And yet, like you, I too am exhausted. For those like us, we are trapped, trapped in a terrible bind. I know you know of what I speak. We must condemn The Genocide loudly enough to keep our seats at the progressive table, to which we must remain, but we mustn’t condemn it so loudly that we may suggest we provide any material sacrifice. We must be radical in our language and immovable in our wealth, entitlement and property.
Let me be honest, it’s exhausting being an Anti-zionist jew right now. The images from Gaza are distressing, accusations of antisemitism hurtful. We want The Genocide to stop, of course we do, but we also have careers, families, a standing Friday night dinner invitation at the Rabbi’s house. How can we navigate this moral crisis without disrupting our lives? How can we maintain the appearance of being good, progressive jews while doing absolutely nothing that costs us our comfort?
For years, thinkers have proposed final solutions to the Palestine question: One Democratic State; the right of return; reparations, but I confess these are terribly divisive, and worse, morally inconvenient for us good jews. As you may already have gathered, these require sacrifice, a sacrifice from the ancestors of those who sacrificed it all. We have sacrificed enough, it is now the turn of other people to make theirs.
My Modest Proposal
I, Menjamin Boser, the latest good jew, therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be in the least part objectionable, for I speak not like Netanyahu or Ben Gvir, for I am a good Jew. My modest proposal for us all is a comprehensive framework of “Aesthetic Anti-zionism.”
Under this framework, we Good Anti-zionist jews will dedicate our lives to the performance of radical solidarity, while ensuring not one dunam of land, not one shekel of stolen wealth, not one colonial structure is ever actually restored.
Here is my 7-step plan for success.
Seven Steps for Success
Firstly, the Good Anti-zionist jew shall declare, with feeling, that every inch of israel is Palestine. I know, it sounds harmful, but this is a magnificent rhetorically performative flourish, acknowledging history, signalling radicalism, costing us nothing. This allows us space to wallow, and wallow we must, as the good jews.
I have practiced this many times, in mirrors I never look in, as well as in front of cameras, and my eternal advice is it must be followed immediately by a profound sigh, a saddened face, a furrowed brow and the observation that the situation is, of course, incredibly complex. So, so complex. When someone confronts us about the children in the rubble, we say,
“It’s certainly a complex situation. I am waiting for a ceasefire, waiting for the ICJ, waiting for the next election.”
We must confine our morality to the future tense, as if we acknowledge The Genocide is happening right now, we might be forced to act right now.
We know what the ministers say, for our beloved Bezalel Smotrich has stated plainly, ‘There is no such thing as a Palestinian nation. There is no Palestinian history. There is no Palestinian language.’ As we read this outloud to our audiences, we must shake our heads, and say, “this is precisely why we need a two-state solution. This is why we must support the peace camp.”
For you see, Smotrich’s rhetoric is dangerous as it makes a two-state solution harder to achieve, and yet we can use this to ensure no solution is ever achieved. By acknowledging that the land is in fact Palestine, for that is what it is, we merely accept, regretfully, that it’s currently occupied by a nuclear-armed state and that we, even as good jews can’t be expected to confront that. It doesn’t matter that it is sold as the ‘jewish homeland’, ‘the only jewish state’, ‘a state for all jews’, this we should reject, for it does not further our hand. We must claim moral clarity of decolonisation, while retaining the keys to the house. Their houses.
Secondly, we must master the art of the Profoundly Guilty Platform. We will all accept every invitation, to every university, every late-night show, every legacy newspaper, every podcast, every where we can describe the horrors of occupation, in a soon to be trademark, pitiful and trembling voice.
We will appear on the podcast of a man who once wrote that he was “not a zionist,” and we will nod as he explains that anti-zionism must be “responsible.” We will not ask him what he means by responsible. We will simply be grateful to be invited.
It is essential we do not share any platforms with any actual Palestinians, unless they are the right sort of Palestinian, the sort who agrees that armed resistance is terrorism, that the word genocide should be used carefully, and that the real problem is the lack of a two-state solution.
We must centre the jewish experience of The Genocide being undertaken by jews in Palestine, in the jews name, because who else can properly explain the tragedy of what is being done in our name?
Thirdly, regarding land, property and wealth. We champion a shared future, one in which we remain in the centre of. We must reject, firmly, the return of stolen property to Palestinian refugees, which is unhelpful, maximalist and, let us be honest, not only destabilising, but also very complex. So, so complex.
Instead, we propose a beautiful vision of a future in which israelis and Palestinians live side by side in a binational state. We write books about this. We host panels about this. We do nothing whatsoever to bring it about, because to bring it about would mean returning what was taken, and we are fond of what we have.
Take note, even though in point one of the plan we claim all of israel is Palestine, we must retain our identity as israeli jews, this is not a contradiction, this is our intention.
