Two reasons the “I can’t be a Zionist because I’m a liberal” meme is false

[King_David]

Another day, another essay by a “former liberal Zionist”, this time Antony Lerman in the New York Times, decrying the fact that while it used to be okay to be a liberal Zionist, nowadays Israel politics is so right-wing that being a liberal Zionist is a contradiction in terms. Regrettably, the author sighs, he decided to choose liberalism.

This is silly (and pernicious). First, in practice today being a “Zionist” means that you support Israel’s right to continue to exist as a sovereign, Jewish state. One could be a liberal Zionist, who wants Israel to withdraw from the territories and achieve full equality for its Arab citizens, or one can be an illiberal Zionist, and support a vision of “Greater Israel” with a suppressed Arab minority. One can be a secular Zionist, or a religious Zionist. There are Christian Zionists, and even a few Muslim Zionists.

But the only feasible alternatives to Zionism are themselves illiberal–have a majority Arab state in which Jews are, at best, a suppressed minority, or force all six million Jews living in Israel to flee to whatever countries (if any) will accept them, or some combination of the two. The idea that giving up on “Zionism” makes you a “liberal” is false, unless creating yet another Arab dictatorship in what is now Israel at the cost of six million Jews’ lives and liberty, and of by far the most liberal state in their region, is somehow a “liberal” option.

Second, it’s entirely false that Israeli politics have taken a sudden swing to the right. The main issue, of course, is territorial compromise with the Palestinians. Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza (and also left Lebanon fourteen years ago), and also has given the Palestinian Authority control of parts of the West Bank, so it’s already more “left-wing” in that sense than it was in, say, 1988, when it was still supposedly okay to be a liberal Zionist.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/22/two-reasons-the-i-cant-be-a-zionist-because-im-a-liberal-meme-is-false/

[Jefferson23]

1. The Volokh Conspiracy

The Volokh Conspiracy is a blog, founded in 2002,[1] which covers mostly (but not exclusively) United States legal and political issues,[2][3][4] generally from a libertarian or conservative perspective.[5] In 2008, it was one of the most widely read legal blogs in the United States.[1] The Volokh Conspiracy then had more than one million page views each month. In 2007, Inside Higher Ed wrote that it "probably has more influence in the field – and more direct impact – than most law reviews."[1]

As of 2011, the Volokh Conspiracy was the most-visited academic blog published by law professors[6] and gets an average of approximately 25,000 unique visitors on weekdays.[citation needed]

The Volokh Conspiracy was credited as having influenced a partially successful constitutional challenge to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.[7][8] The Volokh Conspiracy is one of the blogs that is in the ABA Journal's Blawg 100 Hall of Fame.[9]

In January 2014, the Volokh Conspiracy has migrated to the Washington Post as part of an attempt to reach a larger audience.[9] In June 2014, the blog will be behind a paywall.[9]

The Volokh Conspiracy has been criticized for promoting climate change denialism.[10][5]


Notable contributors

Eugene Volokh, UCLA School of Law professor, one of its founders
Jonathan H. Adler, professor of law at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, who contributed under the pseudonym "Juan Non-Volokh" until May 1, 2006
Kenneth Anderson, professor of law at American University
Randy Barnett, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center
Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center
Stuart Benjamin, professor of law at Duke Law

*David Bernstein, professor at the George Mason University School of Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Volokh_Conspiracy

[King_David]

2. I guess at least he's an American and a Zionist

Neither can be said about Antony Lerman.

[Jefferson23]

3. A non-liberal's point of view..that is Bernstein..yes. n/t

[King_David]

4. Not exactly non liberal. Also the author of :

From Pesthouses to AIDS Clinics: Neighbors’ Irrational Fears of Treatment Centers for Contagious Diseases, 23 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 1 (1990)

[Jefferson23]

6. Sure thing..the totality of his work if available for anyone to read..good luck. n/t

[King_David]

8. Lerman is an AntiZionist and now talking for Liberal Zionists

Nuff said .

