[PAA-Discuss] New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neocon Jewish Groups Are

[Ken Freeland]

American Jews on War and Peace:

What Do the Polls Tell Us and Not Tell Us?


James Petras


December 15, 2007





Introduction


Once again, a poll recently released by the American Jewish Committee (AJC)
(1) has confirmed that on some questions of major significance there are
vast differences between the opinion of the Presidents of the Major American
Jewish Organizations and the mass of American Jews. On questions of the Iraq
war, the escalation of US military forces in Iraq (the ‘Surge’) and military
action against Iran, most Jewish Americans differ from the leaders of the
major American Jewish organizations.

Most liberal, progressive or radical Jewish commentators have emphasized
these differences to argue, “most American Jews resoundingly reject the
Middle East militarism and GOP foreign policy championed by right-wing
Jewish factions.”(2) This progressive interpretation however avoids an even
more fundamental question: How is it that a majority of US Jews who,
according to the AJC poll (and several others going back over two decades)
differ with the principal American Jewish organizations, have not or do not
challenge the position of the dominant Jewish organization, have virtually
no impact on the US Congress, the Executive and the mass media in comparison
to the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations?

The issue of the ‘silent majority’ is questionable since all Jewish and
non-Jewish commentators point to the highly vocal and disproportionate rates
of participation of American Jews in the political process, from electoral
campaigns to civil society movements. Nor is it clear that the progressive
majority lacks the high incomes of the reactionary ‘minority’. There are
some Jewish millionaires and even a few billionaires who hold views opposing
the leadership of the major Jewish organizations. There are several probable
explanations that account for the power of Jewish leaders in shaping US
Middle East policy and the relative impotence of the majority of American
Jews.


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 National 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.1J1TSPHKoG/b.36428551>
www.ajc.org/site/c.1J1TSPHKoG/b.36428551

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.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Carter [mailto:rwcsr1 at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:37 PM
To: rwcsr1 at yahoo.com
Subject: Fwd: Re: [PAA-Discuss] New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neocon
Jewish Groups Are




Bob Carter <rwcsr1 at yahoo.com> wrote: 

Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:33:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Carter <rwcsr1 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [PAA-Discuss] New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neocon
Jewish Groups Are
To: Alyssa Burgin <aburgin4peace at gmail.com>, 
PAA Discuss List <Discuss at paa-tx.org>
CC: Mandell <mandell at yahoogroups.com>, notinourname at yahoogroups.com


Alyssa,   
     I have always been satisfied that there are a strong minority of Jews
that vehemently oppose the Zionist neocon positions which, in my opinion,
cause anti-Semitism and will ultimately lead to the destruction of Israel,
and to more anti-Semitism. Does this group of Jews (minority or majority?)
oppose the Zionist neocon position because they think that it is wrong and
immoral or do they think that if it continues, Israel will be severely
damaged or both?  Are there others reasons why they oppose?  I don't know. 
 
     The survey endeavors to prove that Jewish opposition to neocon/Zionism
is comprised of much more than a minority. 
 
     I clicked on the Common Dreams web site and again clicked on to the
full survey of 38 questions and read them very carefully. I think the most
of the questions were fair and some even probing. 
 
     In any survey one needs to try to determine the reason or motives of
those doing the polling.  What questions were not asked?  
 
     Question 14 was very interesting: "Do you agree or disagree with the
following statement?  'The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied
territories but rather the destruction of Israel.' "  The answer: 82%
agreed--only 12% disagreed.  This was shocking  and a strange question. If
the territories were not illegally and immorally occupied, why would there
be any opposition to Israel?
 
     FURTHER, WHY DO WE REFUSE TO ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT GO TO THE VERY
HEART AND ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM?
     Do you agree or disagree that all of the illegal (Jewish only)
settlements in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem should be removed?
     Do you agree or disagree to the right of return of Palestinians?
     Do you agree or disagree that the wall/fence (which was declared
illegal in 2004 by the UN's International Court of Justice) built on
Palestinian land should be removed?
 
     If questions like this were asked, the results of the survey may have
been a bit different. The Israel/Palestine conflict WILL NEVER be solved
until these questions are asked and properly resolved according to
International law and UN resolutions.
 
     I am pleased that the survey was taken and am forever grateful to the
principled Jews and Palestinians who have the courage, in great risk, to
treat their neighbors as they would like to be treated.
 
Bob 
     
Alyssa Burgin <aburgin4peace at gmail.com> wrote:


Go to http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/12/12/5792/ to read comments.
 
