
When someone defends themself against a bully, the Left sides with the bully, whether it's prosecuting homeowners for shooting burglars, (and trying to keep them from having guns) or censuring Israel for attempting to prevent suice bombers from killing them by the dozen.
So far as I can see the Left is totally consistent in how it deals with Israel.
<< Home