I don’t understand why the LA Times runs stuff like this. Stanley Gold is the head of a group that is all for diversity in Israeli society, which sounds good, so am I. Its bugaboo is ultra-Orthodox power, which is transforming Israeli culture. Here is his piece in the LA Times:
Privileging a small minority with state funding and granting them disproportionate influence over rituals related to marriage, conversion and other aspects of daily life run completely counter to principles embodied in Israel’s Declaration of Independence, which says that "the state of Israel … will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex." For decades, the politicians who are dependent on ultra-Orthodox blocs of voters have sanctioned and supported a system that not only benefits a minority of Israelis but is a serious detriment to Israel’s social and economic fabric. That is morally repugnant.
This piece is not helpful. Yes these are real issues and important tensions inside Israeli society. They are why the seculars are fleeing to the Upper West Side to pursue the American dream.
But how does it serve an American readership to be told that this is The Issue of diversity in Israeli society; it doesn’t. Gold is a Beverly Hills businessman and an Israel lobbyist in good standing. He obviously cares about what Israel is becoming. But how can you talk seriously about the Israeli Declaration of Independence without pointing out its vast hypocrisy with respect to Palestinians? It would be like running a piece during Jim Crow era saying that the big tension in southern society is a class tension between white industrial workers and the wealthy factory owners. I’m sure there were real tensions like that back then. How important were they next to racial segregation?
The issue in Israel is, It’s not a democracy. They would never elect Barack Obama, though their religious/ethnic minority– Palestinians– makes up 20 percent of the population (and Obama’s minority here is only 15 percent or so). And the proof of this is simple. The Jewish parties refuse to negotiate with Arab parties and make them part of their coalitions. When push comes to shove, the Orthodox and the secular Jews get together. The Jewish secular parties would rather make a ruling combination with rightwing religious parties than EVER give power to an Arab party. That’s how Barak did it in 1999. It’s how Netanyahu did it this year. They take rightwing Jewish splinter groups in but never a Palestinian party. Has the LA Times ever done a story about that?
P.S. My tipster completely disagrees with me. John writes:
Stanley Gold has revealed another aspect of Israeli society (and the Jewish
community) which is little understood by average Americans. The article is
excellently written and I commend the author for his honest reporting of how
ultra-Orthodox fundamentalists (Haredim) in Israel are affecting policy out
of all proportion to their numbers, just like religious fundamentalists in
the U.S. are doing. When you read that 2/3rds of ultra-Orthodox men don’t
work and are subsidized by the state of Israel to the tune of $1.3 billion a
year, it casts a new light on where all those billions which Uncle Sam gives
Israel are actually going. Then you find out that Israel is financing a
separate bus system for the Haredim because they want to avoid other
people!?. Gold finishes his column by saying that funding of this small
minority has created a "serious detriment to Israel’s social and economic
fabric" that is "morally repugnant" (my paraphrasing might be a bit off
here).
I think your tipster has a point. One commentator I recently heard declared that Iran should not have nukes because they are “religious fanatics.” It would be helpful to the cause of peace to point out that Israel is not only chock-full of religious fanatics, their religious-fanatic parties constitute a large bloc in the government.
Most Americans have a strong attachment to the notion of the separation of church and state. During the 1960 election, JFK had to battle a pervasive suspicion that he would turn out to be a proxy for the Pope. I don’t think Americans* would be happy to learn that the MKs from Shas vote at the dictate of the rabbi Ovadia.
* except for the Christofacists, who would like nothing better than to install a similar regime in the US.
John’s point does not in the least detract from Phil’s piece; of course Americans know
little about Phil’s “Big Satan” or John’s “Little Satan,” neither of this de facto Israeli Golem nor some
muddy sum of its parts.
I see at least three elephants in this story, although I agree that any insight into Israeli society is important.
Big elephant: Equality for Palestinians.
Medium elephant: Secular Amercian Zionists may go on an on about the ultra-Os in Israel, but they do not want separation of church and state in Israel (as much as they insist on it in the US), because then it would no longer be an ethno-religious state.
Little elephant: There is a lot of prejudice, hatred and intolerance in Israel toward the ultra-Os (and vice versa). There are legitimate issues on both sides, but also deep cultural and ideological differences and a lot of animosity. Of course part of the problem is that it is hard to be a partial bigot, hating only some people who aren’t “like us”, but not others.
