That’s all fair. Just for clarity, I want to firmly distinguish that I don’t think Joe Biden’s zionism is at all the same as Pat Robertson’s zionism. What you’re talking about, I think is the evangelical messianic cult belief that a holy war in the middle east will usher in the second coming of Christ. I’ve heard that the president of France thought that George W. Bush was in that camp a bit.
Biden, from all that I’ve read, simply shares the zionism of liberal Jews. It’s the same kind of Zionism I grew up with. It’s a belief that the return of Jews to Israel is a triumphant story of 20th century humanist values making the tragedy of the Holocaust and the second World War into an inflection point at which we as a global civilization broadly turned away from barbarism and colonialism and racism in favor of enlightened future of international law and justice. It was predicated on the notion that Jews had been mistreated for millennia, and finally were receiving reparations. And our victory (as Jews) was the symbolic case that would define the future of political and economic liberalism that was the birthright of humans around the world.
As long as you don’t ever think about the Palestinians, it’s a powerful, uplifting narrative. That’s what Biden is on. But the reason that Bibi has sat on the thrown for so long is because unlike folks like Biden, he knows how the gefilite fish is made, and he’s not squeamish about making it.
Do you know where the term “scapegoat” comes from? It’s biblical. We used to transfer our sins onto goats and then sacrifice them. We made them dirty with our sins so we could claim to be clean. That’s what Bibi has always been. His job has always been to do the things that that liberal zionists have always wanted done but cannot bear to soil their own souls doing.
Biden, from all that I’ve read, simply shares the zionism of liberal Jews.
If that zionism is “Israel has a right to exist” then, okay I’d agree he shares that belief.
That’s what Bibi has always been. His job has always been to do the things that that liberal zionists have always wanted done but cannot bear to soil their own souls doing.
I mean, that’s where I’m not with you. If someone “wants [that] done” they’re not a liberal zionist in my opinion. (Sorry, I don’t know which definition of liberal you’re using or which one means the Jews who want to peacefully coexist and which ones want to take land and support genocide.)
If you’re telling me that all the Jewish people I know who hate what Israel is doing but want Israel to exist are secretly loving what Israel is doing, I just don’t believe that. I don’t believe that Biden is one of them.
Again, I totally understand. I have been down the road that your friends are on.
This question you’re asking has been a point of debate since the start of the zionist project a century ago.
The concept of some form of peaceful coexistance used to be the default position of liberal zionists, which in this context means supporters of universal human rights who believe in the establishment of a sovereign Jewish national homeland. The counterweight to this that has emerged – particularly since the conquest and occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights in 1967 – has been secular Jewish Supremacy and Religious Zionism. These are technically distinct, but ultimately both are far-right ethnonationalist/ethnosupremacist groups that advocate for a maximalist approach. Both believe in the complete conquest and ethnic cleansing of historic mandate Palestine.
The problem is that following the Oslo Accords, the far-right recognized that momentum was slowly shifting their way, and the liberal zionists never fought it. They liked the idea of rights and justice, but they didn’t really have the stomach to advocate for the agency of Palestinians. Many are scared of Palestinians. Many recognize how utterly inconvenient their continued existence is. It was assumed that after a generation, they’d give up and their culture would’ve dissolved, but it didn’t happen. Media shifted to the right along with the center of power in Israel, and US government – historically a bulwark against the Israeli far right – kept moving with them.
Most of your friends were probably raised much as I was. They probably got a tree planted in Israel for their b’nai mitzvah. They may have gone on a Birthright trip. And as they got older, they got more uncomfortable with the the side of Israel they saw during the Second Intifada and Operation Cast Lead, but accepted the universal pacifier: “It’s complicated.”
Which brings us to today. The illusion of any chance of agency or self-determination for Palestinians – in both the occupied territories as well as Palestinian citizens living in Israel’s formal UN boundaries – has been rendered an obvious farce. Which means that everyone is really forced into largely three paths:
Radicalization. Much of the Israeli public has openly endorsed a second Nakba. They leave and live or stay and die. But staying and living should no longer be an option afforded to them.
