The Creative Writing Program at Carnegie Mellon annually awards a Martin Luther King Jr. Day Writing Award for high school students. Essays are supposed to ""reflect on encounters with race and difference in their own lives." This year there were two first place winners, and both essays can be read at the following link. Both essays are worthwhile reads, but the one I'm going to post below was written by a 17-year old Jewish boy on the topic of Israel entitled, "Fighting a forbidden battle: How I stopped covering up for a hidden wrong." I've pasted the essay below.
This reminds me so much of contented moderates-- who are apathetic (moderately opposed or moderately in favor, but not too bothered) toward economics for the 1%, the poverty of tens of millions of Americans; Israeli treatment of the Palestinians as the author writes about; Obama/Romney erosion of civil liberties; global warming; the permanent warfare state and anti-Iranian propaganda. etc. Oh, well.
Thanks for the positive feedback, and yes, I too felt the essay was both thoughtful and deeply moving. Sadly, Lieberfield has been roundly criticized by many for his 'warped' views on Israel. Carnegie Mellons administration has been receiving a number of emails questioning their motives and condemning their publicizing and awarding of the essay (as expected, many have branded the institution and award anti-semitic). Lieberfield himself has had to shut down his social media accounts due to the rash of negativity and criticism he's been recieving. Excellent thoughts glynch, and the term 'moderate' gets invoked so frequently that it tends to obscure issues or manipulate realities so that they can further pre-existing narratives that people want to believe. 'Moderate' philosophy need not lead to apathy, and true moderates feel passionately about issues of concern to themselves and others.
This highlights a major problem, it's almost impossible to discuss or look at the situation in Israel objectively without being branded an anti-semite. I wrote an rhetorical analysis on Israeli settlements, I couldn't believe how many of the sources were just baseless name calling "either you support Israel, or you're an anti-semite."
Moderacy is actually more rational now, because unlike Civil Rights this litany of issues affects several different groups to more wildly varying degrees. Unlike segregation or arcane lending, divorce or birth control laws against women, individuals can escape the effects of a lot of the above issues by sticking to their "routine."
[rquoter] It was different not being the ideal nice Jewish boy. The difference was subtle, yet by no means unaffecting. Whenever it came to the attention of any of our more religious family friends that I did not share their beliefs, I was met with either a disapproving stare and a quick change of the subject or an alarmed cry of, "What? Doesn't Israel matter to you?" Relatives talked down to me more afterward, but eventually I stopped noticing the way adults around me perceived me. It was worth it to no longer feel as though I were just another apathetic part of the machine.[/rquoter] I identify with and recognize the author's experience, here. There is a lot of group-think operating within the Jewish community that encourages a narrow viewpoint on Israel. One should expect certain negative, short-term social consequences when stepping out of line. The essay raises important questions about identity and conflict and their relation to each other. The reaction to these regarded-as-distasteful questions can make one feel like an outsider among one's own kind. This kid shouldn't give up on his people so quickly; with some effort, he would find a sizable number of like-minded Jews.
I once had a friend tell me that we were supporting Israel because "we don't turn out back on our allies." I responded that "we need to support the greater good." Much different from the Anti-Semite labeling, but good thing some people are able to wade through the BS. Especially someone still in high school. Our support of Israel killing and targeting civilians; ignoring genocide in Syria/Africa and then "liberating" Iraq, Pakistan, and Libya for "freedom". Oh well, I know many people (and I don't necessarily blame them) are not willing to sacrifice a low gas price for hundreds of thousands of human lives.
That is because most sources are from an extremist viewpoint. The majority of people unconsciously take sides when taking on a controversial argument and human nature dictates that the moment they take something on they will do everything in their power to "win". There is a competition in everything. You don't find many true moderates. The old are too ingrained into following a routine of narrow-minded thought. The young are too naive.
Excellent points and great response. Something I'll add for the sake of fairness is that groupthink isnt endemic to the Jewish community, and is evident in other religious/political/cultural factions to varying degrees. From your response, I'm assuming you're either Jewish or grew up in a Jewish household. I've worked a lot with Jewish communities for various efforts including social work and interfaith programs. One question/concern that's always come to mind has been in regards to your second question, and more specifically, the nature of Jewish identity. To a certain extent, I've always perceived Judaism as somewhat of an Ethnoreligious group in that ethnicity and religion are deeply interrelated (ie identifying with/taking pride in being an Isrealite is concomitant with identifying onesself as a Jew). Am I correct in this understanding? If so, to what degree do you think this contributes to an environment that treats criticisms of Israel as anti-semitic? My apologies if you're not Jewish and no worries if you dont know.
Your understanding is your understanding, so I'm not really in a position to validate it either way. I would ask, though, if you could elaborate as to how you came to that understanding. What end does identifying Jews simultaneously as both a religious and ethnic group serve? I think the two ideas are completely antithetical. The impulse to silence dissent comes from the fear of losing something that doesn't (and couldn't) exist--a pure and just nation.
My understanding is more or less a product of my readings on Judaism (examples I found online here and here) and lectures I've heard on the subject. As I said, the main purpose behind the question was an attempt to better understand the question of identity and the various dynamics that contribute to it. Agreed.
