This is juicy. Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J Street, and Marty Peretz (left) met up on an NPR radio show yesterday out of Boston. Go to minute 29 or so and you get a delicious exchange.
A woman named Tracy, who says she worked on the Clinton campaign with Ben-Ami, calls in from Boston and asks for advice on "how to talk about this with your family." Nervous laugh. "I am very much in line with J Street, and my in-laws certainly would view it as heretical."
Host Tom Ashbrook asks if Tracy is "afraid" to bring it up with them at the High Holidays. "You got it," Tracy says. "I find that if I even broach the topic of questioning any of Israel’s policy stances, it is viewed as a very upsetting thing to say."
Marty Peretz snaps.
"That’s your personal problem, it isn’t a social problem," he says with zero sensitivity. "I discuss with my kids who have different views from me– AIPAC, J Street. Too much of J Street’s emotional push is to give someone a voice. There are so many voices, and J Street is one of them. The question is, Is the voice right?
"This is not about your psychological issues with your in-laws, and this is demeaning, to try to discuss this."
Ashbrook finally steps in to lift Peretz off Tracy’s bloody form. Well she truly feels this way, he says.
"She feels it, and Jeremy also feels that you need more and more and more viewpoints," Peretz says. "The question has to be, ‘Are the viewpoints correct?’"
Jeremy Ben-Ami truly distinguishes himself with his response to Peretz’s meanness.
"It is really important for the people of Marty’s generation [Peretz is 70] to hear the calls that just came in…To deny that this sense of being muzzled exists, to deny that this sense that I cannot speak, not only within my family, within my synagogue, within my Federation, within my community, to my friends about this topic, to deny that this feeling exists and to say it’s a personal psychological issue– is to completely miss the point. Because this is a community wide phenomenon. There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Jewish Ameicans who share these views and share that sentiment, and it is sowing the seeds of the long-term disintegration of the American Jewish community if those feelings are allowed to fester."
A few comments. The exchange demonstrates once again that the political battle we are all engaged in is at a very important level a war over Jewish identity, what it means to be Jewish. Ben-Ami is trying to change that Jewish identity, Marty Peretz is holding on to 1967-era Jewish identity, joined at the hip to Israel. Peretz’s generation made a giant mistake here by swallowing Jim Crow hook, line, and sinker. Ben-Ami is trying to correct the error. As a Jew who became completely alienated from the Jewish community over apartheid in the Middle East, I cheer Ben-Ami on.
Secondly, the thuggery of Peretz’s response cannot be understated. He is saying: There are lots of voices in the Jewish community! But some are wrong! So shut the fuck up! Peretz is rationalizing his own refusal to publish anything critical of Israel in the New Republic, or the Democratic Party too, for that matter– by saying, It’s wrong, end of discussion. And not only wrong but– remember my headline– crazy. Anyone who thinks that Palestinians are being mistreated is a lunatic.
This is about religious orthodoxy. And Peretz’s denial of access and psychological smearing are practiced across the Jewish spectrum, which Ben-Ami fails to point out includes the media and the Congress. Let my (American) people go.
A lot of people, even Jews, have a very hard time dealing with the decntralised nature of Judaism. The fact is, anyone can claim their project, goal, way of doing, colonial plan, whatever, to be “Jewish” and there is no-one to tell them no.
Of course, it makes it pretty simple from one point of view; whenever someone claims to decree what is Jewish or claims to speak for “the Jews” grab your wallet and run the other way.
But Peretz is certainlt right about one thing. There is a big psychological problem here, and Peretz has got it bad.
But the point remins, when the Zionists put together a mish-mosh of romantic nationalism, colonial minipulation, and personal ambition and catalyzed it with the suffering of Europe’s poor Jews, and called it Jewish destiny, there was no-one to tell them NO. Those with the loudest voice and the appealingly crafted narrative won the day, and hi-jacked Judaism, tied the forunes of Judaism to an racist colonial project
It is very hard for those who are used to at least some kind of doctrinal discipline in their religion to conceive of the situation in Judaism. And the ZIonists have taken full advantage of the situation.
“The exchange demonstrates once again that the political battle we are all engaged in is at a very important level a war over Jewish identity, what it means to be Jewish.”
Unfortunately, that is one of the consequences of the decentralisation of Judaism. It’s a free-for-all.
The Zionists are, of course, at a huge dis-advantage in this particular battle. They require lots and lots of affluent, activist Jews (or whoever, they’re not fussy) to work for and contribute to Israel.
