Leonid Goldin | Will there be an awakening?

“A people… set apart from all other peoples on Earth.”

Deuteronomy 7:6

The results of Israel’s war with Hamas can be viewed from different angles: strategic — long-term, tactical — here and now, in relation to internal conditions and the foreign policy situation, moral and psychological, theological — from the point of view of the covenant between God and the Jews. One can see in the current situation either good and hope for a change in fate, or yet another tragedy, one of many in Jewish history.

The landscape after the battle

The biblical prophecy has come true: Israel is alone, globally isolated. Of the 193 members of the UN, 157 have rewarded terrorists with the recognition of the Palestinian state. No country has received as many condemnatory resolutions from international organizations as Israel. The economic and cultural boycott of Israel has intensified. Israeli scientists, artists, athletes, and participants in international events are being warned that their safety cannot be guaranteed.

Threats and discrimination have spread to the diaspora, even though it includes many harsh critics of Israel who are estranged from Jewish identity. Being anti-Semitic has become normalized and is no longer shameful; in many cases, it is political capital, a resource for popularity and higher ratings.

The agreement to cease hostilities has not softened attitudes toward the Jewish state. Israel has won the battle, but the war continues. General Benny Gantz, former Israeli defense minister, writes in The New York Times that a cosmetic change of government in Gaza will change nothing; Hamas will be elected under a different name. External guarantees, as history has repeatedly shown, are empty promises. What is needed is a rebirth of the Palestinians, as happened after the defeat of fascism in Germany — a different ideology, culture, education, and press.

But who is capable of bringing about these changes, which are more complex than military operations? The Arab countries will not fight Hamas. European countries are weakened by internal strife, fearful of the reaction of the Muslim diaspora, and lacking in political will. Aggressive mass anti-Israel protests in Europe have not abated. Trump cannot ignore the fact that the direct involvement of American troops will provoke strong opposition even among his supporters. Israel’s security can only be guaranteed by its army and internal unity. Netanyahu said that Israel is not a protectorate of America, and only Israel will determine the necessary measures to ensure the country’s security. But he is under fire from both the left and the right, even though the opposition has repeatedly proven the unviability of its ideas and programs.

In the US, according to a recent PEW poll, 70% of Democrats and 37% of Republicans sympathize with the Palestinians. In 2022, 58% of Americans had a positive opinion of Israel, now 47%. Trump’s actions to end the war are by no means universally supported.

Why do Israeli-Palestinian relations attract such intense public attention, why are prejudice and a lack of common sense so clearly dominant here? Humanitarian considerations seem hypocritical and demagogic in today’s world, where civil and tribal conflicts, especially Muslim infighting, have incomparably more victims and refugees than in Gaza. A conflict involving Iran could escalate into a nuclear war, but this threat is even more real in the war between Russia and Ukraine, with the deterioration of relations between America and China, and as a result of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The world is threatened by global warming, pandemics, limited basic resources, and the uncontrollable consequences of the development of artificial intelligence. But despite all the global and regional threats, the world’s main concern is for the Palestinians.

Many see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a confrontation between democracy and totalitarianism. But many democratic countries are by no means on Israel’s side, and many totalitarian regimes in Arab countries see Palestinian terrorists as a threat to their stability.

Undoubtedly, millennia of anti-Semitism, deeply ingrained in many cultures, plays an important role. In a global world, massive explosive discontent has accumulated, the causes of which are diverse, difficult to understand and comprehend, and the usual channel for the outpouring of protest and hatred is anti-Semitism; as always, the Jews are to blame for everything.  Throughout history, anti-Semitism has been used by the ruling elites to divert attention and responsibility. And today, this tactic is still part of the arsenal of public opinion manipulation.

But the main reason is that the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel clearly shows the West’s retreat under the destructive influence of internal political contradictions and demographic changes caused by mass migration from third world countries, with a different way of life and thinking. Western countries that support the Palestinians are capitulating to the rise of left-liberal forces and foreign cultures.

Multiculturalism, political correctness, and the replacement of Western values with the ideology of globalism and cosmopolitanism do not smooth over contradictions, but rather exacerbate them. The man of the universe is as much a chimera as Homo Sovieticus, the Soviet man, and the global village of equal and cooperating utopians is as unviable as the worldwide victory of communism.

The degradation of Western civilization is particularly evident in large cities. In many of them, whites are already in the minority and are moving to the suburbs, where they can still maintain their accustomed lifestyle. Large cities were centers of education, culture, and social progress. Today, they are centers of social contradictions and degradation, crime, and a base for radicalism and extremism.

