Conservatives, Liberals and the anti zionism

Post Reply New Topic

Anti-Israel protests at American universities have made headlines in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack. And almost simultaneously, many conservative critics — including GOP presidential candidates — have used those protests as an opportunity to ramp up their assault on higher education, eagerly yoking them to their long-standing accusations of “liberal indoctrination.” Eliminationist chants, partisan DEI officers, angry mobs hey-hey, ho-ho-ing their support for terrorists — in terms of Republican's favorite straw men, the “woke,” liberal campus of 2023 has them all!

Institutions of higher education, conservatives charge, are complicit in fostering an atmosphere of intimidation and even violence against Jews. Such allegations gained a little traction last week when the Education Department opened a civil rights investigation into antisemitic and Islamophobic harassment at seven colleges and universities (Islamophobia, of course, is not an overriding concern for conservatives).

Conservatives don’t seem to understand that liberals aren’t the ones who are contesting Israel’s right to exist.

Given their increasing dalliance with white supremacist voting blocs, it’s hard to view the concern for campus antisemitism expressed by many in the GOP as sincere. Even if it were, their critique of “liberal indoctrination” widely misses the mark. In their zeal to "own the libs," conservatives don’t seem to understand that liberals aren’t the ones who are contesting Israel’s right to exist.

Conservatives assume that colleges and universities are pervaded by liberal professors who impart their extreme agenda to impressionable co-eds. Some polling organizations that study the political leanings of scholars perpetuate this myth as well. But this is more a reflection of the pollsters’ own limited understanding, as they often ask scholars to place themselves in one of only two boxes: liberal or conservative.

Anyone who teaches on an American college campus knows this framing is incorrect. Politically, American academia is nothing like American politics. The latter is generally divided between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, blue and red, etc. But a college faculty, generally speaking, is not sliced in two, but into three antagonistic columns of unequal size and influence.

First, the conservatives, few in number and justifiably peeved about their marginality.

Then there is the graying cohort of true liberals. In the post–World War II “golden era” of American higher education, these liberals were indeed in the majority. The stereotypical image of the professoriate — the wine and cheese, the Volvo ownership, the existential dread in the faculty lounge — was set in place half a century ago by professors whose core political assumptions were liberal.

Since the 1980s, however, liberals’ dominance has been diluted by the slow, steady growth of a third column. Some refer to them as the “far left,” the “post-colonial left” or what I call POCOFO, an acronym for "post-colonial, post-Foucault" (Michel Foucault being one of the most influential philosophers of the past half-century).

Post-colonial scholars blast away not at conservatism, but liberalism. The majority view the European Enlightenment — the foundational moment for liberal political thought — with the same dismay that Christians regard original sin. The Enlightenment, in their telling, spawned the nation-state, constitutionalism, secularism, individual rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, the rules-based international order, etc.

For most, these innovations are the glorious staples of liberal democracy. But to many POCOFO scholars, these developments can also be linked to every atrocity of modernity, from the North Atlantic slave trade, to European settler colonialism, to modern genocides, including the Holocaust.

As for the Holocaust, POCOFO scholars usually reflect upon its magnitude quite seriously. And while these professors are not antisemitic per se, many are vehemently anti-Zionist: Israel stands, glowering, at the intersection of all global oppressions. It follows that “Palestine is the moral litmus test for the world,” to quote professor Angela Davis.

For the far left, anti-Zionism is something like a default setting.

At many top-tier universities especially, POCOFO scholars have displaced liberals and achieved near-hegemony. But to the extent that this group might be a problem on campus, it is not their presence so much as the scale of their presence — they’re usually serious researchers and good to “think with” (I routinely assign them in my courses on global free speech controversies, secularism, etc., for precisely that reason).

So one might concede that Republicans are correct that “viewpoint diversity” is indeed limited. Yet they don’t seem to recognize whose viewpoints are overrepresented or whom they are beefing with. The speech (and acts) they abhor tend to emanate from the far left, which, ironically, shares their animus toward liberalism.

The indoctrination, then, that is occurring on campus is not liberal. Truth be told, I’m skeptical that professors of any political persuasion could successfully “indoctrinate” their students if they wanted to.

Conservatives have found an ace issue to demagogue. Public distrust in higher education is peaking. The optics emanating from campuses are unsightly. University administrations seem confused as to how to distinguish free speech from hate speech, or from expert speech — the very type of speech universities are built to disseminate and defend.

Republicans were once all for “the free and open exchange of ideas,” to quote Sen. Tim Scott back in 2021. Naturally, a few weeks ago he called for deporting foreign students who make antisemitic remarks. The conservative critique of higher education is neither principled nor accurate; it’s just another canard to justify the continued evisceration of a cornerstone of democratic society

Does he also acknowledge that there are a lot of Jews who are against zionism?

Does he also acknowledge that there are a lot of Jews who are against zionism?

Figuring out the contours of American Jewish public opinion on Israel has long been a challenge. As Jewish Currents reported in 2020, while statistics about how many Jews identify as Zionists are often thrown around in public discourse, few reliable studies have been done on the question.

While surveys may not be evolving quickly enough to keep up with changing political realities, responses to the new questions paint a picture of an increasingly polarized American Jewish community—one whose median position appears to be to the left of mainstream American Jewish institutions, even as Jewish Republicans are increasingly supporting more right-wing policies. Still, researchers caution, drawing conclusions from polls of American Jews can be challenging, given that respondents have different interpretations of what it means to be a “Zionist” or to be “emotionally attached” to Israel, and varying levels of knowledge about the country—challenges on which new studies are themselves focusing.

ONLY A HANDFUL OF POLLS specifically survey American Jews, a group whose small size—Jews make up roughly 2.4% of the US population—makes accurate sampling a challenge. The Pew Research Center, whose rigorous data is widely seen as the “gold standard” for surveys of American Jews, studied American Jews in 2013 and again in 2020. The American Jewish Committee (AJC) releases annual surveys on various American Jewish communal issues, including Israel and antisemitism. Two groups that regularly poll American Jews include the liberal Zionist advocacy group J Street and the JEI, an affiliate of the Jewish Democratic Council of America.

Pew found that American Jewish respondents were more likely to have heard a significant amount about BDS if they were religiously Jewish (especially Orthodox), older, more educated, or Republican-leaning. While all subgroups of American Jews opposed BDS, with most opposing it by wide margins, BDS support was highest and opposition lowest among “Jews of no religion” (those who identify culturally as Jews but do not consider Judaism their religion), with 18% in favor and 22% opposing. Other groups that had higher levels of support for BDS than the general Jewish population included those who identified religiously as Jewish but not with a particular denomination, those who did not believe the Israeli government was sincere in peace efforts, and those who rated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership as “fair” or “poor,” as well as Democratic, younger, and more educated Jews. By contrast, the highest level of opposition appeared among Orthodox Jews (at 70%), followed by Conservative Jews, as well as Republican-leaning Jews, those above the age of 65, and those who rated Netanyahu’s leadership as “excellent” or “good.

Opinion=mine
The anti zionist Jews are very skilled at gaining both legacy and social media attention making them seem a larger part of the Jewish community then they are.

Obviously Palestinian anti zionists have been effectively using anti zionist Jews in order to prove they are not antisemitic further giving an appearance of a groundswell of anti Zionist Jews.

Being for BDS does not automatically mean being anti zionist. It could mean while believing Israel has a right to exist but Israeli actions are so bad they deserve no support until such time as they radically change policy.