[Jefferson23]

9. According to you and your OP is not helping your cause to be persuasive, it only helps

establish the fact that young American liberals are dropping support for Israeli policy.

[King_David]

13. Jewish liberal Zionist youth movements

Are at record high enrollment .

LOL

[Jefferson23]

15. You better hope they multiple before any peace deal is finalized, as the youth vote in the US

will not be supporting Israel's policies any longer.

[King_David]

16. Your like a Nostradamus ?

Any other prophecies ?

[Jefferson23]

21. Read the polls, or ignore them. n/t

[King_David]

19. Here's a liberal ,

"I guess you can call me a typical liberal, and I accept that label with sincere pride"



http://www.democraticunderground.com/113478266

[Shivering Jemmy]

11. Volokh is more complex than liberal/conservative

[Jefferson23]

12. One can research Bernstein's work, their conclusions he is liberal minded would be a fantasy. n/t

[King_David]

17. I did

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=78279

Complex is correct.

[Jefferson23]

18. Keep solace for that and ignore the totality of his work, that's the ticket. n/t

[intaglio]

5. Question: can you be a liberal and support policies that result in the death

of more than 400 children?

Can you be a liberal and support a regime that has committed numerous war crimes?

Can you be a liberal who supports a state that uses human shields?

[King_David]

7. What's that got to do with Liberal Zionism?

[intaglio]

10. Pointing out that liberal Zionists must deplore the actions of Israel

... if they deplore all of the things I itemised.

[King_David]

14. OK I'll pass on your directive.

Thanks.

[leftynyc]

20. Why?

Because you said so? This is the problem - this right here. Who the fuck gave you or anyone else the keys to the liberal kingdom? Who gave you the gavel to be judge and jury as to who is a liberal?

[oberliner]

22. Many liberal Zionists oppose the current actions in Gaza

There have been anti-war marches in Israel and around the world with significant liberal Zionist participation.

[leftynyc]

23. That's not what I'm talking about

I'm talking about the daily barrage of "you CAN'T BE A LIBERAL" that I put up with every single freeking day around here - all because I support Israel and think Glenn Greenwald is an asshole. The polls tell the story but like the fox news drones who believed the unskewed polls dude, they get ignored or mocked.

[oberliner]

24. I hear ya

And I agree with you about Glenn.

I always said that anyone espousing Obama's views on Israel on this site would be savaged here.

[leftynyc]

25. But leave it to DU

to try and convince everyone that DU actually represents the majority of Americans.

[King_David]

26. As far as Israel is concerned it doesn't even represent the majority of Democratic Party supporters

Else the congress and senate would all be made up of Kucinech alone.

[leftynyc]

27. I point that out time and time again

but continue to see articles posted written by people I've never heard of who say liberals are abandoning Israel in DROVES (DROVES, I TELL YA). Like I told people who thought Romney was ahead during the election season - just look at the polls. They tell the story.

[DanTex]

32. In general, I think DU is mostly more liberal than the average Democrat.

Here we're talking about whether "liberals", not Democrats, can support Israeli policy in light of the occupation, settlements, recent actions in Gaza, etc.

DU doesn't represent the majority of Americans. In 2002-3 the vast majority of Americans supported Bush and the invasion of Iraq. DU was against it, as were most liberals. Some things are a matter of principle and not polls.

[leftynyc]

34. You think DU is more liberal?

I think DU represents the far left and doesn't even represent the majority of Democrats (although they pretend otherwise). And I can't take seriously anyone who tries to pretend THEY can define what liberalism is and if people don't fall into their cartoon cut out version of liberal, they're a right winger. I could link you to the dozen times just last week I was called a right winger for supporting Israel but I really don't care that enough to go to the trouble.

[DanTex]

36. Yes, more liberal. Some here are the "far left". Some here are just "liberal Democrats".

On some issues they represent the majority of Democrats, on others they are more liberal. There's also a variety of voices here. Look at the "Obama wars". Most people here, it seems, oppose Obama, some virulently, but there is also a sizeable group (I'd say the split is like 60-40) that supports him, despite not agreeing with him on all issues. And then there are some moderates and outright conservatives -- NRAers, people who don't think that there is such a thing as white privilege, etc.

