I’ve explored this question before, though not nearly with the depth that a thinker like Michael Walzer approaches the question. In this Dissent article (yes, I’m catching up with the Dissent copies next to my bed) he explores all the theories. Perspective of a history of cultural marginalism; practical necessity of a tolerant, open, liberal society; The powerful imagery of Exodus and the Passover traditions; The theological triumph of Hillel over Shammai; cultural values underscoring education and intellectualism; philosophies and theologies which do not shy away from ambiguity; communalism of closed communities; social identity; etc.
The end of the article raises a new question to my intellectual experience; namely the concern of Walzer that Jews may become a “banal minority.”
AT THIS point, I would like to make a more personal argument—that of a participant-observer in Jewish diaspora politics—in favor of the survival and continual re-invention of Jewish liberalism.
Writing in the 1950s, Hayim Greenberg warned that American Jews were in grave danger of becoming “merely an ethnic group in the conventional sense of the term. . . no more the Congregation of Israel, but only a group with a long and heroic history, with memories which, when cultivated, can arouse much justified pride (thus still not quite a mere banal minority) but without the consciousness of a specific drama and tension in its life.”
Many critics of diaspora Jewry would go further today and argue that the historic memories, since they are only rarely cultivated, are themselves fading and that we are indeed becoming a banal minority. The Jews are one more interest group, different from the others only in the obvious sense that our interests sometimes conflict with the others’—as is happening in the U.S. in the case of Jews and their relations with American blacks and Hispanics. Such conflicts can impose a certain transient unity on the different groups, but they are unlikely to revive heroic memories.
Walzer goes on to argue that Jewish neoconservatism embraces the interest group reduction, defending “only Jewish interests and not Jewish values,” resulting not only in the near totality of cultural assimilation, but the loss of an history. Food for thought.

38 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 15, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Tom Sebourn
The best people I have ever worked for were liberal Jews. I spent over a decade making myself and them money. They were the most honest, respectful and intelligent bosses a guy could have had.
They treated me like family and I was even invited to one of their weddings. If you have never been to a Jewish wedding, you should go if you get the chance.
Uzi and Israel, I hope you are doing well.
February 16, 2010 at 7:54 am
Randy
Also an interesting question in the context of the growth of the trend in recent years of young Jewish people being drawn back to the frum lifestyle and what affect that might have on the perception of their supposedly liberal orientation.
February 16, 2010 at 8:42 am
Anonymous
frum lifestyle?
February 16, 2010 at 10:40 am
Anonymous
Here is proof that the Star of David is secretly Satanic!
February 16, 2010 at 10:42 am
Anonymous
And here is proof that the Shroud of Turin prophecied Obama’s election.
February 16, 2010 at 11:12 am
suzy blah blah
last week, civil rights concert, bob and bama
February 16, 2010 at 11:24 am
Eric Kirk
Uh, yes anonymous – those videos are, um… informative.
February 16, 2010 at 12:49 pm
middle child
My experience with liberal Jews is the same as Tom’s. By and large great people; generous, caring, intelligent, socially conscience and incredibly family oriented. Throughout my life I have been greatly enriched by many associations; as neighbor, friend, lover, student and fan of the many fantastic artists and deep thinkers. Jewish culture is a rich and beautiful gift to the world.
That said, at times I find Israel’s treatment of their neighbors as abhorrent as any of Bush’s deadly and myopic foreign policy nightmares and I admit I am stunned at the pass some liberal Jew’s give to Israeli aggression. I’m not sure what to make of that contradiction and how it can be reconciled with the strong social justice ethic that is so central to liberal Jewish belief.
February 16, 2010 at 1:07 pm
anon
my bag of bacon bits predicts that donald duck is the next pope
February 16, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Eric Kirk
middle child – actually some of the harshest critics of Israel are Jewish – almost as if they have to prove themselves somehow.
February 16, 2010 at 1:22 pm
Randy
anon – frum= yiddish word for “pious” or “observant”
February 16, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Mitch
middle child,
Israel has been under attack since its founding. While Eric is correct that Jews are among the harshest critics of Israel, other Jews are extremely supportive of Israel.
You know those awful people who claim that singling out Israel as a problem state is anti-semitic? That’s me! Read some history, and then see if you still feel it is fair to compare Israel to the third reich.
