Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Unity and Dissent: The two faces of Progressive Zionism

Expand Messages
  • Ami Isseroff
    Erratum: in Coming to terms with Gush Etzion posted previously: The sentence: Without a shred of proof, the hysterical proponents of misguided compassion
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 1, 2007
      in Coming to terms with Gush Etzion posted previously:
      The sentence:
      Without a shred of proof, the hysterical proponents of misguided compassion insist that the evil Zionists are perpetrating genocide and ethnic cleansing against the Jews.
      Should have read:
      Without a shred of proof, the hysterical proponents of misguided compassion insist that the evil Zionists are perpetrating genocide and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians.
      Note - You can comment on articles by clicking on the URL of the article. The URL of this article is at:
      If you want to write a formal reply for posting at our Web log and distribution, please write it as an article (not a letter) and send it to znn-owner@yahoogroups.com
      To place related articles and other materials about Zionism, Israel, anti-Semitism, Jews on the Web for discussion, please use the forum: http://www.zionism-israel.com/cgi/yabb/YaBB.cgi?
      Comments about the topic of this post go here:
      Our poll (related to this post): Keep differences about Zionism and Israel "within the family" or make them public? 
      You do not have to register to vote in the poll.
      If you need help using the forum or posting comments, please let us know.
      Middle East humor corner:

      01.02. 2007
      Original content copyright by the author
      Zionism & Israel Center http://zionism-israel.com

      See also the previous article about Israel Bashing. In redoing this latest article, it struck me that an important question to be answered is whether or not it is enough for a Zionist group to declare that it is "pro-Israel." Richard Nixon was pro-Israel. Did that really make him part of the Zionist movement? The Lubavitcher Rabbi is pro-Israel, but he is not a Zionist methinks. There is nothing wrong with saying you are 'pro-Israel,' but it isn't the same as being a Zionist, is it?

      Supporting Israel and criticizing Israel: The two faces of Progressive Zionism

      (updated and adapted from http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2007/01/supporting-israel-and-palestinians-two.html)

      The Union of Progressive Zionists, Ameinu and other progressive Zionists are justifiably upset by the crude attempt of Mort Klein and the ZOA to oust them from the ICC, or to change the ICC charter so as to stifle dissent. Good sense and tolerance triumphed over partisan grandstanding and hysteria, and the attempt was quashed. The controversy did no good for Zionism, though it generated publicity for ZOA, UPZ, Ameinu and the Breaking the Silence group sponsored by UPZ.

      The controversy epitomized the dilemma of progressive Zionists: how to be logical in an illogical political arena. The heart of our argument is that one cannot support self-determination for our people, without supporting self-determination for the Palestinians. The argument is logical, and it cuts both ways. Logical arguments do not suit political reality, which is dominated by emotional partisans of each side.

      Ameinu and UPZ set themselves up for Mort Klein and Zionist extremists by inviting the Breaking the Silence group, and Ameinu got themselves in more trouble when they published an article comparing Israel to apartheid South Africa. Everyone understands that Mort Klein and ZOA are "waiting for progressive Zionists at the corner," ready to pounce on any bit of evidence that progressive Zionists are not loyal to Israel. Equally, anti-Zionists are eager to exploit Breaking the Silence and the legitimate internal Israeli Zionist controversy about the occupation and about IDF human rights violations. The movement to delegitimize Israel has built itself in large part by exploiting legitimate internal criticism of Israel, taking it out of context, and using it for their own ends, to demonize Zionism and its supporters.

      Breaking the Silence provides legitimate and necessary internal criticism in Israel. They show real acts of real IDF soldiers, though these acts are not necessarily representative. This inhumane behavior must be changed, and the occupation must be ended. This criticism can only get the attention and support of mainstream Israelis and Zionists, and really bring about a change, if Breaking the Silence, MachsomWatch and other critics make it clear that they are "on our side." Few Zionists in Israel or the Diaspora will listen to anyone who is lending legitimacy to terrorist acts or to those who announce the intention of destroying Israel.

      If I whisper to you, "You have a spot on your tie," I am a friend who is trying to help. If I get up in front of an audience of thousands and say "Hey look at him, he has a spot on his tie," then my "help" will be viewed differently. As soon as Breaking the Silence left Israel and took their case to Europe and the USA, they lost their legitimacy. They are perceived as enemies by ordinary Israeli Zionists and can no longer be effective advocates of change in Israeli policy or the IDF.

      Within Israeli society, where the need to defend against terror attacks is understood, Breaking the Silence does not need to remind anyone about terror. They have to point out senseless brutality and get across their political point within the political spectrum of Zionist debate. But when they bring the same message to a campus in California, to people who perhaps never heard of the Hamas or of Islamic Jihad suicide squads, they have taken their message out of context. Instead of being a means of improving Israeli society, it becomes a tool for destroying Israel. Progressive Zionists are Zionists. We must never cross the line between trying to fix what is wrong with Israel, and giving aid and comfort to those who want to destroy Israel.