I can't speak to the dozen times you were called a right-winger here, but I do know that just the other day someone refused to believe that Mondoweiss was a "progressive Jewish voice" (that's what they call themselves) because nobody progressive could possibly oppose Israeli policy since opposing Israeli policy automatically means supporting Hams. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=78024. So there's that.

Like I said, there's more to it than polls. The Iraq War polled really well, better even than the Israeli attacks in Gaza. There are principles involved, and defending Israeli aggression violates liberal principles of peace and nonviolence.

And here's the thing. If we're playing "big tent", you need to be aware that there are sizeable minorities of the Democratic party that oppose gay marriage and think creationism should be taught in schools, etc. Would you describe someone as right-wing because they thought gay marriage should be illegal?

[oberliner]

37. How much do you know about Mondoweiss?

Have you been an avid reader of the site for a while or are you a relative newcomer?

I ask because I am wondering if you are just taking them at their word when they say they are progressive or is it based on your own experience with the site?

Fox News calls itself "fair and balanced" but those who are familiar with them as a source know not to take that claim seriously.

[DanTex]

39. Almost nothing. I'm a newcomer.

It was brought up by someone else in the course of a discussion about the fact that there seem to be a lot of links to right-wing think tanks in the I/P forum. I clicked on it and it said "progressive Jewish voice" (which, I must say, is a lot more auspicious than "conservative think tank&quot .

Is it not actually "progressive"? The argument that was made is that Mondoweiss supports Hamas and Hamas is anti-gay therefore Mondoweiss is not progressive. Is that accurate?

The poster I was responding to was complaining about being labelled "right-wing" after voicing support for Israeli policy. There's a parallel here between whether Mondoweiss is truly "progressive" and whether people defending Israeli military aggression are truly "liberal".

[oberliner]

40. Fair enough

Personally, I have a negative view of the site and do not consider it to be progressive, though I am sure others will disagree. I will say that I am not basing my perspective on the formula that you identified in your second paragraph.

My view is that most liberals oppose Israel's actions in Gaza but are also critical of Hamas.

A question I would ask: Are there circumstances where a liberal might be in favor of military action being taken? For instance, is it possible for a liberal to support having US troops in Afghanistan or conducting air strikes against ISIS?

[DanTex]

58. I oppose Israeli policy towards Palestinians and am also critical of Hamas.

Last edited Tue Aug 26, 2014, 12:30 PM - Edit history (2)

One thing is, for all the "anti-Israel" bias talk, the fact of the matter is, most Americans, even liberals, can't help but see the conflict more easily from the side of the Israelis than the Palestinians. Israel is a western-style Democracy, Israelis are similar to Americans in a lot of ways. I've met many Israelis, and zero Palestinians.

Mondoweiss, which I still know little about, seems to be written mostly by American and possibly Israeli Jews. The articles that get posted in this forum seem to be mostly Israelis and Americans arguing with each other (not Israelis versus Americans, but Israelis/Americans who support Israeli policy towards Palestinians versus Israelis/Americans that oppose it).

Americans are mostly Christian, with much closer ties to Judaism than to Islam. In fact, being an Arab Muslim, what most Palestinians are, is probably the most looked-down upon group in America at large. In the US media, there are far more Jewish voices than Muslim ones. There are also far more Israelis than Palestinians that make appearances, even on MSNBC -- a point made recently by a Palestinian woman who was then dropped as an MSNBC correspondent.

So the entire debate takes place with a background that heavily disfavors the Palestinian point of view.

Are there circumstances where a liberal could be in favor of military action? Sure. I think most liberals think, for example, that there should have been intervention to prevent the Rwandan Genocide.

[Jefferson23]

41. Covering Hamas and Palestinian Society: A Response to Peter Beinart ( Mondoweiss )

http://mondoweiss.net/2013/03/covering-palestinian-response.html

[leftynyc]

38. I let people define themselves

That's not up to me. And I certainly wouldn't try and shame them off this board or any other by using "you don't agree with me so you must be a right winger"bullshit. By the way, when I asked if DU was more liberal, I was being incredibly sarcastic. I'm well aware of our big tent as I know some Democrats that are not pro choice.