February 16, 2010 at 4:14 pm
middle child
“almost as if they had to prove themselves somehow” I don’t think that’s fair Eric. Being critical of Israel’s conduct in its wars with Lebanon and recently in Gaza is hardly something you would do to “prove” yourself if you are a liberal Jew. It seems very consistent with liberal, social justice values everywhere. The wondering I expressed in my original post was that there was significant liberal Jewish-American silence and even support of behavior that would have been met with outrage if different players were involved. I find that confusing and disconcerting.
February 16, 2010 at 4:22 pm
middle child
Mitch,
Are you familiar with the term projection? Problem state, third reich?????? WTF are you talking about. You are arguing with someone but it isn’t me.
February 16, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Eric Kirk
Mitch – we’ve had many discussions on this topic, beginning with this post very early on during the 06 invasion of Lebanon. Unfortunately the link to a photo very damning of Hezbollah is broken, but there’s plenty of material in there.
http://kunsoo1024.wordpress.com/2006/07/24/why-i-probably-wont-participate-in-the-demonstrations-against-the-israeli-attacks-on-lebanon/
We’ve had many discussion since and I was forced to ban one persistent poster who insisted on equating Judaism with Zionism and made reference to his theory that they are trying to take over the world by pretending to be Semites (they’re really Khazars or Huns!). And I do think that there is a serious problem of anti-semitism in the anti-war movement as it stands.
That being said, I also think that Israel’s responses have often been extremely disproportionate. Rockets being lobbed over the border by fanatics should not result in the leveling of an entire city or country.
Coincidentally, one of my favorite articles on the subject was also written by Michael Walzer.
http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=557
February 16, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Not A Native
Wonder how Sharon, Netanyahu, and Lieberman were elected nationally by Jews who are predominately liberal?
I think the assumption that Jews are mostly liberal is false, a myth promulgated by Gentiles based on extrapolations from the assimilated Jews that they know about. Some observant Jews have suggested that streotyping Jews as liberal is a form of antisemitism, Israeli Jews are particularly senstitive to that characterization.
American Jews, being mindful they are a tiny minority, are less publically aroused by the stereotype, and some use it to their personal advantage. But within the few majority Jewish US communities that do exist, most openly say the label is prejudicial and at best just reflects Goyim ignorance
In my opinion, Jews conform to the political equation that Liberals are Conservatives who have been screwed over by the dominant powers and Conservatives are Liberals who have been mugged.
In the US, as a miniscule ethnic/cultural/religious group subject to discrimination, more Jews have fallen into the former group. But just like former SoHum”hippies”who’ve now become rednecks, US Jews are becoming more conservative(and assimilated) as their civil rights have expanded.
February 16, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Mitch
middle child,
You are right, I was putting words in your mouth. It’s cross-blog transference though, not projection.
Eric,
You, too, are right. Of course you don’t level a country in response to having some rockets lobbed over the border. Would that the United States could learn that.
February 16, 2010 at 7:50 pm
middle child
“Would that the United States could learn that.” Mitch, thanks for making my point so much more eloquently than I did. See how naturally criticism of U.S. behavior comes when that behavior is seen as aggressively inhumane and vindictive. Even when it is carried out in the name of “protecting the homeland”. That criticism is an appropriate liberal response (or anyone else concerned with social justice) whether it is carried out by the U.S. or Israel.
And yes, cross-blog transference is more accurate.
February 16, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Mr. Nice
That Mises dude was totally not liberal. What about Milton Friedman… hell, Ayn Rand. All those peeps were Jews.
This stereotype is dumb.
February 16, 2010 at 8:49 pm
Ben
I remember being called to join a picket line back in 1961 or so. We were picketing a dinner party being held at the Ambassador Hotel in LA. The party honored the House Committee on Unamerican Activities (spellcheck doesn’t recognize the word unamerican. That makes me really happy.) We were way out on Wilshire Blvd. and chanting and having a good time when I learned that the group feting the Committee members was a Jewish business association. I was floored. How could this be? Well, I was told, these guys are really rich and they don’t want anyone taking their money so they want to outlaw the Communist Party and probably the rest of us lefties. I was told to get used to it. Some Jews were right wingers. It was a huge lesson in political reality for me.
February 16, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Anonymous
Jews were excluded from the Rosenberg jury. They were guilty as sin but the trial was not an exercise in justice.
