A few dozen self-appointed left-wing zealots closed down Walnut Street for an hour on Tuesday, under the banner of the deceptively-named Jewish Voice for Peace.
It is not a “Jewish voice.” It is a voice of very few Jews, it is opposed by most Jewish organizations, and it is not for “peace.” It is for one-sided surrender by the state of Israel. And it lies about “genocide,” which has a legal definition that does not fit what is happening in Gaza, despite the tragic loss of life.
The key thing to know about Jewish Voice for Peace, aside from its having an outlandishly large voice, is that it, by its own admission on its own website, is anti-Zionist.
And since Zionism is the expression that the Jewish people are entitled to their own homeland, if you oppose that, you oppose the existence of Israel.
Anti-Zionist = Anti-Israel.
Despite its attempts to wiggle away from that simplicity, it remains the truth. If you oppose Zionism, you oppose Israel.
One could further expand the equation to Anti-Israel = Anti-Semitism, but that is not always true and I consider the charge of anti-Semitism, like racism, to be so toxic I am loath to use it without certainty.
Jewish Voice for Peace, which I’ll call JVP from here on, had revenue of $3.2 million in its 2019 IRS filing, the latest one I could find, listing 34 employees and 1,000 volunteers. The NGO Monitor website was able to uncover some of its financial foundation support, including left-wing philanthropies run by the Rockefeller brothers and George Soros.
JVP was founded in 1996 by a couple of left-wing students at Berkeley, one of America’s most radical campuses, and one of its primary ambitions is to isolate Israel through the BDS movement — Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions.
I oppose BDS for two reasons: First (leaning on Saul Alinsky’s rules for radicals) it targets only Israel, it freezes it, personalizes it, and polarizes it for human rights abuses.
Never mind China, Russia, Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Burma, Eritrea, Libya, etc. JVP has no interest.
Why?
It often falls back on the Jewish admonition of (in Hebrew) tikkun olam or “heal the world,” but defines the “world” as one nation — Israel.
Which is not to say Israel has never crossed a line, or conducted itself improperly or illegally. It has, and when it does, I am embarrassed. So I criticize the government — Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu is an obstacle to peace — but I don’t question Israel’s right to exist any more than I question France’s.
Second, JVP presents so-called “human rights abuses” without any explanatory context.
This is widespread when it comes to reporting about Israel. It is persistent, perhaps rooted in ignorance, perhaps in bias.
Just the other day, the AP carried a story about the current displacement of Gazan Palestinian Arabs, harkening back to a displacement of Palestinian Arabs before and during Israel’s 1948 War of Independence when it was attacked by five Arab nations sworn to destroy the infant state. The story starts out talking about “mass expulsion” of Arabs, which is not true, then moderates to “fled or were driven out.”
The latter gets closer to the truth, that an estimated 700,000 Arabs were displaced.
Two things not said: First, the war was launched by the Arabs and the Israelis were vastly outnumbered and were fighting for their very existence. The Arabs lost and there are always consequences for the losing side.
Second, during the same time, an estimated 700,000 Jews were expelled from, or fled, Muslim Arab nations around the Mideast.
The same number of refugees on both sides. But the Jewish expulsions from Arab lands, which is the definition of anti-Semitism, are rarely mentioned.
One difference in the outcome: Israel took in every single displaced Jew, while the Arab world allowed the Arab refugees to rot in refugee camps, where they remain today.
So JVP is very selective in its outrage.
Of the dozens of human rights violators, JVP selects only one, the Jewish one. Not a Christian one, not a Muslim one, only a Jewish one.
Hmm.
So maybe I can’t say JVP are all self-hating Jews, but I can say they are anti-Israel and everything they say and do should be seen in that light. People who would deny their own place in the world are deeply disturbed.
I don’t think most people realize how tiny Israel is in comparison to the countries around them, and how completely surrounded they are by people who want to destroy them. I would suggest that a quick study of a map of the region is in order. It is quite eye-opening.
I don’t think. Period. There, fixed it. Too verbose.
lol
I would love to be able to post pix on Word Press. It is a crappy platform.
