Customer Reviews

A Threat from Within: A History of Jewish Opposition to Zionism

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This is a groundbreaking book, as an american jew, I strongly resent my religious and cultural heritage being co-opted by zionism. This book precisely lays out what is exactly at stake ---- the very heart of a jewish identity. The typical tribalist zionist is most threatened by such an analysis because this book deals in-depth, with the dirty secret of zionism, its profound antipathy toward the core jewish traditions. I have read many great and not-so-great books on the middle east, but this book is different, it places the whole zionist program in a very different light, only partially discussed in other writings, such as Original Sins: Reflections on the History of Zionism and Israel by Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi. Any too easy dismissal of this truly important book can only be considered fatuous, at best. Perhaps the most important concept to consider is that Rabkin thinks that jews have persisted over time because of values that transcend the state, nations come and go, Israel is a crude attempt to subvert this and to artificially establish a jewish state in a place and way that goes against almost all jewish values. Indeed, Rabkin asks what is the thing now that makes Israel a jewish state? Is it religion, a lifestyle, a history, a culture, etc. He answers in the negative, the thing holding it together as a state is a common place nationalist quest, not unlike any other on the planet, nothing special here and an effort doomed to ultimate failure. The last time something like this was tried, the Jewish presence in Palestine was essentially destroyed by the Romans.

Do buy this book, religious or not, zionist or not, if you are intellectually open minded, this could be a watershed for you.

Sifting through the complexities of the current Middle East situation, one can easily assume all Jews support the state of Israel. Not so: a deep discord has erupted between avowed Zionists advocating Israel and Jews, both secular and religious, who reject the state, albeit for very different reasons. Not everyone is aware of the desperation and suffering of the Palestinians, who now suffer at the hands of Zionists. Not Jews, but Zionists.

After the horrors of the Shoah, natural instinct lead Jewish survivors to seek safety, a land to call their own, the land promised by God. Perfectly just, perfectly reasonable, perfect in all respects.

Except for one critical issue: although Jews and Arabs had lived together in reasonable harmony for centuries there, the influx of massive numbers of Jews, replete with the support of the world (guilt for turning away?) had profound and devastating effects on the native Palestinians. The latter remember all too well the start of the "Nakba", an excruciating travesty that continues today.

But Professor Rabkin's book does not touch upon the current political and legal situation, although his perspective is clear. This book is difficult to categorize: it touches upon history, philosophy, spirituality, ethics and delves into the deepest levels of being Jewish. These are truly eschatological issues, issues that affect the Jewish soul in this realm and the next; beyond the narrower, but highly relevant, dimensions of international law and politics.

Here we see the profound difference between Zionism and Judaism from a historical and ethical aspect: Zionism, a modern offshoot, actually contradicts the essence of what it means to be a good Jew. This new schism is not based on traditional, expected lines such as Ashkenazi and Sephardic, observant and non-observant, religious and secular Jews, etc, but rather, how one regards the state of Israel in relation to oneself and God.

Professor Rabkin speaks from the orthodox perspective - in that God did not give Jews land unconditionally, to take and prosper upon. Indeed, God merely promised such land if - and only if - Jews returned to the ways of God. God, Orthodox thinking held, punished the Jews for sin, and sinning deeply. Pride, arrogance, idolatry - all resulted in exile. The Jews could only return to the land in a state of humility, kindness, peace, justice, and subservience to the laws of God, not man. Observant Jews in exile over the centuries eschewed all forms of violence, including symbolic. In humility, one finds strength; in striving to live whilst accepting one's suffering as God's will, one becomes closer to God. Job is perhaps the greatest illustration of dignified acceptance. Of course, this is rather bewildering to our modern society, which values aggression, force, materialism and pride. The Jews offended God, but will always be welcomed back into God's good graces, provided the effort is made. Jews must live peacefully among all peoples, not in their own land, according to God. God will provide the land when the Jews learn, not before, and Jews are not to take land.

And it is with force, power and ferocity that the Israelis claimed the state of Israel - devastating Palestinian land, homes, people, driving out thousands, all in the name of this 'promised land'. It is for these reasons the Orthodox reject the concept of a man-made Israel, constructed on the blood and bones of murdered Palestinians; this is against God's admonition to the Jews. Also, the more taciturn, aggressive and critical Zionists become, the more God is offended. It is interesting to note Stephen Spielberg examined the price of violence in his film "Munich".

Israel, in effect, has become the new "Golden Calf", the new idolatry.

No, Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism; to question and/or reject the existence of Israel is not to be an Anti-Semite or a self-loathing Jew. Indeed, it seems that to oppose the state of Israel as it currently exists is the means by which one can be a better, and wiser, human being.

I found the book, reportedly to speak of Judaism and Jews as a whole sorely lacking in major areas. One was the fact that nearly all, if not all, of the voices and commentary contained in the book came from only one part of world Jewry, Ashkenaz.

The fact is that great rabbis from all over the Sephardic and Edot HaMizrach world view Zionism favourably, these voices seemed to be completely absent from the book. When the author makes arguements in the name of Judaism and selectively quotes from a small part of world Jewry, surely the nature of the book is severely compromised.

The fact is there has never been a scholar or Rabbi of repute from outside of the Ashkenazi world who has a theological problem with Zionism and the State of Israel. This stands in stark contrast to the author's views on how Judaism views Zionism. Without the views of the "other" Jews, this work shamelessly sounds out important voices to any work on religious responses to Zionism.