February 17, 2010 at 7:54 am
Mitch
middle child,
United States: The world’s superpower, which has had a grand total of one external terrorist attack on its homeland in its 200 year history, lashes out with “shock and awe” at the men, women, and children of two countries, one of which was uninvolved in the terrorist attack.
Israel: A speck of a country, largely populated by children and grandchildren of survivors of the European holocaust, formed along with Jordan by partition of the British colonial empire in Palestine, responds aggressively after decades of continuing terrorist attack. It TELEPHONES people in areas it will need to attack, because terrorists have hidden among the civilian population. When the UN asserts it is guilty of war crimes, it issues responses that include photographic evidence demonstrating that some of these crimes (such as the alleged aerial attack on a flour mill in Gaza) could not have taken place. The world’s journalists ignore the photographs.
February 17, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Unk John
Ben- let us not forget that Joe McCarthy had Roy Cohn as his top lawyer during his anti-commie heyday.
I don’t know if he was devout, but he was Jewish. He also prosecuted the Rosenbergs.
I think his parents were democrats and I also think he was as well, in the beginning. I don’t know for sure why I think that, I probably read it somewhere. One thing is for sure, he was a pig.
We can point out all the conservative Jews that we want, but that does not disprove Eric’s original statement. Not A Native makes a strong point in that direction, however.
Lastly, I would like to address Mitch. I don’t compare Israel to Nazi Germany, but I believe I can rightly point to them as a problem state. I have read the history and although I can agree that they have been under attack since their founding, it is also not unnoticed by me that they regained their promised land at the expense of people who had occupied that land for generations. Hundreds of generations. I wonder how people in this country would react if, for whatever reason, some body decides that people in the United States have to give their land and their property back to the Native Americans. After all, it used to belong to them.
I know it isn’t that simple. The situation is extremely complicated. But, when you get down to the basic problem, it is just that. People live somewhere, other people come in and with the support of someone with strength they take it over. People get pissed.
February 17, 2010 at 9:53 pm
Mitch
Unk John,
I agree. You’ve summarized the situation precisely. In fact, you may have summarized much of world history. It just seems to me that this dynamic is noticed a lot more in the case of Israel.
I would never try to justify Israel’s right to exist on the basis of Biblical occupancy. But I never lose sight of the fact that Israel was the world’s response to the holocaust. If the West were not racist, the Jewish state would now occupy Germany, not Palestine.
The world seems annoyed and surprised when the children and grandchildren of holocaust survivors insist on fighting back when the children and grandchildren of the displaced Palestinians fight for what was taken from them.
February 17, 2010 at 10:44 pm
Unk John
Mitch- true dat. I wish I had an answer,but that problem is sooo tough and I am not smart enough to figure it out. Some way, some how, someone’s got to find a way for all of their kids to grow up together.
How’s that for a pipe dream?
February 18, 2010 at 12:00 am
silence do good
I worked for one of the most liberal men ever, one Wolfgang Grajanka,I think I may have his last name spelled wrong,other wise known as Bill Graham. But tell me this ,would you all consider the rothchild’s of fleet st. liberal jews. why do we continue to support israel militarally when the rothcilds could easily foot the bill.
February 18, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Not A Native
Its just a suggestion, but I think what makes liberals in the US so uncomfortable about the Israeli/Palestinian situation is it seems to disprove a liberal socialist tenet: people have the innate ability to cooperate regardless of their acquired cultural/ethnic/religious behaviors. And furthermore, they are always better off when they do cooperate.
Israelis and Palestinians as a group don’t share the US angst. They viscerally know why their conflict is justified, and feel a need only for allies.
US liberals are really in denial of the reasons for ethnic conflicts that have lasted centuries throughout the world(when one faction hasn’t been totally annihilated). We continue to believe we can “uplift” foreign populations (often at gun point) to peace and reconcilliation. Its rather strange considering the racial and religious conflicts that have persisted in the US. And locally, who can see an end of the Humboldt culture war with both sides remaining standing?
February 18, 2010 at 9:09 pm
Unk John
I’m a bit confused by your statements, Not A Native. I probably would be considered, by more people than not, a liberal. However, I don’t believe anything near what you describe as a liberal socialist tenet, and I don’t know too many liberals that espouse our government policy of interference in the affairs of other countries. On the contrary, I think those policies are supported instead by more conservative types, which I see as falling into at least two categories: Them that got mucho bucks and want more, and them that ain’t got and don’t have the sense to know what the other group’s true incentives are.