[Mosby]

30. is Obama a liberal?

He assassinates people with drone strikes and bombs sovereign nations that he doesn't like.

More to the point though, claiming that Israeli leadership committed war crimes is nothing more than your poorly informed opinion and claiming that Israel uses human shields is just a flat out lie.

[Shaktimaan]

49. Of course.

The question is never just as black and white as you've presented but always depends on circumstance. Often there is not a "correct" option to choose from but rather a collection of "less bad" possibilities. I'll give you an example.

Could a liberal support a military action that resulted in the deaths of over 2,000 civilians and hundreds of children? As in the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, when NATO involvement prevented an ongoing genocide. What was the correct "liberal" option? The deaths of thousands of innocents, or standing by while more thousands of innocents were slaughtered?

[azurnoir]

28. Israel poll from Pew ResearchCenter for the People & the Press

A majority of Republicans (60%) say Hamas is most responsible for the current violence. Democrats are divided: 29% say Hamas is more responsible, 26% Israel, while 18% volunteer that both sides are responsible.

There also are deep differences over Israel’s response to the conflict: Nearly half of Republicans (46%) say Israel’s response has been about right while another 19% say it has not gone far enough; just 16% think Israel’s response has been excessive. Among Democrats, as many say Israel has gone too far (35%) as say its response has been about right (31%); 9% say Israel has not gone far enough.

A Pew Research Center survey conducted earlier this month found that the partisan gap in Mideast sympathies is as wide as it has been at any point since the late 1970s. Nearly three quarters of Republicans (73%) said they sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians, compared with 45% of independents and 44% of Democrats.

http://www.people-press.org/2014/07/28/hamas-seen-as-more-to-blame-than-israel-for-current-violence/

[oberliner]

29. What would your poll responses be?

Mine are:

Both sides are responsible
Israel's response has been excessive

[leftynyc]

35. Even liberals couldn't muster more than 30%

who blame Israel more for the violence. With independents, it's not even close.

[azurnoir]

72. Was there a "liberals" catagory I missed?

because what I posted only had party affiliation and none of 3 mentioned are automatically synonymous with liberal, of course one is more likely to be liberal if a Democrat or even independent it not necessarily the same thing, as shown by this board the Democratic Party is a very big tent albeit, I will give you that being Republican and liberal is pretty much impossible

[leftynyc]

75. Yes - about 2/3 the way down the page

right next to the section titled Who Is More Responsible for Current Violence?

[azurnoir]

77. There was a mention of Liberal Democrats on that subject here is the excerpt

however not liberals as separate group and the manner in which it was expressed is indeed interesting

Liberal Democrats are among the most likely to view Israel’s response as excessive: 44% say they have gone too far in the conflict with Hamas, compared to 33% who say the response has been about right. At the other end of the spectrum, 51% of conservative Republicans say Israel’s response has been about right; just 10% say it has gone too far.

[leftynyc]

80. Those are different subjects

One asks who is to blame for the violence, the other is whether Israel's response is excessive. I found it interesting that even liberals couldn't get a majority to agree that Israel was responsible. The response was 30% for Israel and 30% for hamas.

[DanTex]

31. Another day, another right-wing source...

[Jefferson23]

33. Yep. n/t

[King_David]

42. Washington post ?I think it's far better than the Modoweiss nonsense usually posted

That is anything but progressive anything but supportive of the Democratic Party .

And Mondoweiss is posted here every single day .

[DanTex]

43. I'm talking about the Volokh Conspiracy and David Bernstein.

It's funny, I imagine you scour the internet for articles supportive of Israeli military aggression, then try to narrow it down to the least objectionable sources you can find, and yet still you can't seem to avoid right-wingers.

[King_David]

44. Good imagination,

Can't say I ever thought or imagined what your doing , but then there's a lot of dudes out there trying to imagine what I'm doing, so I'm not surprised .