Historically, large cities, which offered broad opportunities for social advancement, were attractive to Jews. Successfully adapted, energetic, loyal to the political system and moral canon, and leading in charity, they occupied a prominent place in large cities. But large cities are also home to ethnic minorities, migrants, people with deviant behavior, and other outsiders at the bottom of the social hierarchy.

This is also where the cultural elite is concentrated, almost entirely committed to liberalism and the Democratic Party, raised in the belief that the history of Western civilization is one of colonization, exploitation, racism, privilege, and Jews, a privileged category, the embodiment of its guilt and vices.

Thus, the anti-Semitism of the social underclass and the anti-Semitism of the cultural elite have converged. In these conditions, many Jews who have lost their sense of national identity, susceptible to liberal illusions and hopes of pleasing their haters, have joined anti-Israel, anti-Semitic movements. Forty percent of American Jews share the opinion that Israel is committing genocide, even though everyone knows what the real Holocaust is.

Mamdani, a nobody without the slightest practical experience, who gained popularity through his blatant anti-Semitism, is a natural product of the new political climate. He called for a global intifada, he is “horrified by the Israeli genocide,” in his opinion, “the war is not the result of October 7, but of the conditions of occupation and apartheid,” “Israel should not be a Jewish state.” A generational shift in politics and in the electorate, along with new demographics, will bring many of Mamdani’s like-minded people to power. Liberal Jews will help them in this. Jews still vote for the Democratic Party, which has become a home for anti-Semites. More Jews voted for the public anti-Semite Mandani than for Trump.

A large group of Jewish celebrities in a letter to the UN Secretary-General condemned Israel’s occupation of Palestine and demanded tough sanctions against Israel. Andre Sasson, head of the organization Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, said in an interview with The New York Times: “It is incredibly painful to see our history, our symbols and our traditions exploited to justify the cruelty of the Jewish state.”

There was a time when the Anti-Defamation League played an important role in combating anti-Semitism. But now, under the leadership of former Obama aide Jonathan Greenblatt, the organization has been completely transformed. Its priorities have nothing to do with protecting Jews, and when it pretends to take action, the focus is on minor figures on the right, while the main threat comes from the left, ethnic minorities, and Islamists.

In Philip Roth’s famous novel The Counterlife (1986), an Israeli says to an American Jew: “We are not pleasant intellectuals and humanists with a galut (diaspora) mentality… The sick diaspora cannot understand that we refuse to be destroyed by our enemies on our land… We do not have the luxury of American Jews living in fantasies.” Today, these differences in ideology are even more pronounced. Many polls show that despite Trump’s unprecedented efforts to support Israel and combat anti-Semitism, only 25-30% of American Jews express a positive attitude toward the president, compared to 83% in Israel.

The pathological state of Jewish self-awareness is not a new phenomenon. It was clearly evident in Europe when, after Napoleonic emancipation, many Jews believed that assimilation and loyal service to the country of the diaspora would eradicate prejudice and discrimination. “Useful idiots,” “Stockholm syndrome,” self-hating Jews, court Jews… There is a diagnosis, but no antidote.

At present, Jews have a noticeable presence in American politics. The most famous of them, Chuck Schumer, often said that his name means “defender” in Hebrew. He represents New York, and the vast majority of Jews voted for him, but he was neither seen nor heard in the election campaign for the city’s leadership, as he was busy fighting Trump. Obama, on the other hand, has stepped out of the shadows and offered his mentorship to the anti-Semitic candidate.

Seventy percent of American Jews associate themselves with the Reform movement of Judaism. Here, criticism of Israel and Trump, support for gays, ethnic minorities, and illegal immigrants takes center stage. Rabbi Ellen Lippman invited Mamdani to her “progressive” synagogue in Brooklyn several times. He was welcomed warmly, even though attacks on Jews and vandalism had become commonplace in the neighboring Hasidic neighborhoods. Angela Buchdahi, chief rabbi of the Central Synagogue in Manhattan, dedicated Shabbat to the release of hostages, but did not even mention Trump and Netanyahu in her long sermon. On the eve of the New York mayoral election, she said she would not support any candidate or sign any collective letters.

In the Orthodox community, the mood is different. Orthodox Jews are the first victims of rampant anti-Semitism, and they have no illusions about liberals. But they have their own grievances against the Israeli government: many oppose ultra-Orthodox service in the army, territorial concessions in Samaria and Judea, the secularization of the country, and the loss of the Jewish character of the state.

