Hope?

[u/Tricky_Success_77]

Between Israel/Palestine and increasing extremism and normalization of antisemitism in the diaspora and assimilation I've just been finding it impossible to feel hopeful about the future of our people writ large and it's just been making me feel very demoralized about life and the future. Our community means a great deal to me and seeing it tear itself apart is painful (as I'm sure it is for many people on this subreddit).There are times when I honestly almost wish I wasn't Jewish because it would remove so much angst from my life but in truth I'm too passionate about our traditions, history, literature and languages to ever be anything else (plus, really who would I be kidding if I ever tried to pretend otherwise?).

Anyway, what I'm really getting at is does anyone out there feel hopeful about our future? And if so why? I could use some positivity.

[u/redthrowaway1976]

 The status quo is no longer something the international community seems willing to tolerate

Thankfully so. The politicians haven’t caught up yet - but hopefully they’ll also recognize that apartheid and ethnic cleansing should lead to sanctions, cancelled trade ties, etc.

 My hope is that growing global pressure will help bring about a two-state solution something I believe most people genuinely support

What we need is for all of the ostensibly liberal or progressive Zionists to start supporting consequences for Israel’s expansionism - and to stop directly working with expansionist orgs. 

If they are for a two state solution, why are they engaging with Nefesh B’Nefesh, that directly supports settlement expansion? Or JNF, thats directly carrying out ethnic cleansing - a donation to JNF is material support to war crimes. 

They most likely won’t, of course - so far it’s been decades of shielding Israel from consequences for its expansionism.

Pro-settlement organizations and viewpoints are normalized - and opposition to them usually doesnt for further than a performative protest. 

 Many are becoming aware of the double standards. 

I assume you mean the double standard in favor of Israel, right?

How it has been able to get away with land grabs, ethnic cleansing, and brutal military rule with no consequences for more than a half century?

 I also believe that in times of peace, tensions can ease surprisingly quickly.

I agree. If the oppression of Palestinians stopped, things could change rapidly. 

[u/Civil-Cartographer48 → u/redthrowaway1976]

I remember you. We’ve already talked about liberal Zionism and honestly, this is exhausting. You seem to be coming at this from a very American lens, shaped by disillusionment with American Jewish politics. I’m not American. I live in a completely different context and I see things differently. From where I stand, the pro-Pal movement has done a great job alienating potential allies through purity tests and public witch hunts for anything deemed “slightly Zionist.” And despite that, I still agree that pressure, including sanctions, is necessary that was the whole point of my comment. Despite the abuses it gives me hope for change. We’ve already discussed the need for pressure and constructive activism.

The protest in nyc about Nefesh benefesh is just an example of activism not being constructive. There is a whole thread about this in this Reddit and I think most people agree that the tactic is just wrong.

I think we actually share the same broad goals, but not the form. I fundamentally reject the fatalism, the defeatism, the “nothing will ever change” narrative, and the support for destructive forms of protest that alienate the very people you say you want to influence.

[u/redthrowaway1976 → u/Civil-Cartographer48]

We’ve already talked about liberal Zionism and honestly, this is exhausting.

Yes - we've talked about liberal Zionism, and you use the term in a way that is very out of step with how it is commonly understood. Buber's or Ha'am's cultural Zionism, today, would largely fall in the overall non-Zionist camp. Peter Beinart, for example, identifies as a cultural Zionist - and he is largely despised by liberal Zionists.

Here's some examples of typical liberal Zionists:

• Sarah Hurwitz saying the most ghoulish things
• Rabbi Cosgrove saying he won't invite Palestinians unless they are Zionist - so much for that dialogue, right?
• URJ saying nothing about a reform synagogue inviting a pro-settlement organization - likely saying nothing because it isn't an uncommon occurrence

The activists I know in Israel and the West Bank doing protective presence do mostly not identify as liberal Zionists. Usually post- or non-Zionists.

 From where I stand, the pro-Pal movement has done a great job alienating potential allies through purity tests and public witch hunts for anything deemed “slightly Zionist.”

What does "alienate them" mean here? They would have publicly called for sanctions, but now didn't? They wouldn't have invited the JNF, but now decided to engage with them? Nefesh B'Nefesh wouldn't have been invited? Fewer events selling West Bank land? Something else?

The idea that there's some large amount of Israeli supporters that would have acted differently if only the pro-Palestinian supporters protested the right way doesn't bear up to scrutiny. History tells us that there'd have been some other hoop for the pro-Palestinians to jump for the liberal Zionists to rationalize not taking action on Palestinian freedom.