      Progressive Zionist groups have to find a way to support Zionism and Israel on the one hand, and support Palestinian rights on the other. We have to find a way to criticize Israel's actions without imperiling the existence of Israel, adopting the rhetoric of anti-Zionists and questioning the legitimacy of Zionism. We have to find a way to support human rights of Palestinians, and to criticize Israeli human rights violations, without ignoring the human rights of Israelis and the crimes against humanity of groups like Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Fatah Al-Aqsa. Self-determination, whether for Jews or Palestinians, is enshrined in international law. Delegitimizing a member state of the United Nations is not "humanitarian," and ignoring the genocidal program of the reactionary Hamas is not "progressive."

      It is easy to fall in with the crowds of people of different persuasions who bandy about slogans in the propaganda war, and to adopt a policy that is "politically correct" "received wisdom" in one or another constituency. It is not easy to be a Zionist and also support Palestinian rights, but it is not impossible.

      It is possible to support Zionism without supporting the settlements. It is possible to criticize Israel without using catchwords like "apartheid" and "war criminals." It is possible to support Israel without ignoring settler extremism. It is possible to explain that the settlements are wrong, that the occupation, a slightly different issue, is the result of a conflict that has been going on for nearly 100 years, and that the repressive security is a cruel necessity dictated by the recent rampage of terror. In a better world, soldiers would all be officers and gentlemen (or women), but we know they are not. The Palestinians forced a war on us. In wars one uses soldiers, and that is how soldiers often behave. It is shown graphically by Breaking the Silence. We should not be content with that behavior, but we can't stop fighting terror attacks because of criticism of that behavior, nor can we surrender to the Islamic Jihad and Fatah Al Aqsa brigades.

      It is possible to support Palestinian rights without condoning or ignoring terror, corruption and incitement or minimizing the genocidal intent of extremist groups.

      At Ameinu, Christopher Macdonald-Dennis wrote:

      "It is time for us to take back the term “pro-Israel” from groups such as AIPAC and ZOA."

      It is not the term "pro-Israel" that Ameinu must reclaim. That was never our term. It was not the term of David Ben-Gurion or Yitshak Rabin. It is "Zionism" that we need to reclaim. Ameinu needs to do that urgently. Labor Zionism built the state of Israel. Ameinu should not leave ZOA and similar groups alone in the field to defend of Israel. First Ameinu has to reclaim Zionism in their hearts.

      UPZ has to remember that the "Z" stands for Zionism. We are not just pro-Israel, Ameini friends, we are Zionists. We believe that Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jewish people. That's us. If you are only "pro-Israel," then don't call yourself "Labor Zionist" please. Brit Tsedek veShalom is "pro-Israel." They are very careful to avoid the word "Zionism." Ultraorthodox rabbis may be pro-Israel but declare themselves non-Zionist. King Abdullah of Jordan is often accused of being "pro-Israel" too. He is not a Zionist. "None genuine without this mark." Beware of imitations!

      Progressive Zionists have to demonstrate our support for the state and for Zionism, which are also the basis for our opposition to the occupation. We can't just be "pro-Israel." We have to be "Zionist," or else we will exclude ourselves from the Zionist polity. We are not likely to regain our rightful place by insisting Israel is like apartheid South Africa, or by feeding Breaking the Silence atrocity films to the propaganda mills of PSM and Wheels of Justice. There is a reason why this group was sponsored by anti-Zionists in Europe and at some USA campuses.

      The author continued:

      "We need to name those groups for what they are: pro-Likkud or pro-rightist."

      Zionists need more urgently to expose groups like PSM and Wheels of Justice for what they are, pro-terror and genocide, not pro "human rights." The Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not "progressive" groups or causes. They need to be exposed as well.

      If you "name those groups," those Zionists who differ from you, as pro-rightists for "what they are," then expect that they will name you as well for "what you are" from their point of view. Ameinu's insistence on pluralism and allowing a variety of views has to allow for the legitimacy of views that they disagree with as well. If Ameinu calls ZOA names, they will start calling names too. If you are lucky, they will call you "pro-Israel," like former President Nixon or the rabbi of Lubavitch. More likely, they will yell about "self-hating Jews" and "traitors," try to delegitimize you and continue the "Jewish wars." The real enemy is not other Zionists. We disagree with their point of view about the occupation and many other issues, but they are not the ones sending suicide bombers to Eilat and launching rockets on Sderot. Either we will have unity on basic issues and survive, or we will destroy ourselves in dogma eat dogma fights.

      If we want progressive people to support Jewish rights, we cannot be deaf to legitimate criticism, however much it hurts. However, if we want Zionists in Israel and abroad to hear our critique and concerns, and to support Palestinian rights, we can't be deaf to their criticism either.

      Ami Isseroff

      Original content is Copyright by the author 2007. Posted at ZioNation-Zionism and Israel Web Log, http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000338.html where your intelligent and constructive comments are welcome. Disributed by ZNN list. Subscribe by sending a message to ZNN-subscribe@yahoogroups.com. Please forward by e-mail with this notice, cite this article and link to it. Other uses by permission only.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.