Agree. I also see a side elephant.
In the US, an opinion such as this would be attacked as anti-semitic if it wasn’t coming from Jews with a strong attachment to Israel. It wouldn’t even see the light of day. Even more so if the opinion was addressing the greater problem of religious freedom and equality for non-Jews in Israel, and arguing for the same separation of church and state that we take such pride in here.
In Israel, the ultra-Os milk the anti-Semitism angle for all it’s worth – because they are the “true Jews”, and the secular Zionists are the “cossacks”. It’s an ironic twist.
My understanding was that the “anti-semitic” charge was thrown around by just about by everyone in Israel, just as often against other Israelis as against foreigners, to the point that it really had no meaning there, other than as an easy slur to toss out.
I can understand the Orthodox temptation to claim to be the “real Jews”. Some Fundamentalist Christians do the same thing vis-a-vis Christianity. And no one that I know claims to be Christian by ethnicity, or claims to be a Christian atheist, while the correlated claim is prevalent in Israel among those identifying as Jews.
Shmuel, your medium elephant may, in truth, be a mere antelop. Yes, the ziomericans may not really want a church/state separation isn israel – though they overwhelmingly want that in America. But they are also ignorant of just what that means in Israeli context. The jewish ultra-o’s of israel are nothing like the christian evangelist right, which is the american model of a powerful religious minority. The jewish version I think may be closer to radical islam both in fervor and militancy. they may be similar in thoughtlessness, but there’s a key difference I think in that the principle of forgiveness is embedded deeply in many christian schools of thought, often even fundamentalist ones. How much forgiveness is there among the israeli orthodox? Once the ziomericans realize that Israeli and american religious models diverged (with the latter having been somewhat “christianized”), that elephant may indeed become strangely light footed – enough for many to see it run for its life.
I’d, OTOH, increase the size of your “little” elephant. The increasing perception that across-the-board prejudice as a deep part of the israeli psyche – rings true, as you say, but it also looms larger and larger when it comes to ziomericans reluctance to admit that there’s a true split in values between their own country and Israel’s growing parochialism. At some point they’ll have to decide what’s more important to them – and that time is coming. Right now, I’d say this elephant is already reeking big time.
Thanks Danaa, I accept your changes to the herd.
Very interesting comment, Danaa.
Shmuel, you are correct to point out the layering of issues; I think that’s why some get so bogged down in the comments here sometimes, and tempers flare, because one person is addressing, without identifying, a certain layer of Israeli society/politics, and another is assuming a completely different focus. Your insights are welcomed.
From a perusal of the Hiddush website (Gold’s group) it obvious that their idea of “diversity” and “religious equality” only applies to Jews. There is absolutely no mention anywhere at the site that there are citizens of Israel who are not Jews or wanna-be Jews, and yet it claims to be for “religious freedom and equality” in Israel.
Frankly, the group merely illustrates the core problem of Israel and its apologists. In their world, those who are not Jews don’t count, whether in a discussion of Israeli “democracy” or when discussing religious freedom. Only Jews are important in the oxymoron that is “Jewish Democracy”.
From the group’s statement of purpose.
I’d be ashamed to be so blatantly obtuse as they so proudly declare.
I sort of agree with John here – mostly about the fact that Americans are not aware of the huge – and probably irrevocable – split between the religious and secular communities in Israel. And this has far deeper repercussions than people realize outside Israel, IMO, even in the short run. For one, when one adds the numbers of Hredi to the orthodox nationalist and to the plain religious (often Mizrahi) the numbers add up to a very substantial minority. According to recent polls, the number of students in elementary religious schools is already at 35% and approaching 45% in 10 years due to vastly disparate birth rates (of the “Jewish” not the Israeli total). Most of these children will grow up nurtured on biblical narratives of extreme prejudice and exceptionalism (a well known misinterpretation of the covenant, but that’s another subject). What this means is that chances for israel to address this split and move towards a separation of church and state are very slim. If anything the trend is in the opposite direction. It also means, as Phil says, that the trend of seculars (especially professionals) migrating out of israel will accelerate. Most significantly, as people said here, the divergence between american/western values and israeli ‘values” will only widen, until shmuel’s elephants will become impossible to ignore, seeing how they fill the entire room. In this sense Gold’s article, lamenting the growing influence of the haredi may only be partly cognizant of what’s really happening to israel, but he may indeed be perceiving a true elephantine growth spurt, if only dimly so.
