Zionism’s challenge to the Jews of privilege

Ezra Klein’s attempt to manufacture a divide in the Jewish community says something very important about liberalism, progressivism, and Zionism.

"Ezra Klein in 2020" by Irn is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.

The New York Times’ ongoing attempt to divide the Jewish community continued apace with a recent article by professional progressive hand-wringer Ezra Klein (I don’t link to systemically antisemitic publications), which falsely claims that the Jewish community is already divided.

Klein asserts that Jews, especially young Jews, are running away from their community’s pro-Israel consensus because of reasons, mostly having to do with the standard cliches of anti-Israel defamation.

He presents more or less zero evidence that this is the case, beyond the existence of astroturfed organizations like “Jews for Mamdani” that run interference for antisemites like New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. Such organizations, needless to say, are decidedly not part of the Jewish consensus.

Indeed, Klein probably knows this, since if he didn’t, he would never have felt the need to write his article in the first place. Nor would the Times feel the desperate need to drive a wedge into the Jewish community.

Nonetheless, Klein does manage to write one interesting thing: “For decades, American Judaism, built on the liberalism of the diaspora, has been interwoven with Zionism. What happens when the ideals of the one become incompatible with the reality of the other?”

For most American Jews, this is irrelevant. They are interested in fighting antisemitism, not quibbling over ideological abstractions. More interesting is what this statement says about Klein himself and the privileged Jewish upper class he represents.

Put simply, that upper class remains staunchly liberal and progressive while the rest of the community is heading in quite the opposite direction.

The objective evidence Klein does not cite appears to bear this out, such as a new study showing that Jewish students are not turning on Israel but quite the opposite: They are abandoning the antisemitic left in droves.

Another study showed strong Jewish support for many of the policies of the Trump administration. While generational loyalty to the Democrats may prevent outright political defection, these numbers are very telling indeed.

In other words, it is not Jews who are being alienated from Israel, but the Jews of privilege who are being alienated from the rest of the community.

I have already written extensively about this alienation on the part of privileged Jews like Thomas Friedman and others. And Klein, inadvertently, points us toward its source: The privilege such Jews enjoy—and the rest of us don’t—insulates and shelters them from the reality of antisemitism. As a result, they have the luxury of indulging in abstract musings on whether Zionism properly comports with liberalism and progressivism.

This points to something very important: Privileged Jews inevitably privilege liberalism and progressivism over Zionism and, indeed, Judaism itself. Whenever the two contradict each other—and at times they do—it is always liberalism and progressivism that must prevail no matter what. For privileged Jews, liberalism and progressivism are and must be an ideological tyrant.

The reason is that privileged Jews believe that liberalism and progressivism are key to their privilege. Without them, they would be cast out of a rarified world dominated by non-Jews.

They would be forced to face the fact that they are just like all the other Jews, stuck in the tribe like the rest of us, and subject to the same historical destiny. They would have to acknowledge that, for the Jews, Diaspora privilege means nothing, because that privilege can always be withdrawn at the whim of the non-Jewish majority.

As a result, Zionism must always be deemed wanting, because while Zionism does not negate liberalism or progressivism, it constitutes a challenge to and a critique of it.

Zionism, faced with the reality of overwhelming non-Jewish power, ultimately concluded that liberalism and progressivism are not enough. For the Jews, there can never be a true liberalism or progressivism outside of a Jewish state. It is only when the Jews are a majority with the powers of the majority that any non-Jewish ideology—however admirable or desirable—can be genuinely realized.

This is not pleasant for liberals and progressives to contemplate, but it has the virtue of acknowledging reality. It assesses the world we live in and reaches conclusions that, while uncomfortable, are eminently logical and pragmatic. Liberal and progressive values, Zionism posits, are all perfectly well; but for the Jews, if they are to be more than bitter hypocrisy, a Jewish state is required.

Such realism, however, is the province of non-privileged Jews, because they have no choice but to embrace it. For the non-privileged, the horrors of life must be faced if we are to survive. For the privileged, safe behind the walls, other possibilities can be contemplated, and the delusions inherent can be embraced because, for a time, such delusions come at no cost.

But eventually, as Klein will discover, there will be a cost, and it might very well be a heavy one. When Mamdani is elected—and he will be—a great many privileged Jews will discover this along with Klein. By that time, however, it may be too late.

Nonetheless, all this may have one silver lining. Klein and his privileged brethren will be forced to ask: What are these glorious liberal and progressive ideals really worth? Can they be as superior as they claim if they take everything from the Jews and give nothing in return? Can they be so admirable if they betray precisely those who have most fervently held to them? Who have held to them even at the cost of abandoning their own tribe, when it is that tribe, and only that tribe, that can save them?