There are actually two strains of Jewish opposition to Zionism and perhaps a third. Firstly there is the religious objection. Zionism is not based on Torah, it is secular and deocratic, communist sometimes and gives women and gays equal rights, and Arabs and Muslims and Christians. These are not Torah values neccesarily. It doesnt invisage a state governed by Torah sages, such as the chief rabbi and a Sanhedrin and rebuilt temple. Also it is not ordained by the arrival of Messiah.

The second objection is from the left wing jews who simply object to nationalism and beleive in assimilation.

The third objection was from conservative loyal Jews who felt they would be expelled if Zionism suceeded, they would be seen as disloyal and they would be forced to go to Israel.

This book concentrates mostly on the Satmar and Neturei Karta varieties of anti-zionism which although it has old roots is more a modern phenomenon, that links itself with palestinian and left wingers, even gay rights activists, anything to condemn Israel. But these religious people are themselves radicals, like Hamas, they oppose the secualr jewish state as Bin Laden opposes the monarchies and secular arab regimes and hence it is strange to see left wing literature supporting religious extremism, the anetham of liberalism and human rights. But alas that is the truth behind this publication. This could have been much more but instead it was less.

Seth J. Frantzman

Rabkin builds up a strawman that he calls "Zionism" in order to justify

his opposition to Israel. He posits a violently anti-religious movement that sought to rebel against G-d and which all the Rabbis opposed ideologically. Unfortunately, this is a very superficial description of the true historical record. It turns out that in reality, mass aliyah was first proposed by both the Hasidic followers of the Ba'al Shem Tov and the Vilna Gaon in the 18th century. True, there are those who claim, like the Satmar Rav, Rav Yoel Teitelbaum that mass aliyah is forbidden by the "3 oaths" mentioned in the Talmud, Tractate Ketubot, but we see that many, actually most scholars have refuted this. Regarding the supposedly

anti-religious nature of the Zionism, yes, there is a branch that was and is still militantly anti-religious, but there is on the other hand, a very religious element, too, and it has been there from the beginnings of modern political Zionism in the 19th century. The famous Netziv from Volozhin (one of the top leaders of the traditional Orthodox Jewish community in the late 19th century and head of the famed Volozhin Yeshiva) was a member of Hovevei Zion, a proto-Zionist movement that included non-religious people. A famous photograph of a meeting of the Mizrachi religious Zionist movement in Warsaw around the year 1900 shows rows of bearded, black-coated Rabbis. Thus it is UNTRUE to claim that ALL the traditional Orthodox rabbinical leadership was anti-Zionist. The fact of the matter is that most of this group (which later organized itself as the Agudat Israel movement) had mixed feelings, supporting building the Jewish community in Eretz Israel (the Land of Israel) but worried about

the anti-religious nature of many of the leaders of the Zionist movement.

Agudat Israel later agreed, upon the establishment of the State of Israel,

to sit in its parliament and participate in national and social issues. The large majority of Haredi (Ultra-Orthodox) Jews vote in the elections. This does not mean that they subscribe to all the values of the Zionist movement, there is a great debate going on as to how involved religious Jews of this type should get involved, but the large majority care about Israel, work for its security and support it in the international arena.

Rabkin claims that "really" these people are anti-Zionists (I would define them as non-Zionists since many don't believe the all Jews are REQUIRED to live in Israel and because they oppose military service for various reasons) but they have been "bought-off" by the Zionist establishment. Well, it has been discovered that the spokesman for a radical religious anti-Zionist movement was on Yasser Arafat's payroll for years, so we can just as easily claim that the anti-Zionists have been

paid off. In any event, this claim takes away any matter of choice from

people, claiming that there support for Israel is "really" from base motives, saying that the people really are "stupid". That is why I say to Rabkin and to the current post-Zionist leadership of Israel, that it was the JEWISH PEOPLE who built Israel, not the "Zionist Leadership" of the time, and it belongs to the Jewish people, not one particular political movement. After the Holocaust (which refutes Rabkin's claim that anti-Semitism is due to Israel's policies) the Jewish people voted with their feet that they wanted to return to their ancient homeland, Eretz Israel, and the built it and continue to build it today. Any Jew who goes to synagogue and listens to the weekly Torah portion sees that the Torah is enfused with love of Eretz Israel (e.g. the detailed description of Avraham buying the burial place in the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hevron) so the Jewish people have been absorbing this for millenia, and the desire to return flows from this, not Rabkin's imaginary conspiracy of "anti-religious Zionist rebels". The large majority of Jews in Israel reject Rabkin's claim that "Zionism replaced Judaism with nationalism" and identify themselves as Jews, regardless of their level of religious observance, and the fact is that religious observance of the average Jew in Israel is much higher than those outside of Israel. Knowledge of Hebrew, the language of the Bible and Misha is univesal making these works accessible to everyone, unlike outside Israel and that Jewish religious life and intense Torah study are undergoing their greatest revival in 2000 years, IN SPITE of Rabkin's claim that the Zionist state is suppodedly dedicated to eradicating these things.

Yes, there is an ongoing debate in the religious world about the nature of the relationship of religious community of Israel to the (not yet religious) state apparatus, but reading this polemic is not going to give an accurate picture of this.