Well, Stu, if they weren’t anti-Israel Jews, they would feel a lot less important. Rando’s against Zionism aren’t particularly special–but Jews, now that’s something! See how brave, objective, and selfless they are. Plus, they are very useful to fend off charges of antisemitism. Generalized do-gooders are a dime a dozen. Why worry about the real ethnic cleansing being carried out by Arab militias against the Black population in Darfur? Of course, it’s got to focus on Israel. How else could they become celebrated and embraced by folks who want to kill their cousins? On what basis could they raise money? From a marketing standpoint, it’s a great hook.
I’m not saying they are grifters or insincere, but there is a psychological payoff. “Radical Chic” will never die.
👍
It’s bad enough to be surrounded by people who hate you and your country. But to have your own people in that camp is anathema.
As a Jew I have low concern for these kinds of protests and the ones on college campuses. I am far more concerned about Trump and his statement that American Jews who do not vote Republican are not loyal. Along with his willingness to embrace Christian Nationalism and his refusal to disavow White Supremacists. Along with his elected acolytes who do the same.
I guess there are crazy people in all Nationalities and religions !
Irish Catholic here, so speaking from a somewhat non-involved position, but Stu, you mention something that’s greatly puzzled me throughout the current conflict: “the Arab world allowed the Arab refugees to rot in refugee camps, where they remain today.” You are speaking of a past conflict, but I’ve been puzzled by it happening in the present one. Why are the regional Arab countries not opening their doors to aid their brothers and sisters who they feel are being unjustly attacked as worth no more consideration than “collateral damage”?
Why don’t those countries open their doors with “temporary visas” to those who are starving and suffering right next door to them? The United States, by virtue of its support of Israel’s fight, is being held as responsible for the suffering of those people as Israel, but we’re over 5,000 miles away!
Why aren’t the bordering Arab countries setting up safe refugee camps for the duration, even if only with a strict understanding that those refugees would return through an open door to return once Israel and Hamas are done dealing with each other? Israel certainly wouldn’t oppose it — as long as provisions kept Hamas personnel from simply using the refugee accommodations as safe “base camps” for a relaunch of their attacks afterward? While difficult to structure, at least some reasonable provision could be made to keep Hamas from simply using such accommodations as a safe zone for setting up future attacks.
As noted, Irish Cath background here, so I may be a bit out of touch, plus I’ve got a Peace Studies and nonviolence training background of decades which leans me toward seeking such “peace loopholes” as suggested here…
… but it HAS puzzled me.
Michael J. McFadden
Peace Studies Graduate
Philadelphia, PA
You couod ask the Arabs, but you won’t get a straight answer. I will try. First, understand the UN has TWO refugee agencies — UNHCR that deals with ALL refugees, usually short term, and UNWRA, which deals ONLY with Palestinians. Yes, they have their own commission and they have been refugees longer than any other modern group.
At the time of the 1948 War of Independence, some 700,000 Arabs either left Israel (to get out of the way of invading Arab armies) or were forced out by Israel. What few mention is about 700,000 Jews were forced out of Arab lands and EVERY SINGLE ONE was taken in by Israel.
Why didn’t the Arabs do the same? Many Arab nations fear them as trouble makers. Wherever Yasir Arafat went, trouble followed. OR they liked keeping the refugee camps to give Israel a black eye, (There are no camps in Israel. ) or because they don’t want responsibility for them. Possibly other reasons, too. That is the broad outline.
Thanks for the response Stu. It truly is a puzzler how the Arab countries down there seem to be refusing to anything at all to help solve the horrible conditions the Arab refugees are in. They don’t have to construct a massive artificial boat=docking platform and carry it 5,000 miles away to set up. And I’m sure Israel would LOVE to be able to have it certified that they are NOT seeking to or have any desire to kill innocent Arabs in Rafah for anywhere else, They’re after those Arab gangs (Hamas etc) who have attacked them, just as the US would quickly be sending troops into Mexico if drug cartels were attacking/kidnapping folks in California and Texas while the Mexican government said, “Hey! Don’t blame US! It’s the drug gangs and we can’t control them!
Would we REALLY just sit here and let it continue or would we pick the means with the least loss of American life (i.e. by using our military weapons) in wiping out those drug gangs ourselves after warning the innocent Mexicans in the gang-city areas to leave because we’d be attacking the gangs’ headquarters specifically “hidden” under civilian towns.
It’s not a perfect parallel of course, but I think its essence and variations upon it can help with thinking but the situation by removing the emotive elements that both sides often have in intense arguments so they can better see and sympathize with the “other” side.
– MJM