Rebellion. You put on a shirt that says “Not in Our Name!” and throw tomatoes at John Fetterman. You tell the world that Netanyahu and his band of fascists are gaslighting the whole planet, and genocide is flat out antithetical to Jewish values.
Resolution. You just look away. It’ll be over soon. Afterwards, if your kids ever ask about it you can say that you were against it. But hey: we can’t mourn forever. And tickets to the new resorts in the Gaza settlements are heavily subsidized by the government, so who are you to say no to a nice vacation?
Biden is has been in camp 3 his whole career. As I mentioned, he justified violence against civilians in a private meeting during the Reagan administration. He’s always had an appetite for breaking a few eggs.
I’m in camp 2. I want a one-state solution. It can be binational states or whatever, but I want everyone to have free movement across the territory, full rights, and for everyone to get access to the same national budget for schools and hospitals.
Your friends are probably demoralized and don’t know what to feel. But if you don’t take any action, the default option is 3. I hope they’ll join me in 2. I’m furious that my son won’t enjoy the privileges I did. Jewish safety and our reputation around the world are the prices that are being paid for a bunch of real estate.
I’m sorry this is all so long. I don’t know if you’ll read this, but as you can tell, I’ve got a lot bottled up. I bet your friends do to. Give them my love and support.
Well I just want to say it’s been an interesting conversation and I appreciate the measured tone you’ve taken and your efforts to explain your position. I really do.
I think you’re right that my friends are probably in the 2nd group you outlined. I think Carter, Clinton, Obabma, (and yes, Biden) all fall into that category of working towards a two-state solution that allows everyone to live peaceably. Certainly that’s the dominant message I’ve ever recieved from the Democrats.
But as for this part: The problem is that following the Oslo Accords, the far-right recognized that momentum was slowly shifting their way, and the liberal zionists never fought it. They liked the idea of rights and justice, but they didn’t really have the stomach to advocate for the agency of Palestinians.
Wasn’t that the whole issue about Yitzhak Rabin? As per Wikipedia:
In 1992, Rabin was re-elected as prime minister on a platform embracing the Israeli–Palestinian peace process. He signed several historic agreements with the Palestinian leadership as part of the Oslo Accords. In 1994, Rabin won the Nobel Peace Prize together with long-time political rival Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Rabin also signed a peace treaty with Jordan in 1994. In November 1995, he was assassinated by Yigal Amir, an extremist who opposed the terms of the Oslo Accords.
So the way I saw it, was that his assassination was a coup for the far right as represented by Bibi and the Likud is the equivalent of the MAGATs here - that is to say, utterly reprehensible people who do not represent what most people want.
But you’re making the case that in fact most people DO want what Likud is selling they just don’t have the courage to express it? If that’s the case, how do you know this? I mean is it strictly anecdotal or do you know of some other data that suggests that? I admit I’m only going by what I have heard and my assumptions from reading the news, so that’s why I’m asking.
And, more than that, that Biden somehow falls into the category of supporting a two-state solution but secretly (?) wanting to eliminate all Palestinians?
At a certain point I worry that this gets to be more philosophy than deduction, but I would say that my reasoning is largely under-girded by two things.
First, I’m a realist, a materialist, and a consequentialist: if someone repeatedly does things with a consistent outcome, eventually I conform that regardless of what they may say, clearly they like that outcome.
Second, my impressions regarding Biden and the mainstream of consensus of various group are based the same thing as anyone’s: observing what a group says and does through following news and testing how various mental models fit at predicting and explaining behavior.