A Jew who does not believe that Zionism (as presently constituted) is , well, “good for the Jews” only has to do nothing. And the Zionists, with their demands and ridicule and rhetoric, seem to have perfected a strategy to get them to do it.
“This is about religious orthodoxy.”
No, it’s much much more about social orthodoxy, and to a certain extent, perceived self-interest. Hard to have an orthodoxy when there is really no-one who can say what it is, or extract any punishment, religious or temporal, for violating it.
Anyway, when you do find out what the new orthodoxy is, be sure and send me a copy. I’ll naturally want to conform to it.
Hmmm? I’ve never heard Marty Peretz stutter along like this. Which I can only read that Jeremy is a force he doesn’t underestimate.
But what little “pricks” exactly are the efforts at divestment from Israel? (A little patronizing, Marty, a little condescending?)
I don’t think it would have made sense for Jeremy Ben-Ami to confront Marty more than he already did. Given the insecurely stuttering Peretz he already confronts with his arguments it, could have felt a little bit like bad taste for the listener. He wants to win hearts not estrange them.
At least that’s my impression. Good challenge concerning critique versus support of Christian communities by Jeremy. Hilarious Marty’s: “a, a, a, a, absolutely”.
Sorry, that was the wrong place to respond. I initally wanted to write this:
But yes, I agree, it often feels like “social orthodoxy”, but a very specific kind. The religious part of it makes it harder to challenge it intellectually.
LeaNder, did you even read what I said? I have seen in my short (I know, not short enough) life the conception of what is “Jewish” take many twists and turns, like a frickin kosher Mobius kreplach.
Jewish “orthodoxy” is, like a brand name, available to whoever can pay for it.
Let me upset more people –
GHAZA
Arab and Muslim rap is booming–I tried to get the translated lyrics to Balti’s 2009 gaza rap lyrics but couldn’t find them. The image sequence is pretty revealing of why
the hip are hopping angrily. A tea party across the grassroots just as hip hop started here. Gee, will we be seeing the Israeli version of wiggers copycat culture one day? An Israeli Eminem?
the hip are hopping angrily
> you need to leave the turkey jive at the door, son.
Phil Weiss wrote:
“This is about religious orthodoxy.”
Well, whatever it’s about one thing it’s clearly and utterly unconcerned about is American interests, that’s for sure.
And that seems equally true on both sides; Mr. Peretz’s and Mr. Ben-Ami’s:
Worried about how the U.S.’s unconditional support of Israel is bad for the U.S.? Worried about what bin Laden just said about same, lending great credence to the idea that past and perhaps future terrorism against the U.S. is maybe at least a little related to our policy vis a vis Israel and the Palestinians? Indeed, worried about terrorism against the U.S.? Worried that, as Haaretz is just reporting, the first thing the Israelis are doing in the wake of this new U.N. report is run to their friends in Washington for support and etc. which when of course given is going to make the rest of the world and esp. the arab and moslem countries hold the U.S. in great disgust if not in fact engender hatred and maybe even more terrorism against us?
Hell no. Not even a blip on the radar screen. Unimportant. Utterly irrelevant it seems to either Mssr.s Peretz or Ben-Ami, and Tom Ashbrook too. Indeed the U.S. interest is just beneath mention it appears, of interest only to laughable nut-cases. Instead what’s important of course is endless navel-gazing about the supreme issue of what’s good for Israel. And then—with the U.S. interest still ranking far far behind it appears and still being invisible—lots and lots about the issues of jewish identity, and what are Israeli jews feeling, and what are American jews feeling, and what are some jewish families feeling and on and on, ad judaica infinitum.
Even being so blithely unconcerned about the interests of the U.S. you’d think that these deep jewish thinkers might consider the effect seeing this kind of discourse has on their fellow non-jewish American citizens in terms of the false impression it gives that all or even most American jews are also simply oblivious to the interests of their fellow citizens. It’s like they’ve been advised by David Duke to say exactly the kinds of things that leave non-jewish Americans with a sour taste in their mouths.
Another illustration of why what Phil and Adam are doing here is so important. Not only looking after the U.S.’s interests, but in the course of same showing that of course mainstream jewry isn’t in fact unconcerned with non-jewish interests.
Sin Nombre,
Good post!! It’s good to see someone pointing this out.
Can we spell
n – a – r – c – i – s – s – i – s – m ?
