At the Daily Beast, Indiana University’s Shaul Magid is justly angered by the censorship of a non-Zionist youth group’s event at the 14th Street Y and asks why it is a heresy to oppose the two-state solution. I would put Magid, a legendary scholar of Jewish studies, in a growing camp that includes David Shulman– thoughtful people with status who have begun to question what Zionism is doing to the Jewish soul, and the Palestinian soul too. I’m referring to Shulman’s piece in the New York Review of Books preparing American Jews for the one state future.
Magid surely misrepresents Jewish Voice for Peace in this excerpt– JVP has not endorsed a one-state solution. [Update-- I am told that Daily Beast has fixed the errors.] But he makes an important point I’ve always wondered about: 25 years ago you were considered a heretic for supporting the two state solution. So who is the heretic now? Paradigms change like the weather:
Someone should write a history of the two-state solution. This is not only because it is an interesting and important idea, but because it has moved so quickly in Jewish circles from being anathema to being a dogma of the Jewish mainstream.
The less likely the reality of two-states, the more it becomes a dogma… The more we believe it will never happen, the more we claim that it must and that anyone who claims otherwise is outside the mainstream and thus illegitimate. The absurdity of the two-state dogma among mainstream American Jews (according to Tertullian all dogmas are “absurd”) showed itself in the Y’s treatment of JVP.
It is true that JVP supports a one-state solution, that is, a liberal democratic Israel where all citizens are treated equally and given full rights supported by a constitution; kind of like the United States (flaws notwithstanding). What is ironic about this is that JVP is not the only Jewish group against two states…. [Magid mentions all the rightwingers]
Would “mainstream Jewish groups” deny groups supporting settlers access to Jewish communal space because they “do not endorse a two-state solution”? One would hardly think so.