By way of an example, I read Jewish Currents, 972 Magazine, Mondoweiss, The Intercept, The Forward, etc. and so I’m aware that the head of the Anti-Defamation League, Jonathan Greenblatt, has been a controversial figure even among his ideological peer group. Even within the ADL and like-minded organizations such as J Street, it’s been a point of awkward friction that Greenblatt demonstrates a bias against criticism of Israel and zionism that seems to routinely impede the overall mission of the ADL.
And now we’re at a point where the ADL has become wholely deferential to Elon Musk, who has flatly stated that he believes Jews engage in media manipulation and act to enrich themselves at the expense of any other national allegience. But: he’s also basically made clear that he’s prepared to support a Jewish ethnostate without reservation as long as he feels that the Jews refrain from challenging his own power and priorities.
This is just a case study. The point is that I look at this, and I have a mental model of Jonathan Greenblatt. I think about what I was raised to believe, and I understand how a man like Greenblatt can lie to himself all the way to quietly accepting the richest man on Earth unapologetically performing a sieg hiel salute. But going back to my point about being a realist and a consequentialist, it does not matter how convincingly you insist that circumstances forced your hand, and that you made the best hard choice among bad options. It doesn’t matter how hard you insist that you’re a supporter of human rights who just doesn’t know what to do. If every time a powerful group further yokes the rights and dignity of another group you say ‘Well… I’ll let it slide just this once’, then forgive me if I use the same mental model to predict your actions as I’d use for an embarrassed fascist. If you don’t like it, behave in a way that doesn’t conform so well to that ideological framework.
I credible journalism and analysis and follow where it leads. A great example is this analysis of the Sde Teiman riot. “A riot for impunity shows Israel’s proud embrace of its crimes” [+972 Magazine]. There are a lot of people who have dropped any pretense of opposing genocide, and so it’s reasonable to conclude that the people who knowingly support them do to. And we can say the same about the people who knowingly support them. And when you apply this to the settlement of the West Bank and destruction of homes in East Jerusalem over the last decade, you’re left with a bewildering but unavoidable conclusion. Obama certainly criticized Netanyahu for subsidizing the obvious ethnic cleansing he was doing. But he never stopped sending crucial supplies and vetoing UN resolutions about it. The companies that build factories that rely on the labor of an oppressed class living under apartheid cannot claim not to know that they’re benefiting from and working to uphold ethnic exploitation. They know well enough that they seek to censor people who try to bring awareness to it.
But here’s where I think we can wrap up: Biden is retired. He lives in history now. I’m not interested in shaming anyone, I just want to help people figure out what is right and do it. And right now, that is (1) opposing genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid and (2) recognizing attempts to justify or deflect from these actions and calling them out for what they are. That’s what I’d encourage everyone to do. If you have a brain, use it; and if you have a mouth, use it too.
That’s all fair. Just for clarity, I want to firmly distinguish that I don’t think Joe Biden’s zionism is at all the same as Pat Robertson’s zionism. What you’re talking about, I think is the evangelical messianic cult belief that a holy war in the middle east will usher in the second coming of Christ. I’ve heard that the president of France thought that George W. Bush was in that camp a bit.
Biden, from all that I’ve read, simply shares the zionism of liberal Jews. It’s the same kind of Zionism I grew up with. It’s a belief that the return of Jews to Israel is a triumphant story of 20th century humanist values making the tragedy of the Holocaust and the second World War into an inflection point at which we as a global civilization broadly turned away from barbarism and colonialism and racism in favor of enlightened future of international law and justice. It was predicated on the notion that Jews had been mistreated for millennia, and finally were receiving reparations. And our victory (as Jews) was the symbolic case that would define the future of political and economic liberalism that was the birthright of humans around the world.
As long as you don’t ever think about the Palestinians, it’s a powerful, uplifting narrative. That’s what Biden is on. But the reason that Bibi has sat on the thrown for so long is because unlike folks like Biden, he knows how the gefilite fish is made, and he’s not squeamish about making it.
