The “Jewish question,” aka the “Jewish problem” of the 1930s, has resurfaced in the form of the ”Jewish state question.” As then, some Jews are attempting to solve it using the “good Jew” vs “bad Jew” distinction.
Every few centuries, there is an attempt to eradicate Judaism: in the 15th century via the Inquisition, in the 20th century through the Holocaust, and in the 21st century with Israel-bashing and anti-Zionism.
In each of those assaults, some Jews have tried to create an artificial separation between “good Jews” and “bad Jews.” In the 1490s, many Jews believed that converting to Christianity would spare them, making them “good Jews.” They were wrong – it only placed them under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition.
In the late 19th century a new form of opposition to Judaism emerged, with a new term: “antisemitism.” Jews were accused of dehumanizing Europeans, poisoning the wells of humanity, and were treated as pariahs. Some Jews believed that the spike in antisemitism was not against them, the “good Jews,” but against the badly behaving Jewish immigrants from Russia or, as one person explained to Theodor Herzl, “against the liberals, not against the Jews as a nation.” Herzl understood that the Jewish question went deeper, and he offered a solution in his 1896 book The Jewish State – A Modern Solution to the Jewish Question.
Some 45 years later, the Nazis presented a very different solution to the Jewish question.
‘Good Jew’ vs ‘bad Jew’
Today, in the current assault on Judaism in the guise of an attack merely on Zionism, we once again see Jews appearing to believe that the solution lies in separating “good Jew” from “bad Jew.” This was perhaps best depicted in Sen. Chuck Schumer’s speech.
Schumer said it clearly: “The Jewish state is a pariah opposed by the rest of the world.”
He echoed the accusations of anti-Zionists and Israel-bashers, eerily similar to the accusations heard in Europe a century ago and in Persia 2,500 years ago during the events of the Book of Esther.
But there is a footnote: Schumer did not slander all Jews – only those Jews in Israel. Per Schumer, it is not the Jewish nation that is a pariah, only the Jewish state – a charge he repeated twice in his speech.
Schumer also implied that Jews in Israel are bigots, defining bigots as “those who oppose the idea of a Palestinian state,” which today are the vast majority of Israeli Jews on the Left and Right alike.
Schumer’s slander followed Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s charge that Jews in Israel dehumanize Palestinians – and his insinuation that Israeli Jews, once again, poison the wells: “The greatest poison in our common well is dehumanization.”
Would this “bad Jews” in Israel vs “good Jews” in America distinction work? Not likely. The world does not make this intra-Jewish distinction – only Jews do. Berlin and Nazi-dominated Europe did not distinguish between Russian Jewish immigrants and proper German Jews in the 20th century, nor between “Israelites” and “Juifs” in France in the 19th century – those were only internal Jewish nuances.
Schumer made it worse by calling for the removal of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and for new elections in Israel. This only solidified the allegedly bigotry of the Jewish state, since Netanyahu’s would-be challengers equally support the war effort, opposing the idea of rewarding Hamas’s Oct. 7 actions with a Palestinian state – and are appalled by the incitive, anti-Jewish rhetoric voiced by Schumer and Blinken.
(Thomas Friedman of The New York Times is not a candidate for prime minister of Israel. But even if he were, he would likely only get a few hundred votes. Incidentally, those few hundred Israelis are the primary touch-point with Israel for much of the New York milieu, and indeed, those Israelis are more sympathetic to the idea of a Palestinian state.)
Let’s be clear: Schumer and Blinken are long-standing friends of Israel who have admirably served their country, the United States, for decades. Israelis will forever be grateful for the steadfast support of President Joe Biden and Sec. Blinken at the onset of the war, as well as for their continued support in ways we know and ways we do not know.
But their rhetoric fuels our era’s existential threat to Judaism.
As discussed in this column, the potent part of the threat is not the vocal pro-Palestinian demonstrators waving “From the river to the sea” banners, since they do not have the destruction mechanism.
The lethal threat comes from “Israel-bashers-lite,” those in positions of power who are influenced by the Israel-bashers and act upon it (See “Understanding the depth of Israel-bashing – One night in Basel,” Magazine, September 24, 2022).
Herzl pinpointed this aspect when he defended accusations that he exaggerated the threat to the Jews from their friends: “Even if we were as near to the hearts of princes as are their other subjects, they could not protect us. They would only feel popular hatred by showing us too much favor.”
Indeed, for Schumer, one of America’s most astute politicians, to make a legacy-changing decision from being what he called “the guardian of Israel” to being broadly viewed by Israelis on both Left and Right as someone who rose up to assault Israel in its time of need could be indicative of something much bigger and more dangerous.
Netanyahu repeatedly argues that 80% of Americans support Israel. Schumer’s legacy-switch decision might be emblematic of undercurrents in the other direction. After years of incitement in the media and social media, by international organizations, and now even on the Senate floor, the Jewish nation in the 2020s is facing an existential threat that is significantly greater than that of the 1930s.
However, Judaism has a secret weapon for fending off this unprecedented ideological assault coming from the West: antisemitism itself.
Paradigm shift
Unlike in previous rounds, in our era’s assault it is taboo to say, “I hate Jews.” Therefore, one needs to direct opposition to Jews through the Jewish state (“I only hate the ‘bad Jews’”).
Once there is a global recognition that Judaism has transformed and Zionism is now its anchor (Judaism 3.0), that false facade gets shattered. A recognition that we are in Judaism 3.0 would turn the Israel-basher into a Jew-basher, and thus he would be deterred.
Mostly, it would dispel the prevailing ludicrousy in America of showing zero tolerance for traditional antisemitism (the existential threat to Judaism in the 20th century), while shining a big green light on Israel-bashing – the existential threat to Judaism in the 21st century).
Recognition is already taking place around the world. Yet the Biden administration failed to acknowledge it when it crafted its antisemitism-combating strategy. It decided to focus on the threat that Judaism faced in the past century, while ignoring the contemporary threat. This is akin to crafting a strategy to combat antisemitism in 1930s Germany by showing zero tolerance for statements supporting the Romans’ burning of the Jewish Temple, while giving the green light to accusations of German Jews dehumanizing Europeans and polluting the wells of humanity.
The “Jewish question” is back. It has a simple solution: Judaism 3.0. ■
The writer is author of Judaism 3.0: Judaism’s Transformation to Zionism (Judaism-Zionism.com). For his geopolitical article: EuropeAndJerusalem.com.