Thoughts on
Title: Israel's War Within
Author: Bernard Avishai
Issue: Harper's Magazine February 2024
Written: 2024/01/31
Avishai writes about the Culture War in Israel between two factions that
he calls Global Israel and Greater Israel. Global Israel comes from the
secular, liberal, left-leaning tradition of the original Zionists.
Think kibbutzes. Today, it's adherents are more focused on economic
development, democracy, etc. At least anecdotally, these types are
thought to be prosperous white collar workers, Air Force types. True or
not, this characterization leads to some resentment. Greater Israel
refers to a position that is more religious and favors settlements
and territorial expansion. Religion and territory are combined with
proponents viewing the taking and holding of all of the ancient lands as
fulfilling a god-given prophecy.
Avishai is clearly in the camp of Global Israel. This secular version if
Judaism matches his upbrining in Montreal and probably matches the view
of Israel held by many North Americal Jews. In the article he writes
about the history of the secular tradition in Israel and how the more
religious, conservative view took power.
Before and during Israel's founding the religious Jews were not seen as
a threat. They were backwards and surely exposure to rapid modernization
would be enough to transform them towards the secular, modern tradition.
Avishai admits that this matches his own attitude towards Judaism
growing up: it is a pragmatic religion that bends in the face of
modernity. It's well known that many of the early Zionists were not at
all religious. Avishai describes how Ben Furio did not keep kosher and
worked on Yom Kippur. He talks about when he arrived in the 70s, pork
was widely available. His host on the farm where he worked had never
been to synagogue.
The interesting division between Jews early on in the 20th century was
between the secular Zionists that were moving to Israel and the secular
assimilationists moving to America. Two million went to America compared
to seventy thousand in Palestine. The choice between Israel and the US
was not between secularism and religiosity, it was a choice between
national identity and assimilation.
It's no suprise to me that Israel was a nationalist project, but I have
never really considered it in opposition to assimilation. Judging by the
numbers, moving to the US was a kind of default. Moving to Palestine was
an active choice and Avishai describes those who went as attempting to
build a modern state for Jews. They wanted to live a secular life
without being absorbed by a majority into obscurity. They resurrected
Hebrew to more thoroughly distinguish themselves.
This raises some interesting questions.
1. How does secular Zionism compare to assimilation? I'm generally
skeptical of any emphasis on nationality or culture. National food
and dance are great, but typically we see culture wielded as as
justification for not progressing. The idea that culture is a fixed
thing is ahistorical and unfortunate in my view. That said, what are
the arguments of these original Zionists, what was the debate like at
the time
2. How did it play out for each group? The first question is about
principles, but this question is about fact. Did the secular Zionists
get the nation that they wanted? Are American Jews better off or did
they lose something precious.
3. Is secular Israel viable anymore? As Avishai desribes in the article,
the state is largely in the control of the Greater Israel faction.
How marginal are the progressive forces in Israel?
Overall, Avishai provides an interesting glimpse of Israel's internal
political divisions. His description of the early Zionists and of his
North American Jewish upbringing provide a context that should be
familiar to many American Jews, but the way he describes the divisions
between these two groups was new to me. Furthermore, the hold that
conservatives have over the Israeli government is not surprising, but
the strength and history of that hold is.
It's clear from Avishai's description that the conservative Greater
Israel faction is responsible for the continuing violence against
Palestinians and that they are a formidable roadblock to a resolution.
It's not obvious to me that Global Israel can do or wants to do much
better. That leaves us with a fourth question: Can secular Israel
provide a just resolution to the Palestinians or is the situation
fundamentally too far gone for a mere change in domestic politics to
resolve it?