Do you know where the term “scapegoat” comes from? It’s biblical. We used to transfer our sins onto goats and then sacrifice them. We made them dirty with our sins so we could claim to be clean. That’s what Bibi has always been. His job has always been to do the things that that liberal zionists have always wanted done but cannot bear to soil their own souls doing.
If that zionism is “Israel has a right to exist” then, okay I’d agree he shares that belief.
I mean, that’s where I’m not with you. If someone “wants [that] done” they’re not a liberal zionist in my opinion. (Sorry, I don’t know which definition of liberal you’re using or which one means the Jews who want to peacefully coexist and which ones want to take land and support genocide.)
If you’re telling me that all the Jewish people I know who hate what Israel is doing but want Israel to exist are secretly loving what Israel is doing, I just don’t believe that. I don’t believe that Biden is one of them.
Again, I totally understand. I have been down the road that your friends are on.
This question you’re asking has been a point of debate since the start of the zionist project a century ago.
The concept of some form of peaceful coexistance used to be the default position of liberal zionists, which in this context means supporters of universal human rights who believe in the establishment of a sovereign Jewish national homeland. The counterweight to this that has emerged – particularly since the conquest and occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights in 1967 – has been secular Jewish Supremacy and Religious Zionism. These are technically distinct, but ultimately both are far-right ethnonationalist/ethnosupremacist groups that advocate for a maximalist approach. Both believe in the complete conquest and ethnic cleansing of historic mandate Palestine.
The problem is that following the Oslo Accords, the far-right recognized that momentum was slowly shifting their way, and the liberal zionists never fought it. They liked the idea of rights and justice, but they didn’t really have the stomach to advocate for the agency of Palestinians. Many are scared of Palestinians. Many recognize how utterly inconvenient their continued existence is. It was assumed that after a generation, they’d give up and their culture would’ve dissolved, but it didn’t happen. Media shifted to the right along with the center of power in Israel, and US government – historically a bulwark against the Israeli far right – kept moving with them.
Most of your friends were probably raised much as I was. They probably got a tree planted in Israel for their b’nai mitzvah. They may have gone on a Birthright trip. And as they got older, they got more uncomfortable with the the side of Israel they saw during the Second Intifada and Operation Cast Lead, but accepted the universal pacifier: “It’s complicated.”
Which brings us to today. The illusion of any chance of agency or self-determination for Palestinians – in both the occupied territories as well as Palestinian citizens living in Israel’s formal UN boundaries – has been rendered an obvious farce. Which means that everyone is really forced into largely three paths:
Biden is has been in camp 3 his whole career. As I mentioned, he justified violence against civilians in a private meeting during the Reagan administration. He’s always had an appetite for breaking a few eggs.
I’m in camp 2. I want a one-state solution. It can be binational states or whatever, but I want everyone to have free movement across the territory, full rights, and for everyone to get access to the same national budget for schools and hospitals.
Your friends are probably demoralized and don’t know what to feel. But if you don’t take any action, the default option is 3. I hope they’ll join me in 2. I’m furious that my son won’t enjoy the privileges I did. Jewish safety and our reputation around the world are the prices that are being paid for a bunch of real estate.
I’m sorry this is all so long. I don’t know if you’ll read this, but as you can tell, I’ve got a lot bottled up. I bet your friends do to. Give them my love and support.
Well I just want to say it’s been an interesting conversation and I appreciate the measured tone you’ve taken and your efforts to explain your position. I really do.
I think you’re right that my friends are probably in the 2nd group you outlined. I think Carter, Clinton, Obabma, (and yes, Biden) all fall into that category of working towards a two-state solution that allows everyone to live peaceably. Certainly that’s the dominant message I’ve ever recieved from the Democrats.
But as for this part: The problem is that following the Oslo Accords, the far-right recognized that momentum was slowly shifting their way, and the liberal zionists never fought it. They liked the idea of rights and justice, but they didn’t really have the stomach to advocate for the agency of Palestinians.
