Broaden the discussion
Great numbers of American Jews care fervently for the welfare of the State of Israel, as do so many of the civic and religious organizations that represent them. The deep commitment to Israel’s survival and wellbeing – in the face of enormous challenges – takes innumerable forms, among them material, political and spiritual.
Alongside the many positive manifestations of American Jewish support for Israel, however, a divisive and troubling tendency has appeared in recent years. It takes the form of concerted organizational efforts to silence, or at least marginalize, voices within the Jewish community that express points of view – such as, perhaps, criticism of the Israeli government’s West Bank settlement policies, or support for Palestinian human rights – deemed out of step with the purportedly “mainstream” perspective on the Israel/Palestine situation.
These efforts arise from a belief that voicing of such views by Jews or Jewish groups is inimical to Israel’s interests, as particular organizations or individuals see them, and, hence, should be suppressed. The suppression takes various forms. It includes charges that the speakers are anti-Semitic, or are promoting anti-Semitism, or are “self-hating Jews.” Speaking engagements are boycotted. And those expressing such views may be labeled “anti-Israel” or “extremist,” and denied a place at the Jewish organizational table.
This mindset, and the tactics implemented in support of it, are wrong. Dissent and debate have always been an integral part of the life of the Jewish community; that the subject is Israel should not alter that norm. Indeed, in Israel debate on such topics is far more robust than it is here in the United States.
As the Jewish-Arab conflicts of the past 100 years – including the 60 years since the founding of Israel – have shown, no quick and easy answer has leapt off the page, and no single viewpoint epitomizing the best interests of Israel and the Jewish people has emerged triumphant. But the kind of deep understanding needed to tackle difficult problems is far more likely attained in a room resounding with vibrant debate than in one where challenging or provocative views are, by fiat or innuendo, left unsaid.
The intractable plight of the Israeli and Palestinian people cries out for all the help that insiders – and outsiders – can bring, toward finding answers that will work, albeit imperfectly, for both peoples. An answer that serves Israelis but not Palestinians is doomed to fail. All views – offered in good faith and with recognition of the histories and current realities, and hopes and fears of each group – should be heard and listened to. They should be debated, dissected, and criticized.
Ultimately, some ideas will be set aside as untenable. But none of these viewpoints, and none of their proponents, should be blacklisted or ridiculed or considered unclean. The American Jewish community needs to champion thoughtful, respectful, inclusive discussion of Israel/Palestine, without litmus tests for participation, or topics excised as taboo.
The current exclusionary approach betrays the earnest pursuit of the truth, and compromises our ability to help in finding badly-needed answers.
Michael Felsen is an attorney and president of the Workmen’s Circle in Brookline.
Other headlines
- Generational storytelling - 04/17/08
- On preventing genocide - 04/10/08
- A different ME strategy - 04/03/08
- No place like home - 03/27/08
- The case for a ceasefire - 03/20/08
- Strong ties to Israel - 03/13/08
- Dialogue not disputation - 03/06/08
- A presidential peacemaker - 02/28/08
- Peace or apocalypse? - 02/21/08
- An Israeli in America - 02/14/08
- Debating the Jewish state - 02/07/08
- The case for Barack Obama - 01/31/08
Subscribe to the Jewish Advocate today and save up to 64% on the newsstand price