As I understand Gold’s complaint, which I’ve seen before, it’s not so much about the Haredim as the fact that the Orthodox establishment in Israel doesn’t consider the members of Conservative or Reform Judaism to be Jews at all, let alone “religious” Jews. There is a lot of discrimination there. I once read a piece that said a Chief Rabbi of Israel actually spit on the doors of a Conservative synagogue and held his breath because of the odor of the devil there.
Now what I don’t get, being an atheist, is how a Conservative institution like Phil (I think it was Phil) described, with the flag of Israel up on the walls, can support a place where the head of the religion doesn’t even believe they belong to it. Someone converted by a Conservative rabbi would have their conversion rejected in Israel. I really can’t wrap my mind around the idea that someone whose religion means something to them could embrace a nation where it is spit on.
Potsherd – There are many issues that stick in the craw of non-O Zionists (including Army service, school curricula, participation in the workforce, state subsidies, religious coercion, etc.). For American non-O Zionists, the non-recognition of non-O rabbis, conversions, etc. is central (in Israel these movements are still marginal and little understood by the average secular Israeli).
One of the main problems in the cognitive dissonance you point out is once again the inherent contradiction in the concept “Jewish and democratic”. American Conservative and Reform Zionists want to have their cake and eat it too. For the most part, they are perfectly happy with a state religion in Israel and state interference in such matters as conversion and religious marriage. They just want a piece of that pie (to mix my dessert metaphors). I have had this conversation countless times with non-O Zionists:
Me: Why are you fighting for recognition of non-O marriage/conversion, instead of separating church and state and telling the state to butt out of such matters.
NOZ: But how will the state determine ‘who is a Jew’?
Me: That’s none of the state’s damn business.
NOZ: It is the state’s business, because the Law of Return grants citizenship only to Jewish immigrants.
Me: Exactly! Cancel the Law of Return.
NOZ: But then it wouldn’t be a Jewish state!?
Me: Exactly!
NOZ: Anti-Zionist!
Me: Thank-you.
A variation has me trying to convince NOZ that it is illogical and immoral to fight for the separation of church and state in the US while refusing to even contemplate such a separation in Israel.
There is an interesting mirror situation among the secular and moderate Muslim Arab diaspora: They are perfectly willing to cheer Hamas and Hezballah from the sidelines, but would never want to live in a country rules by either of those parties.
It seems to me that a lot of US Jews are eager to see a strict Orthodox regimen enforced in Israel, knowing they will never have to live under it. Tell them that they’re going to be forced to live there forever, not just take vacations or holiday trips, they might feel quite differently.
Potsherd – I don’t know about a lot. Some of the Orthodox minority, maybe more of the even smaller ultra-Orthodox minority. A point that Danaa has been making (I hope I’m not misrepresenting) is that the vast majority of American Jews really haven’t a clue about what things are really like in Israel, and if they did would be completely horrified. Those who are beginning to discover the truth (more and more, thanks to Bibi, Lieberman and others) are also beginning to distance themselves from the Zionist golem.
The poll that Phil referenced today shows that the growing split among US Jews wrt Israel is denominational – Orthodox vs Reform.
Your representation is accurate shmuel. And I continue to hold on to it, and would agree that the ignorance of the true state of affairs (on all levels) in Israel cuts across denominational lines. In fact, the intent to not know, seems to be the one commons thread tying all the jewish groups in the US together – from the most secular and least interested to the most orthodox and utterly interested. Maybe potsherd doesn’t realize just how common some perceptions of israel are, despite congregational differences.
Here’s another cute thought I just had – for a people who so pride themselves on being and promoting knowledge and letters far and wide, it’s truly ironic that so many would have united around a common theme of willful ignorance. That of matters supposedly so pertinent to their very identity. One of the things I found most amazing during my many years in the US is how uncurious jewish people become once they sense a less conventional or sugar coated view of their promised land. Of course, I make the exit from knowing real easy and not just by pronouncing the US as the true promised land of the jews (OK, I know, there are some other good lands, but america has been rather special in this respect).
Pingback: ‘LA Times’ runs piece by investor in Occupation without disclosing his interest