[King_David]

45. Here's a liberal author for you,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113478266

Don't confuse people posting in IP who are anti Israel with liberals . I have seen so much homophobia here in IP and it's not coming from the Jewish liberal Zionists here .

The anti Israel spectrum may include some of the left but also a lot of the extreme right are pro Palestinian and extremely anti Israel , such as David Duke .

Most Democratic Party reps are extremely pro Israel .

Being anti Israel does nothing for ones left wing or liberal bonafides - just saying.

[DanTex]

46. "Author"? You mean a 20-year-old college kid...

It's as simple as "pro-Israel" or "anti-Israel". For example, you can be "pro-America" but still think invading Iraq was bad.

[King_David]

47. When u comparing views on Israel / Palestine

There's very little difference from some of what you read here or some Marxist communist articles or some extremist right wing web sites.

And having said that I agree with what you wrote there too.

[DanTex]

52. I wouldn't know, since I don't read much communist or extremist right-wing web sites.

I also try to avoid right-wing think tanks, but curiously they keep getting linked to by people defending Israeli military aggression.

[King_David]

53. Well extremist sites keep on getting linked to here

From a vocal anti Israel minority .

So I can empathize .

Which sites are you talking about? Washington Post ? New York Times? CNN?
Jerusalem Post ? Haaretz ?

I understand Maan has been caught printing extreme antiSemitic articles on the protocols of the elders of Zion and Mondowcand EI are way off the charts.

Which sources are you talking about ? Can you list them ?

The Gay magazines that I use ?

[DanTex]

56. Haven't seen a single example of that.

But in the last week this link to Volokh is the third right-wing link by supporters of Israeli aggression. The other two:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=77901
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=77897

And then there's you defending some right-wing nutjob who smugly supports the assassination of Palestinian children.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113477732
And that college student article you linked has more than a hint of Islamophobia in it. Or maybe -- being generous -- the kid is just too young and dumb to know how to differentiate criticism of Hamas from criticism of the Palestinian people.

I wonder if there are any Palestinian voices at all that you approve of at all? Even progressive Jewish and Israeli voices seem to be too Palestinian-friendly for you. You seem to think the debate should consist entirely of Israelis and Americans.

[King_David]

57. You haven't been here too long

There were lots of posts deleted from Rense in the past.

I see no problem posting from the New York Times or Washington post or The Advocate .

Not sure exactly what your trying to say here. ?

I support the democratic parties views on Israel -100% on this Democratic Party supporting website . Can't say that's the case for over half the people posting in this group. What's your point?

[DanTex]

60. That's true. I only started peeking in about a week or so ago.

Remarkable that there have been so many right-wing sources posted here in such a short time.

I see no problem posting from the New York Times or Washington post or The Advocate .

Not sure exactly what your trying to say here. ?

Don't play dumb. If a right-winger writes an editorial in the Washington Post, that is an editorial by a right-winger. You know, Mitt Romney wrote a NYT editorial about economics once. I would hope that if that was posted in the Economics forum, you wouldn't be defending it on the grounds that it is "the New York Times".

[King_David]

63. "Don't play dumb"

Bye bye , C ya.

[DanTex]

66. I guess now we know how you respond when you can't answer.

[oberliner]

48. Does Hilary Clinton count as a right winger?

How about Obama?

[Jefferson23]

50. What Bibi would give to have her in office right now. n/t

[DanTex]

51. Both center-left in my opinion.

Last edited Tue Aug 26, 2014, 12:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Unlike a lot of DUers, I don't think they are conservatives, and even though I am more liberal than them in some areas.

One thing to realize is that when a person becomes a national political figure, they can't always say what they believe. For example, do you really think Obama was opposed to gay marriage and changed his mind a few years ago? I doubt it. I think he was personally in favor the whole time, but he could also read polls.