Neither group fully understands the complete situation, mainly because they don’t care to spend the time to research the problem. Actually, the first group may have some understanding of the problem, but they will simply use it to further their agenda, which as I implied before has to do with money and power. The second group is, well… the second group.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not arrogant enough to say that I understand all the inner workings of the conflicts in that part of the world, but I feel quite confident in saying that our interference in their problems is not helpful to the people involved and it does not make me feel any safer.
February 19, 2010 at 7:10 am
Mitch
A few suggestions, NaN. People cooperate when they feel they will be treated fairly, when they have enough to eat, and when they are not worried others are out to murder them. That suggests that the way to get more people more cooperative is to ensure people have food, access to equal justice, and safety from thugs with weapons. All liberal tenets, except for reasons unknown to me, the conservatives seem to have the PR advantage on the third item.
There’s new psychology research out (February 2010) that shows that selfishness increases when people feel they have not been treated fairly. It also makes complete common sense.
So, in a society where the rich get richer, even if they destroy the world economy while doing it, even if they’d have gone bankrupt if not for gifts from the US Treasury, everybody gets more selfish, and conservative/Hobbesian attitudes take hold. In a society more like Canada or Western Europe, there is more economic fairness and the result is that as a whole the society grows less selfish and more open to cooperation.
Unfortunately, the paths we choose are self-reinforcing.
February 19, 2010 at 10:51 am
joe the plumber
Why is it that NAN attacks any perceived generalization against Jews with with the obsessive focus of meth addict and yet casually tosses out generalizations of Liberals, pot growers and anyone else she doesn’t like. She cracks me up.
February 19, 2010 at 5:15 pm
silence do good
I still would like some response on our supporting israel militarally to the tune I think of a billion $’s a year, and the rothcilds being able to foot the bill. And what about those liberal masad thugs ganging up on one man and using stolen israeli passports to do so. Now the people who’s identities were stolen are subject to who knows what.
February 19, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Mitch
OK silence do good, here’s the answer others are too polite to give you:
You sound like an anti-semite.
February 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm
middle child
In fairness, Mossad did shit all over Dubai and their ally England in their amateur hour take down of a suspected arms dealer. As a former Mossad agent stated earlier today, ‘the arrogance displayed by Mossad stepping all over English law did more harm to Israel than the dead man could ever have’. In the Israeli arrogance department though, Mossad can’t hold a candle to Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon who shit all over Turkey’s Foreign Minister earlier this month in a stunning display of racism. He did offer a tepid apology but then earlier this week disparaged a visiting US delegation because it included representatives from a peace group. I am aware that by criticizing Israeli government offiicals I will earn the label of anti-semite by the MITCHs and NANs of the world but in truth I am a consistent social justice advocate, a liberal. Israel gets treated no differently than any other nation.
February 19, 2010 at 10:15 pm
Eric Kirk
I agree with Mitch. The whole Rothchilds meme is from the same page as the obsessions over the Protocols of the Elders of Zion – bad history mingled with the worst of stereotypes of Jews as evil moneychangers.
February 20, 2010 at 2:16 am
silence do good
dude,your labels are of no concequence here bitch, oh excuse me I meant to say mitch and as far as capt. kirk your drival is pathetic. You wouldn,t know the truth if it was right upside your head ,oops upside your head, Yeshuah did in fact throw the money changers out of the temple and thank Yahweh thay have’nt been back since except when sharone got the chutzbah to take that arrogant stroll, which set off some ominous chain of events .hey capt. kirk, looks like I touched a nerve. Its also interesting you both won’t comment on the suject of the mossad. ps people are people, and how we treat one another is at the root of everything. Eric , I trully am grateful for your blog and look forward to your reply. mitch, you take things to personally, I am anti-corperate & anti shadow govt. Eric ,fleet st. greases all the wheels of satans world. Beware of anti-Love
February 20, 2010 at 2:26 am
silence do good
Eric, you never did answer my question about the rothcilds supporting israels military,whats up w/that? your a smart man ,so what do you have to say,could the and should they?
February 20, 2010 at 10:07 am
middle child
silence do good. You should take your name to heart.
February 22, 2010 at 1:16 am
silence do good
m c, you,re right, I’ll be even more like Ben Franklin!!! But not because of your opinion or anyone else . i’ll do it because of Free Will ,as in Will Shakespere , and there , dare I say, in lies the Rub, Bub.