There is no unity among the conservatives. Elliot Gosgrove, chief rabbi of the Conservative synagogue on Park Avenue in Manhattan, delivered a brilliant sermon exposing the threat to New York Jews posed by the election of Zahran Mamdani as mayor. This is not a partisan political choice, it is a question of security, protecting the rights and dignity of Jews. There is ample evidence of frenzied crowds chanting slogans calling for the destruction of Israel, attacking and insulting Jews, but the local authorities were unable and unwilling to oppose this. What kind of protection can we expect from Mamdani? And in the conservative Or Olom synagogue, Rabbi Eugene Vernick mourns the Palestinians and illegal immigrants, says that Israel has “disgraced” itself and Judaism, and delivers fiery invectives against Netanyahu and Trump.

Obviously, Mamdani is not the root of the problem; there have always been plenty of people like him. Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson were no better, but in any halfway decent society, they were met with disgust rather than sympathy. The main thing is the scale and influence of the politician’s base; politician is the voice of its sentiments, and what he says and does allows him to attract attention and support. The appearance of Mamdani and many like him is not unexpected. But the thinking and behavior of their Jewish supporters are beyond the control of reason and conscience.

Experts and commentators

The winners and losers in the war between Israel and Hamas are debatable and can be assessed in different ways, but it is clear that Israel has lost the propaganda war. The forces here are not equal, world public opinion is on the side of the Palestinians, media celebrities and unknown bloggers are primarily concerned with ratings, audience growth, and earnings. Criticism and slander of Israel and the Jewish lobby are more profitable than an objective informational and moral position.

Anti-Semitic bacchanalia and conspiracy theories completely dominate social media. Today, a blogger can have more influence than a television star or a columnist for an elite publication because they do not have to take any norms and responsibility into account. Shocking fabrications and the incitement of base passions generate more interest than impartial analysis.

Even in mainstream media outlets with solid reputations, the conflict is covered in such a way that the victim of a monstrous crime becomes the perpetrator. This does not require outright lies; it is enough to talk about the “disproportionate” response of Israel and innocent civilians, avoiding the question of who is responsible for their suffering and what responsibility these civilians bear, the vast majority of whom support terrorists and celebrate their crimes.

The media is called the “fourth estate,” but although trust in it is as low as trust in state institutions, it has become a dominant factor in shaping worldviews and social behavior.

Democracy weakens state institutions but opens up unprecedented opportunities for the development and influence of media structures. The boundaries of freedom of speech are blurred, and attempts to bring them back to common sense are seen as an attack on the fundamental foundations of democracy, the establishment of censorship and dictatorship. The president of the country will speak out against fake news and respond to his opponents is an autocrat and despot, an enemy of freedom, but the daily harassment of the president is a balance of power, a defense of the Constitution and democracy.

At the same time, even media apostles and super-celebrities understand the limits of their capabilities. They know that success is not ensured by intellectual superiority or depth of analysis, but by media marketing—which is in high demand today and determines the possibility of existence. It is show business for sale.

The situation in academic centers is not much different. In the social sciences and education, funding sources, grants, and the need to keep up with the times determine direction, positions, and conclusions to a greater extent than competence and critical thinking. A professor can, with general approval, preach liberal ideology, freely express politically correct ideas, admire Obama and even Biden and Harris, express understanding for Hamas and empathize with the Palestinians, but it is difficult to imagine that he would say a kind word about Trump and in defense of Israel’s rights and still maintain good relations with his colleagues and the administration.

One of the stereotypes firmly entrenched in the public consciousness is the idea of Jewish control of the media and education. Although 90% of what is written and said in the press, on television, in schools, and universities is contrary to Jewish interests, the stereotype remains unshakable.

The vast majority of Jews in the media serve the propaganda of the Democratic Party. In universities, although there are still a significant number of Jews among students and teachers, the atmosphere is shaped by “woke” ideologues, “critical race theory,” Arab sponsors, and students. Those who do not toe the line are doomed to ostracism and discrimination. When Jewish sponsors cut funding to elite universities, the budget losses were offset by even larger donations to counter Trump’s efforts to curb anti-Semitism on campuses.

Today, a colossal amount of information is widely available, but most of it does not serve rational thinking and behavior. In addition to obvious lies and manipulations, there is an avalanche of primitive, one-dimensional, distorted perceptions of the world, events, people, and relationships. Medical statistics are full of evidence that information chaos is a source of serious mental abnormalities and deviant behavior. New technologies have given sociopaths and psychopaths ample opportunity to present the fruits of their pathological thinking to a mass audience and feel needed and recognized. Paranoid ideas, aggression, hatred, and bullying have filled the media space. It is foolish and costly to engage in debate with such opponents, and impunity encourages a sick psyche.