When it comes to Israel, it would be pretty suicidal for any ambitious politician to condemn their foreign policy. Not just because of the powerful political forces supporting Israel (AIPAC, etc.), but also the fact that the people Israelis are fighting are mostly Arab Muslims, which is probably the single most despised and distrusted group of people among Americans at large. You get zero political points for sticking up for the human rights of Arab Muslims.

[King_David]

54. Well as a Democratic Party supporter that's the reason I voted for them

Because I agree with their views they espouse in public.

I would never support them if they did not represent my views I would look for someone like Nader or the GOP if I felt the way you describe.

I'm a happy Democratic Party supporter and happy with my reps senators and president I voted for and their views on Israel match mine .

[Jefferson23]

55. Some people are one issue voters, like you're suggesting. Most people are not in that camp. n/t

[King_David]

59. The dude is going on and on as if it's not Democratic Party principles ,

When clearly in 2014 it is.

[Jefferson23]

61. You're being less than direct with your responses to him, that much is clear. There are no

requirements to agree with the Democratic platform on Israel nor any other issue in order
to participate on DU. Ever visit the Gun group? hmm. Pro-life Democrats?

That you support the Israeli platform, so what? You're a one issue voter, and I will remind
you Obama was not always on board for gay marriage. Your opinion seems to be that
people should leave the Democratic party if they do not agree on an issue....interesting
advice you give for a party that defines itself as a big tent.

[King_David]

62. I never said to leave DU , or shouldn't be on DU , or not participate on DU etc

Best you speak for you and , I speak for myself.

[Jefferson23]

64. Nonsense, your suggestions were stated by you, not me..you own your words and their meaning. n/t

[DanTex]

65. Hmm, so you agreed with Obama in '08 that gay marriage should not be recognized.

That's good to know.

[King_David]

68. I didn't agree with him then

And would never vote or support anyone at all ever who discriminates against Gays.

I couldn't even be in the same room as anyone who believes that it's "culturally" acceptable to discriminate against Gays such as They do in Gaza or a West Bank .


I could never swallow some principles.

Next ?

[DanTex]

69. So I guess you didn't vote for him in '08. Did you abstain? Vote Green?

[King_David]

70. It's good you have an interest in gay affairs ,

You should check put the LGBT group here and the banned list and cross reference to posters here in IP and see how many are found on one particular side of the issue.

Needs more study .

[DanTex]

71. OK, so you don't want to answer the question of who you voted for in '08. I get it.

[Jefferson23]

73. Yep, you definitely get it. n/t

[King_David]

74. Since reaching voting age

I have only ever voted for the a Democratic Party along with vast Majority Jews and LGBT in the USA .

[DanTex]

76. So you voted for Obama in '08 even though he opposed gay marriage. OK then...

So how does that square with this:

Because I agree with their views they espouse in public.

I would never support them if they did not represent my views I would look for someone like Nader or the GOP if I felt the way you describe.

and this:

And would never vote or support anyone at all ever who discriminates against Gays.

[King_David]

78. You like asking personal questions ,

about me and stated that you imagine me doing stuff and now all these personal questions too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=78396




It's freaking me out buddy.

[DanTex]

79. Right, because "why did you vote for Obama despite his opposition to gay marriage" is so personal...

Not like this is a political discussion board or anything.

The conclusion here is that you are entirely inconsistent in your professed beliefs.

[King_David]

84. Thanks for the insight

[3rdwaydem]

81. Supporting Israel's right to exist equals Zionism?

I think you're adapting a very broad definition of Zionism. I'm Jewish, liberal and support Israel's right to exist as an autonomous Jewish state. I am not however, a Zionist.

You have to be very careful in using the term "Zionist" as, in some circles, it seems to be code for anti-semitism. I, as are many Jews these days, am becoming worried about the growing numbers of anti-Semites on the far Left both here and in Europe. Bigotry has no place in our society.

[aranthus]

82. What else would it mean?

How do you define it, such that you are not a Zionist?

[3rdwaydem]

83. That Definition would include elements of Jewish Supremacy as well as...

Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation, and to be liberated from antisemitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution.

[Shaktimaan]

85. Code for anti semitism?

How so?