Wasn’t that the whole issue about Yitzhak Rabin? As per Wikipedia:
So the way I saw it, was that his assassination was a coup for the far right as represented by Bibi and the Likud is the equivalent of the MAGATs here - that is to say, utterly reprehensible people who do not represent what most people want.
But you’re making the case that in fact most people DO want what Likud is selling they just don’t have the courage to express it? If that’s the case, how do you know this? I mean is it strictly anecdotal or do you know of some other data that suggests that? I admit I’m only going by what I have heard and my assumptions from reading the news, so that’s why I’m asking.
And, more than that, that Biden somehow falls into the category of supporting a two-state solution but secretly (?) wanting to eliminate all Palestinians?
At a certain point I worry that this gets to be more philosophy than deduction, but I would say that my reasoning is largely under-girded by two things.
First, I’m a realist, a materialist, and a consequentialist: if someone repeatedly does things with a consistent outcome, eventually I conform that regardless of what they may say, clearly they like that outcome.
Second, my impressions regarding Biden and the mainstream of consensus of various group are based the same thing as anyone’s: observing what a group says and does through following news and testing how various mental models fit at predicting and explaining behavior.
By way of an example, I read Jewish Currents, 972 Magazine, Mondoweiss, The Intercept, The Forward, etc. and so I’m aware that the head of the Anti-Defamation League, Jonathan Greenblatt, has been a controversial figure even among his ideological peer group. Even within the ADL and like-minded organizations such as J Street, it’s been a point of awkward friction that Greenblatt demonstrates a bias against criticism of Israel and zionism that seems to routinely impede the overall mission of the ADL.
And now we’re at a point where the ADL has become wholely deferential to Elon Musk, who has flatly stated that he believes Jews engage in media manipulation and act to enrich themselves at the expense of any other national allegience. But: he’s also basically made clear that he’s prepared to support a Jewish ethnostate without reservation as long as he feels that the Jews refrain from challenging his own power and priorities.
This is just a case study. The point is that I look at this, and I have a mental model of Jonathan Greenblatt. I think about what I was raised to believe, and I understand how a man like Greenblatt can lie to himself all the way to quietly accepting the richest man on Earth unapologetically performing a sieg hiel salute. But going back to my point about being a realist and a consequentialist, it does not matter how convincingly you insist that circumstances forced your hand, and that you made the best hard choice among bad options. It doesn’t matter how hard you insist that you’re a supporter of human rights who just doesn’t know what to do. If every time a powerful group further yokes the rights and dignity of another group you say ‘Well… I’ll let it slide just this once’, then forgive me if I use the same mental model to predict your actions as I’d use for an embarrassed fascist. If you don’t like it, behave in a way that doesn’t conform so well to that ideological framework.
I credible journalism and analysis and follow where it leads. A great example is this analysis of the Sde Teiman riot. “A riot for impunity shows Israel’s proud embrace of its crimes” [+972 Magazine]. There are a lot of people who have dropped any pretense of opposing genocide, and so it’s reasonable to conclude that the people who knowingly support them do to. And we can say the same about the people who knowingly support them. And when you apply this to the settlement of the West Bank and destruction of homes in East Jerusalem over the last decade, you’re left with a bewildering but unavoidable conclusion. Obama certainly criticized Netanyahu for subsidizing the obvious ethnic cleansing he was doing. But he never stopped sending crucial supplies and vetoing UN resolutions about it. The companies that build factories that rely on the labor of an oppressed class living under apartheid cannot claim not to know that they’re benefiting from and working to uphold ethnic exploitation. They know well enough that they seek to censor people who try to bring awareness to it.
But here’s where I think we can wrap up: Biden is retired. He lives in history now. I’m not interested in shaming anyone, I just want to help people figure out what is right and do it. And right now, that is (1) opposing genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid and (2) recognizing attempts to justify or deflect from these actions and calling them out for what they are. That’s what I’d encourage everyone to do. If you have a brain, use it; and if you have a mouth, use it too.