With unlimited media freedom, there are opportunities for self-expression that require nothing more than free time, arrogance, and stupidity. Professor of philosophy Aaron James defined the concept of “Asshole” in his bestseller of the same name: this is a parasite who lives off what others say and write. His favorite genre is commentary. He does not bother to analyze content and ideas; his attention is focused on the author’s personality. His arsenal is limited to swearing and insults. This activity does not bring fame or money, but the reward is that rude comments and the role of judge and prosecutor flatter their damaged self-esteem and give a sense of meaning to a meaningless existence.

Authors with Jewish surnames receive special attention. I have long been acquainted with Rabbi Shmuli Boteach, a legendary figure and the most famous rabbi in America. He is a staunch defender of Israel, a friend of Netanyahu, and a supporter of Trump. He is the author of 20 popular books and hundreds of articles, a brilliant speaker and debater. But he is powerless to cope with the avalanche of hatred and stupidity that accompanies each of his publications or speeches, whether on big politics, theology, or “kosher sex.”

The reaction of professional anti-Semites is predictable and understandable. But what is striking is the multitude of hostile comments from Jews, from the Orthodox to atheists. A Jew’s malicious response to another Jew is part of life in the Diaspora, but Israel is not an example of delicate relations either. In the thick volume Jewish Priorities, which features 60 authoritative Jewish authors, there is an admission: “There is nothing sadder than a stupid Jew.” But even sadder is an educated and otherwise sensible Jew who panders to anti-Semites and believes that this will spare him from hatred and persecution. Jews are still lucky that instead of Mamdani it was not a Jew, as this is a very real possibility in America.

The art of the impossible

The 39th World Zionist Congress was recently held in Jerusalem, bringing together delegates from 40 countries. It is the largest forum that determines the tasks and prospects of the Jewish state and the Jewish diaspora. The “Parliament of the Jewish People” remains committed to the ideas and goals of the First Congress in Basel, which laid the foundation for the Zionist movement. Despite all the differences and polarization in Israel and the diaspora, the Congress is a testament to Jewish democracy and expresses a common desire for the security and well-being of Jews around the world. The Congress serves as a bridge connecting Israel and world Jewry and seeks to influence Israeli national institutions, Jewish education, and priorities.

Among the participants in the Congress is the Zionist Organization of America, led by Mort Klein, an uncompromising defender of Israel and American Jews. He is not bothered by UN votes and the position of most countries: “The world is wrong, Israel is right.” But among American Jewish organizations, he has more opponents than supporters.  The annual meeting of ZOA supporters has just taken place, confirming that the threat is growing and the front of struggle is only expanding – from Holocaust denial to normalization and the rapid growth of new anti-Semitism in politics, media, education, and culture. ZOA will fight against Mandani’s policies and actions and calls on all Jewish groups to join in these efforts.

Zionist organizations preserve traditions and pay attention to the history of Zionism, the legacy of Theodor Herzl. A decisive shift in the views of the founders of Zionism occurred under the influence of the Dreyfus Affair, when crowds in the streets of Paris shouted “Death to the Jews,” the press supported pogromist sentiments, and the government remained inactive. The illusions of equality and freedom collapsed, and it became clear that the only solution to the Jewish question was the creation of an independent Jewish state.

Herzl presented an idealistic picture of the Jewish return to their historical homeland. He hoped for the understanding and assistance of the enlightened rulers of the great powers, the friendship of the Arabs, whom the Jews would help to improve their welfare and share in the achievements of world civilization. He believed that the Jews would achieve equality and recognition among the family of nations.  Even today, one can argue about how to relate to Herzl’s ideas and hopes, whether they were a brilliant prophecy or a great utopia. The creation of Israel came at a huge price, the achievements are undeniable, but the trials are endless and the prospects are ambiguous. Anti-Semitism has grown to a global level, Israel is an outcast among nations, and within the country there is no unity or common vision for the future.

What would Herzl say if he saw modern Israel? One can imagine great joy and pride in its achievements and victories. But one can also imagine his disappointment: the current Jewish state bears little resemblance to his project of a “Little Switzerland” living in peace and cooperation with its neighbors and the whole world, in civil unity, where all external and internal problems are solved through diplomacy and good will, and where justice and prosperity are accessible to all. In this unresolvable dispute, Herzl can be called both a prophet equal to Moses and a utopian dreamer who failed to foresee the trials that lay ahead.

If it is difficult to unequivocally assess the fateful events of 130 years ago, then perhaps we should not rush to conclusions about the current unstable situation and make predictions. But there are obvious realities, and there is a need to make decisions here and now.