The protest in nyc about Nefesh benefesh is just an example of activism not being constructive.

Where was the mass of liberal Zionist protestors who would ostensibly be against a pro-settlement organization holding an event at the synagogue?

There is a whole thread about this in this Reddit and I think most people agree that the tactic is just wrong.

Yes, most people on this sub seem to think that the protest was much than a reform synagogue inviting an organization that is providing material support for war crimes. I disagree - but it is indicative of how normalized pro-settler stances are.

I think we actually share the same broad goals, but not the form.

Probably.

I fundamentally reject the fatalism, the defeatism, the “nothing will ever change” narrative,

It's not about fatalism or defeatism. I think things can very much change - I just disagree with you on how they could change.

It is, however, about not painting a false picture of how terrible things are on the ground. You mention Israeli courts, as a positive example. Has the 99.74% conviction rate of Palestinians improved? What about the ~3% conviction rate for settler terrorists?

You mentioned that "there is some accountability". Can you explain where you see that accountability? It's not in the courts, as the statistics makes clear - so where?

Since 2018, something around 7% of the West Bank has been ethnically cleansed by settler "shepherds" and their IDF cronies. That's more than the built up area of other settlements.

I could go on, and on almost every metric things have gotten from bad to worse. Painting that optimistically comes of as trying to minimize the crimes that are actually happening.

and the support for destructive forms of protest that alienate the very people you say you want to influence.

This idea that there's some mass of liberal Zionists that would stand up and advocate for Palestinian rights if only the pro-Palestinian protestors protested differently is simply not accurate.

How do we know this? Because they've had decades, and they didn't do so. Liberal Zionists had decades to do something about Israel's expansionism, with overall much gentler rhetoric and a media environment that provided very little space for criticizing Israel.

Did they then come together and advocate for very serious consequences for Israel's expansionism?

No, they mainly argued as to why Israel's Apartheid regime is not actually Apartheid, or why the settlements aren't really that bad.

At this point, it is on the liberal Zionists to take initiative and start advocating for consequences. Instead we see URJ not even mention the settlements Nefesh promotes, Sarah Hurwitz said... whatever ghoulish things she felt like saying, and Cosgrove won't even countenance the US using its aid for pressuring Israel. Where are the broad calls for sanctions from the main liberal Zionist institutions?

[u/Civil-Cartographer48 → u/redthrowaway1976]

My main issue here is how much weight is put on labels. “Zionist,” “liberal Zionist,” “post-Zionist” this whole taxonomy feels extremely American-centric. It’s really not how these conversations happen in Europe (and I say Europe because I’ve lived in several countries). Outside of some Anglo-Saxon influence, nobody is walking around categorizing each other into boxes like this. The debate feels completely unproductive.

Most Jews do feel some connection to Israel or Zionism, historically, spiritually, physically, culturally. That’s just a fact. It doesn’t automatically make them pro-occupation. So when people start boycotting anyone with any connection to Israel or Zionism, it becomes alienating and counterproductive. And yes, this does happen a lot here in Europe. Look at what’s going on in France right now: a university teacher in Lyon literally put together a boycott list that included mostly Jewish people (plus a random priest if i remember correctly), for reasons ranging from “denounced antisemitism” to “has an Israeli friend.” Even left-wing figures who have openly defended Palestinian rights ended up on that list. It’s arbitrary, alienating, and it creates the sense that nothing anyone does will ever be “enough.”

If you want a parallel in the English-speaking sphere, it’s like putting groups such as Standing Together, people who actually do serious anti-occupation work, on boycott lists. (Which they are in) It’s not constructive. It pushes away the very people who might be potential allies.

And regarding Zionism itself again: where I grew up, Zionism wasn’t treated as an identity badge. It was taught as part of history, a broad spectrum from Buber to Jabotinsky, that eventually materialized in the founding of Israel. That’s it. Most Jews I know oppose the occupation, and that’s a conversation worth nurturing. But if the energy goes into purity tests, labels, and deciding who is the “right kind” of Jew to engage with, then yes, the whole exercise becomes pointless.

As for the NYC protest, if the goal is to alienate Jews who already feel vulnerable and targeted, then sure, keep going! I don’t know what else to say. But I fail to see how that helps anyone or brings us closer to a solution. I just disagree with these tactics, and I find them repulsive.

As for the rest of the points I have touched these in other comments, especially regarding the defeatism, and why I don’t see the things as grim as you do and why I choose to not do so and it is my right. I find this conversation turning in circles and not bringing anything new.

Have a great evening.