Thoughts on Title: Israel's War Within Author: Bernard Avishai Issue: Harper's Magazine February 2024 Written: 2024/01/31 Avishai writes about the Culture War in Israel between two factions that he calls Global Israel and Greater Israel. Global Israel comes from the secular, liberal, left-leaning tradition of the original Zionists. Think kibbutzes. Today, it's adherents are more focused on economic development, democracy, etc. At least anecdotally, these types are thought to be prosperous white collar workers, Air Force types. True or not, this characterization leads to some resentment. Greater Israel refers to a position that is more religious and favors settlements and territorial expansion. Religion and territory are combined with proponents viewing the taking and holding of all of the ancient lands as fulfilling a god-given prophecy. Avishai is clearly in the camp of Global Israel. This secular version if Judaism matches his upbrining in Montreal and probably matches the view of Israel held by many North Americal Jews. In the article he writes about the history of the secular tradition in Israel and how the more religious, conservative view took power. Before and during Israel's founding the religious Jews were not seen as a threat. They were backwards and surely exposure to rapid modernization would be enough to transform them towards the secular, modern tradition. Avishai admits that this matches his own attitude towards Judaism growing up: it is a pragmatic religion that bends in the face of modernity. It's well known that many of the early Zionists were not at all religious. Avishai describes how Ben Furio did not keep kosher and worked on Yom Kippur. He talks about when he arrived in the 70s, pork was widely available. His host on the farm where he worked had never been to synagogue. The interesting division between Jews early on in the 20th century was between the secular Zionists that were moving to Israel and the secular assimilationists moving to America. Two million went to America compared to seventy thousand in Palestine. The choice between Israel and the US was not between secularism and religiosity, it was a choice between national identity and assimilation. It's no suprise to me that Israel was a nationalist project, but I have never really considered it in opposition to assimilation. Judging by the numbers, moving to the US was a kind of default. Moving to Palestine was an active choice and Avishai describes those who went as attempting to build a modern state for Jews. They wanted to live a secular life without being absorbed by a majority into obscurity. They resurrected Hebrew to more thoroughly distinguish themselves. This raises some interesting questions. 1. How does secular Zionism compare to assimilation? I'm generally skeptical of any emphasis on nationality or culture. National food and dance are great, but typically we see culture wielded as as justification for not progressing. The idea that culture is a fixed thing is ahistorical and unfortunate in my view. That said, what are the arguments of these original Zionists, what was the debate like at the time 2. How did it play out for each group? The first question is about principles, but this question is about fact. Did the secular Zionists get the nation that they wanted? Are American Jews better off or did they lose something precious. 3. Is secular Israel viable anymore? As Avishai desribes in the article, the state is largely in the control of the Greater Israel faction. How marginal are the progressive forces in Israel? Overall, Avishai provides an interesting glimpse of Israel's internal political divisions. His description of the early Zionists and of his North American Jewish upbringing provide a context that should be familiar to many American Jews, but the way he describes the divisions between these two groups was new to me. Furthermore, the hold that conservatives have over the Israeli government is not surprising, but the strength and history of that hold is. It's clear from Avishai's description that the conservative Greater Israel faction is responsible for the continuing violence against Palestinians and that they are a formidable roadblock to a resolution. It's not obvious to me that Global Israel can do or wants to do much better. That leaves us with a fourth question: Can secular Israel provide a just resolution to the Palestinians or is the situation fundamentally too far gone for a mere change in domestic politics to resolve it?