FPM
Sin, only an idiot would worry about what Bin Laden said. Sorry, I’m no Zionist, but if there is one guy on earth I am NOT going to be threatened with, it’s Bin Laden. There is no reason on earth why we should worry about anything he says.
RE: “She feels it, and Jeremy also feels that you need more and more and more viewpoints,” Peretz says. “The question has to be, ‘Are the viewpoints correct?’”
THE ANSWER: Of course, not. Only the viewpoint of Marty “Macho Man” Peretz is correct!
RE: “There are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Jewish Ameicans who share these views and share that sentiment, and it is sowing the seeds of the long-term disintegration of the American Jewish community if those feelings are allowed to fester.”
MY COMMENT:
“Now everyone of us was made to suffer
Everyone of us was made to weep
But we’ve been hurting one another
And now the pain has cut too deep…
So take me from the wreckage
Save me from the blast
Lift me up and take me back
Don’t let me keep on walking…
Walking on broken glass
Walking on walking on broken glass” – Annie Lennox
SING IT, ANNIE! – link to youtube.com
“SING IT, ANNIE”
If only she could.
Thank you Phil. And thank you Sin Nombre.
Ditto. Phil concudes: “Let my (American) people go.” I like to think Phil means
non-jewish Americans too. BTW, with both jewish and christian holidays coming
up, it’s been my experience among solely gentile gatherings that either you don’t
bring up the subject of Israel and our foreign policy at all, and if you do, you are
met with blank stares or a very shallow version of its the USA’s duty to aid Israel
and (devolving down quickly to: the Palestinians are just “sand niggers,” or “camel jockeys,” or “terrorists.”
Also, I get mass emails from a group consisting of my High School graduating class
members–they had a reunion every few years (I never attended). Every
article of a political nature in any way involving Israel forwarded to me by any of these members has always taken as minimum the axiom Israel is right and our total support of it is the only
patriotic way to think. The few times I responded to a sender by forwarding an
article in any way implying such a POV should at least be questioned was met by
a short request demanding I “take me off your list.”
Tracy has Gentile company even if they have no contact with Jews at all.
Marty’s a cranky man, “my uncle”.
J Street has a productive approach.
You have to hear the tape. In reading Phil’s description of the words spoken, I wasn’t as sympathetic to his characterization.
As long as we are doing music and occupation. Here is one by the great Marcel Khalife with lyrics by Darwish:
link to youtube.com
No, it’s much much more about social orthodoxy, and to a certain extent, perceived self-interest.
Bullseye. Part of the reason that I find Peretz so revolting is his blind loyalty to his sphere of interests, which does not include the entire field of ‘The Jews’, nor exclude like-minded, well-heeled Gentiles. Since Phil has set the obscenity-laced precedent, I’ll say that Peretz really couldn’t give a fuck about anybody outside of his group of 2%-ters. We could all be ground to dust as far as he is concerned, so long as there is a clear benefit to him. He is content to sit behind the protective barrier of his intellectual, economic moat, screeching from the turret, suffering a mental breakdown whenever a dissenting viewpoint (even one as neutered as Ben-Ami’s) reaches his ears. I’ll more or less repeat my comment from the other thread on this point: Ben-Ami is no knight in shining armour, more like the court eunuch. Never once, that I recall, did he challenge a substantive point made by Peretz or other Zionist aparatchiks. For example, when prominent rabbi so-and-so supported the Gaza ‘war’, and Ben-Ami did not, this was just a difference of opinion between reasonable people, as Ben-Ami spun it. I am less and less convinced that ‘change will come from within’. Israel will change only when the Irish, Norwegians, and sympathetic Americans put enough pressure on Israel directly through sanctions, and make it uncomfortable for politicians to continue to offer uncritical support.
marc b, I tend to agree with you here. Any effective pressure must incude those such
as you name from the outside, as distinguished from airing dirty Jewish laundry in
the closet. Given the nearly instant “self-hating jew” and “anti-semite” charge, it’s
helpful to see more and more people ditching both jewish guilt and white guilt, just
as more African Americans are ditching the slur “Uncle Tom.”
Citizen, you can’t have both “white guilt” and “Jewish guilt”. After all, Jews are not white. Please don’t tell me they are, I’ve had enopugh disappointment today. And if I start stressing (Yiddish for worrying) over it, I’ll get all constipated, like Portnoy’s father.
Where is my Monkey?