The end of hostilities is not Victory Day, Hamas has not been destroyed, and the Palestinians are not waiting for liberators. World public opinion has not changed its attitude toward Israel, and global anti-Semitism has not weakened. Even in Western countries, anti-Semitism is becoming normalized in politics and the public atmosphere. In Israel, party divisions have intensified, and the diaspora is divided and infected with liberal illusions.

But Israel has been able to heroically resist not only hostile forces in the region, but also to pursue an independent policy and act in the face of unprecedented global pressure and discrimination. The famous maxim “Politics is the art of the possible” did not define Israel’s actions. It was a policy of the impossible, beyond the realm of everyday experience and thinking.

The UN and the International Court of Justice consider Benjamin Netanyahu a criminal, and even in Israel he has many harsh critics, but fortunately for Israel, in its most difficult hour, he was chosen by time and history. One can imagine what would have happened if, after October 7, the government had been led by Netanyahu’s soft-hearted opponents. The return of the hostages would have been paid with territorial concessions and the unconditional release of all terrorists from Israeli prisons, which would have emboldened Israel’s enemies to commit new crimes and inflicted severe trauma on Jewish self-awareness and dignity.

It is also clear that if Obama, Biden, or Harris had been in the White House at that time instead of Trump, Israel would have faced immeasurably greater trials and sacrifices. No politician in American history has done more for Israel and for the fight against anti-Semitism than Trump, not to mention other politicians around the world. He is right when he calls American Jews ungrateful. Numerous polls show that only 25-30% of Jews approve of Trump, 26% of Jews voted for him, and 71% voted for Harris.

Only Trump could offer a phenomenal plan to transform Gaza. It is not even a question of how realistic it is; only 15-20% of leading experts believe it is possible to implement. It is a powerful political statement that clearly indicates whose side the consciousness and will of a state leader, rather than a temporary politician, is on.

Trump’s idea is so stunningly unexpected that even a well-wishing supporter of Israel may find it utopian. It is worth clarifying. The birth of this idea is associated with the name of Jarvin Curtis. He is considered an ultra-right political philosopher who argued that democracy has exhausted itself as a political system, is unable to cope with new challenges and contradictions, and has lost its existential potential and will to self-preservation. Democracy is constantly retreating in the face of aggressive pressure from destructive forces and cannot be reformed.

He believes it is necessary to replace democracy with an autocratic system. It should be headed by a technocrat who makes decisions together with competent experts. Creative and financial contributions to the development of science, technology, and the economy will determine a person’s place and well-being in society. He is against all forms of affirmative action and social dependency. Yarvin has a lot of support in the corporate world. He has supporters in the Trump administration and was at his inauguration.

Yarvin denies that Trump project to transform Gaza into a prosperous metropolis was borrowed from him. Americans have a saying: “Great minds think alike.” Great minds think very differently, but coincidences of ideas and discoveries are quite possible.

While Trump presented the idea in very general terms, Yarvin gave it clear contours. International corporations should lead and finance the transformation of Gaza. Palestinians will receive decent financial compensation for resettling in other regions. Those who prefer to stay will be given the opportunity to do so, provided, of course, that they have no desire to engage in criminal activity. Corporate law enforcement agencies will not stand on ceremony with those who do not comply with laws and rules of conduct.

It will be the world’s first independent corporate state with its own legislation and executive bodies. It will have its own police force and army. The idea that several Singapores or Dubais could be built in Gaza is not new. The location and climatic conditions allow for the creation of a prosperous state equipped with the latest scientific and technological achievements. There are quite real resources for this. Elon Musk’s resources and ambitions would be enough to start with. His wealth exceeds the budgets of Russia, Portugal, Israel, and most countries in the world.

However, Yarvin proposes that the project be led not by Musk, but by Israeli billionaire Adam Newman, a figure even more eccentric than Musk. Newman is 46 years old, has six children, and is convinced that he will live forever, become a trillionaire, and possibly president of the world. He has dyslexia and for a long time was unable to read or write. Perhaps this turned out to be his advantage, as his brain is free from postulates and stereotypes, like many of the world’s kings with Asperger’s syndrome. Newman is Jewish, Yervin is half-Jewish, and the scope for conspiracy theories is limitless.

No one asks me, but I think I have better candidates. Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are titans of the construction and investment industries. They know the balance of power and interests in the region, and their diplomatic skills are a cut above the useless chatterboxes at the UN. Trump’s blessing and interest are guaranteed. Both have proven that the Jewish mind and will can make the impossible possible.