The Poll: A Re-Analysis
The poll
results highlighted by progressive Jewish analysts point to the 59% to
31% majority of Jews disapproving the way the US is handling the
‘campaign against terror.” The problem with using the answers to this
question to indicate progressive opinion is that a number of Zionist
ideologues and their followers also oppose the ‘handling of the
campaign’ because it is not sufficiently brutal, authoritarian and
arbitrary. Other findings cited include a 67% to 27% majority currently
believing that the US should have stayed out of Iraq, a 76% to 23%
majority who believe the war is going ‘somewhat’ or ‘very badly’ in
Iraq, a 68% to 30% majority believing that the ‘surge’ has either made
things worse or has no impact.
Evem more important, a large majority (57% to 35%) of American Jews
oppose the United States launching a pre-emptive military attack
against Iran, even if it were taken ‘to prevent (Iran) from developing
nuclear weapons.” The progressive analysts then cite the polls finding
that most American Jews are ‘some shade of liberal’ rather than
‘conservative’ (42% to 25%) and overwhelmingly identified as Democrats
rather than Republicans by 58% to 15%. Most Jews believe that Democrats
will make the ‘right decisions on the war in Iraq (61% to 21%).
Finally, the progressives have very favorable views of the top three
Democratic presidential candidates.
On the surface these polling results would suggest that American Jews
would be at the cutting edge of the congressional anti-war movements,
arousing their fellow Jews to join and resurrect the moribund peace
movement. Nothing of the sort has occurred.
One reason for the gap between the ‘progressive’ polling results and
the actual pro-war behavior of the major American Jewish Organizations
is found in several of the opinions
not cited by progressive analysts but emphasized by the 52 leaders of the major communal organizations (
Daily Alert,
December 13, 2007). Over eighty percent (82%) of American Jews agree
that ‘the goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories
but rather the destruction of Israel’. Only 12% of Jews disagree. And
55% to 37% do not believe Israel and its Arab neighbors will settle
their differences and live in peace. On the key issue of a compromise
on the key issue of Jerusalem, by 58% to 36% American Jews reject an
Israeli compromise to insure a framework for permanent peace.
Given the high salience of being pro-Israel for the majority of
American Jews and the fact that the source of their identity stems more
from their loyalty to Israel than to the Talmud or religious myths and
rituals, then it is clear that both the ‘progressive, majority of Jews
and the reactionary minority who head up all the major American Jewish
organizations have a fundamental point of
agreement and
convergence:
Support and identity with Israel and its anti-Arab prejudices, its
expansion and the dispossession of Palestine. This overriding
convergence allows the reactionary Presidents of the Major Jewish
Organizations in America to speak for the Jewish community with
virtually
no opposition from the progressive majority either
within or without their organizations. By raising the Israeli flag,
repeating clichés about the ‘existential threat’ to Israel at each and
every convenient moment, the majority of Jews have bowed their heads
and acquiesced or, worst, subordinated their
other ‘progressive’ opinions
to actively backing the leaders ‘identity’ with Israel. Their franchise
on being the recognized Jewish spokespeople intimidates and/or forces
progressive Jews to publicly abide to the line that ‘Israel (sic) knows
what is best for Israel’ and by extension for all American Jews who
identify with Israel.
A second important factor in
undermining progressive American Jewish activity against US-Israeli war
policy in the Middle East (Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Palestine) is the
influence of Israeli public opinion. A
Haaretz report (December 9, 2007) documents a civil rights poll showing that ‘
Israel has reached new heights of racism…’,
citing a 26% rise in anti-Arab incidents (Association for Civil Rights
in Israel Annual Report for 2007). The report cites the
doubling of
the number of Jews expressing feelings of hatred to Arabs. Fifty
percent of Israeli Jews oppose equal rights for their Arab compatriots.
According to a Haifa University study, 74% of Jewish youth in Israel
think that Arabs are ‘unclean’.
Progressive American Jews,
identifying with a racist colonial state, face a dilemma: Whether to
act against their primary identity in favor of their progressive
opinions or whether to back Israel and submit to its American franchise
holders and recognized leaders.
Given these issues, a serious analyst clearly must distinguish between
‘opinions’ and ‘commitment’. While a majority of American Jews may
voice private progressive opinions, their commitments based on their
identity as Jews rests with the State of Israel and its principal
mouthpieces in the US.
This probably explains the unwillingness of progressive Jews to
criticize the principal reactionary Jewish leaders and their mass
organizations, even worse to attack and slander any critics of the
pro-Israel power configuration. Progressive Jews have subordinated
their progressive opinions to their loyalty and identity with Israel.
Organizationally this has meant that the majority of major American
Jewish organizations are still led and controlled by pro-war,
pro-Israel leaders. Progressive Jewish organizations are on the fringe
of the organizational map, with virtually no influence in the Congress
or Presidency and backers of a pro-war Democratic Party and Congress.
Progressive analysts who cite overwhelming Jewish support for the
Democratic Party, its top three Presidential candidates and their
preference for the liberal label as differentiating them from the
leaders of the major organizations, commit an elementary logical and
substantive fallacy. Liberals, like the Clintons, supported the wars
against Iraq and are among the driving forces promoting a military
attack on Iran. The Democratic majority in Congress has backed every
military appropriation demanded by the Republicans and the White House.
Being Democrat and ‘liberal’ is no indicator of being ‘progressive’
using any foreign policy indicator, from the Middle East wars to
destabilizations efforts in Venezuela.
The apparent paradox of progressive anti-war Jews contributing big
bucks to pro-war Democrats is based on the latter’s unconditional
support for Israel which trumps any ‘dissonance’ that might exist in
the head of progressive Jewish political activists.
With the American Pro-Israel Power Configuration leading the way to
savaging the Naitonal Intelligence Estimate study, released in December
2007, on the absence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program, progressive
Jewish opinion is silent or complicit. Worse still, progressive liberal
and radical Jewish peace activists have acted as gate-keepers in the
anti-war movement – prohibiting any criticism of Israel and labeling
individuals or citizen activists critical of the pro-war Zionist lobby
as ‘anti-Semites’.
The AJC opinion poll on the high proportion of American Jewish with
more progressive opinions than the leadership of all the major
mainstream organizations would be officially welcomed if it led to
something else besides private opinions compromised by Israeli
identities.
Footnotes:
1.http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642849/
2.Glen Greenwald, “New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neo-Con Jewish Groups Are”, on salon.com
James Petras is the author of The Power of Israel in the United States
(Clarity Press 2006); The Rulers and the Ruled in the US Empire:
Bankers, Zionists and Militants (Clarity Press 2007). He is a
specialist on US Zionist politics and a close reader of the Israeli and
American Jewish Press.