…well put. It was a bland debate. But Ben-Ami , while no knight of the round table, might be working on his sea legs. J Street is growing and he probably didn’t want to cross the line and lose Jewish philanthropy to his cause. Peretz set the trap and wanted Ben Ami to get caught. I think Peretz lost the fight, he was in the final rounds shadow-boxing himself.
Oh, and another thing. He is a complete f’ing racist. Peretz’s dismissive comment that there isn’t a Muslim country in the world where you would want to raise a child is repulsive supremacist drivel. I can think of a few predominantly Muslim countries that I would choose as my family’s place of residence over ‘the only democracy in the Middle East’, and could add a few more, such as Lebanon, which I would prefer if Israel could restrain itself from its ongoing destabilization campaign and bi-annual bombing runs.
You know, I wrote a comment in defense of J Street a few days ago, but I’m now inclined to retract it after hearing this interview. I’m surprised you didn’t point out the most egregious part of the exchange. For me, it wasn’t anything Peretz said. He was just mechanically regurgitating well-known talking points. Unsurprising. The truly disheartening moment for me was when Peretz recounted his textbook Zionist history of Arab “rejection” and Ben-Ami was asked to comment. He could have easily said something like “Well, we don’t have time to delve into the historical record, but I will say that Marty’s picture is quite simplified and a number of respected Israeli historians would take issue with the categorical statements he makes.” But instead he said that Peretz “has it spot on, in terms of history.”
I’m down with pragmatic ambiguity and tactical omission. But I can’t countenance an active distortion of history, even if the means justify the ends. I thought Ben-Ami was above that.
Matt, I had your response in mind after listening to the radio show and didn’t realize that reply-wise I was still logged into Mooser’s “social orthodoxy” … So my response above was actually meant to be here.
I think Ben-Ami was very good and did well to not confront a stuttering Marty Peretz too hard.
Oh, sorry LeaNder. That’s why I found your reply to my comment a little distressing. I should have realised you were inadvertantly on the wrong thread. It’s not like it hasn’t happened to me!
But never, ever forget that! The Jewish narrative can be seized by anyone who has the chutzpah, the energy and the resources. There is no test for orthodoxy, heterdoxy, heresy, no doctrinal process. Please try and realise the consequences of this, especially when the narrative is in the hands of a guy like Peretz, or even Bon (hasn’t scratched yet) Ami.
Oh Matt, are you tired of “the lack thereof” arguments also? Silence and accommodation for opponents is no way to distinguish yourself as an alternative.
On the subject of Marty I got a big kick out of this article from TPM Cafe –
“A JEW HATER IN THE WHITE HOUSE LEADING OBAMA ASTRAY”
Teaser –
“It could happen to me. I think I’m starting to develop a Yiddish accent (strange for a third generation American) and I keep playing Al Jolson records. Is this how it started for Marty?”
LOL
Marty’s comments remind me of a Radio Havana show I heard decades ago. Castro was asked about why Cuba didn’t allow voices critical of communism to be heard. In essence, his argument was the same as Marty’s. That such criticism was obviously “wrong” and Cuba had the right – and responsibility – to suppress what was “wrong.” Such has always been the argument against the free press. Fortunately, Marty’s kingdom is small if not uninfluential.
Cuba is under a blockade. In the old days partisans of a blockade were given a ride out of town in a trebuchet. Cuba’s “critical voices” should count themselves lucky.
Both of them need to work out their debate skills. Peretz, toward the end, couldn’t seem to offer any constructive criticism of Israel, or what value Israel is worth to the US. He waited for Ben-Ami to trip over his words – you could sense his shaky dialogue. I give him credit, since this topic rarely gets debated. Peretz set the trap and Ben Ami almost walked into it. Too bad the trap wasn’t reversed, God only knows there are a ton of triggers.
Peretz could never win this debate. He was stuttering, which was a sign of his nervousness and his lack of depth in response to his knee jerk answers we’re all to sick of. Chomsky could fart better responses and win a debate against him speaking, and he’s 10 years older.
This is progress though. I stopped listening to NPR about 2 years ago -got tired of their boring issues, although Tom Ashbrook is a skilled at engaging dialogue.
When the last caller asked what Israel gives us, when we provide them with such support, neither of them had a good response. Then I thought, what the hell do they offer us, besides fakclempt aggravation? Oh the horror…
Pingback: Marty Peretz bridles at being called ‘an elder’