Published on Wednesday, December 12, 2007 by Salon.com
<http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/12/ajc_poll/index.html>  

New Poll Reveals How Unrepresentative Neocon Jewish Groups Are

by Glenn Greenwald
A  <http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642849/> new survey of American
Jewish opinion , released by the American Jewish Committee, demonstrates
several important propositions: (1) right-wing neocons (the Bill
Kristol/Commentary/ AIPAC/Marty Peretz faction) who relentlessly claim to
speak for Israel and for Jews generally hold views that are shared only by a
small minority of American Jews; (2) viewpoints that are routinely demonized
as reflective of animus towards Israel or even anti-Semitism are ones that
are held by large majorities of American Jews; and (3) most American Jews
oppose U.S. military action in the Middle East — including both in Iraq and
against Iran.
It is beyond dispute that American Jews overwhelmingly oppose
<http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642855/> core neoconservative
foreign policy principles. Hence, in large numbers, they disapprove of the
way the U.S. is handling its "campaign against terrorism" (59-31);
overwhelmingly believe the U.S. should have stayed out of Iraq (67-27);
believe that things are going "somewhat badly" or "very badly" in Iraq
(76-23); and believe that the "surge" has either made things worse or has
had no impact (68-30).
When asked whether they would support or oppose the United States taking
military action against Iran, a large majority — 57-35% — say they would
oppose such action, even if it were being undertaken "to prevent [Iran] from
developing nuclear weapons." While Jews hold
<http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642857/> views on the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict which are quite pessimistic about the prospects
for Israel's ability to achieve a lasting peace with its "Arab neighbors,"
even there, a plurality (46-43) supports the establishment of a Palestinian
state.
In the  <http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642951/> realm of U.S.
domestic politics , it is even clearer that right-wing neoconservatives are
a fringe segment of American Jewish public opinion. By a large margin,
American Jews identify as some shade of liberal rather than conservative
(43-25), and overwhelmingly identify themselves as Democrats rather than
Republicans (58-15). And, most strikingly, by a 3-1 margin (61-21), they
believe that Democrats, rather than Republicans, are "more likely to make
the right decision about the war in Iraq," and by a similarly lopsided
margin (53-30), believe that Democrats are "more likely to make the right
decision when it comes to dealing with terrorism." They have overwhelmingly
favorable views of the top 3 Democratic presidential candidates, and
overwhelmingly negative views of 3 out of the top 4 GOP candidates (Giuliani
being the sole exception, where opinion is split).
Contrary to the bottomless obssession which most neocon pundits and
office-holders have with All Matters Israel, the principal political
concerns of most American Jews have nothing to do with the Middle East.
Thus, they identify "economy/jobs" (22) and "health care" (19) — not
Terrorism — as "the most important problem facing the U.S. today." Still,
<http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3643395/> most American Jews agree
that "[c]aring about Israel is a very important part of [their] being a Jew"
— a  <http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-11-18-cubapoll_N.htm> common,
innocuous and indisputable attribute that typically triggers
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR200604040
1282.html> noxious charges of anti-Semitism if pointed out by
<http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374177724/ref=pd_
bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197461055&sr=8-1> those who oppose the
neoconservative agenda.
One of the defining traits of war-loving neoconservatives is that their
unrelenting and exclusive fixation on the Middle East places them loudly at
the center of any foreign policy debates. That tenacity — combined with
their
<http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/537qsphp.
asp> reckless exploitation of "anti-Israel" and anti-Semitism accusations as
instruments in their political rhetoric and their corresponding, deceitful
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/politics/05aipac.html> equation of their
own views with being "pro-Israel" — often casts the appearance that they are
some sort of spokespeople for the "pro-Israel" agenda or the Jewish
viewpoint.
Manifestly, they are nothing of the sort. Even among American Jews, they
comprise only a small minority, and their generally discredited militarism
is widely rejected by most Jews as well. It is always worth underscoring
these points, which are so frequently (and deliberately) obscured, and this
comprehensive poll provides potent — actually quite conclusive — evidence
for doing so.
Glenn Greenwald was previously a constitutional law and civil rights
litigator in New York. He is the author of the New York Times Bestselling
book "
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/097794400X?tag=commondreams-20&camp=0&creative=0&l
inkCode=as1&creativeASIN=097794400X&adid=0DDYV6E3FJN3EJW5RMWC&> How Would a
Patriot Act?," a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive
power, released in May 2006. His second book, "
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307354199?tag=commondreams-20&camp=0&creative=0&l
inkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0307354199&adid=0JN08D8RST19DSGHZY6K&>  A Tragic
Legacy", examines the Bush legacy.

© Salon.com <http://salon.com/> 
 




---------------
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org/
Discuss mailing list Discuss at paa-tx.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on
this list, go to:
http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org 

To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply All".
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to
the correct address.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20071217/7b8f18c0/attachment.htm>