Fourthly, we must manage our emotional boundaries. We are deeply empathetic, but we are easily overwhelmed. When Palestinians speak of the Nakba, we nod solemnly. But when they speak of resistance, we must gently explain this makes us feel unsafe and alienated.
When Gallant calls Palestinians ‘human animals,’ we are horrified, yet be certain, that the military and intelligence infrastructure committing The Genocide is hidden among the suburbs of Tel-Aviv, is in not way using civilians as human shields. For israel has the right to do this.
If someone mentions the disproportionality of murdering a Palestinian child throwing a stone at a tank, we must gently explain that violence only begets violence. We are, after all, committed to non-violence, as the good jews, who benefit from the stolen land and violence committed in Palestine, a commitment we apply with equal rigour to the occupier and the occupied. We are performing the emotional labour of opposing The Genocide being conducted in our names after all.
We must recognise this is truly exhausting work, and we should not be asked to do it while also being made to feel uncomfortable, for that is very counter-productive to our ambitions.
Fifthly, we must observe the Ritual of Condemnation. When the bombs fall, we post a quotation from Elie Wiesel, Primo Levi or Marek Edelman. We invoke the Holocaust, as it’s ours to invoke, and because it lends our criticism weight. We can infer never again means never again for anyone, but do not mention the Palestinians in this regard, for they are all terrorists after all.
We read the statements of the men and women who run the state, that ‘Gaza will become a place where no human being can exist’ (Giora Eiland), that ‘there are no innocent civilians in Gaza’ (Isaac Herzog), that ‘it is right and moral to impose a siege on Gaza, even if it means starving civilians’ (Gideon Sa’ar). We share these quotes with the caption: not in my name. But we must never omit the disclaimer: israel has a right to defend itself.
We are deeply worried about the hostages. We condemn Hamas, of course. This ensures our criticism remains within the bounds of acceptable western discourse, and we are never mistaken for those who believe Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as ourselves.
Sixthly, we demand action, the kind that costs us nothing. We urge the UN to pass another resolution. We sign open letters. We call for dialogue. We advocate for humanitarian aid, provided it does not threaten israel’s security, which as we know, it all does. What we do not do is advocate for arms embargoes, sanctions, or restitution.
When Tony Greenstein is prosecuted under the Terrorism Act for posts supporting the Gaza ghetto uprising, and subsequently acquitted, we simply note it. We post about the importance of free speech. We do not attend the trial. We do not fund the defence. We wish he had chosen a less confrontational tone.
When Palestine Action activists are arrested, we express solidarity with their aims while questioning their tactics. We are, you see, more effective inside the tent, after all. When old ladies are arrested for holding signs saying “I oppose genocide” we like the posts online condemning it, and move on.
Seventhly, and most importantly, we must never allow the situation to become simple. Complexity is our greatest ally. When someone says “this is a genocide,” we must gently remind them that “genocide is a legal term with a specific definition, and we must be careful.” When someone says “return the land,” we must explain that “the demographics are incredibly complicated.” When someone says “stop the bombs,” we must say, as the responsible voices do, that “now is not the time for a ceasefire; we must be careful about the language we use.”
Complexity is not an obstacle to action, it’s a substitute for action. It allows us to feel thoughtful while doing nothing. Was it complicated to arrange the Nakba and dispossess 750,000 people of their land, homes, livelihoods and futures? Yes, of course. Did it happen anyway? Now is not the time to discuss such deeply complex issues. So, so complex.
Unreasonable Expectations of Good jews
We should not, even as good jews, be expected to act right now, for we are not committing The Genocide being conducted in our names. Just look at the things being asked of us, the demands are utterly absurd, the work of, dare I say it, Hamas, or actions proposed by radical activists. They are entirely unreasonable.
1. Publicly condemn The Genocide and call for arms embargoes. Impossible. You have a boss, you have clients, what if they are zionists? What if they cancel you? You can’t risk your livelihood. You will keep your condemnation private, a secret, where it belongs. Like the good jew does.
2. Challenge zionist education and youth groups. This is deeply uncomfortable, uncomfortable indeed. You can’t pull your child out of their school simply because they are miseducating them. What would the other parents say? It’s much easier to let them go on Birthright trips, they will figure it out for themselves.
3. Confront our family. You expect me to challenge my Uncle at the dinner table? The man who’s parents survived the Holocaust? Have you no shame? It’s simply too rude. We do not talk about politics at the table. We eat the brisket in silence, while watching speeches from the Knesset.
4. Divest our finances and investments. Do you know how much paperwork that requires? Do you know the returns on my pension fund? Besides, what difference does a few hundred thousand pounds make against the American Empire? This also feels anti-semitic, to suggest jews have any wealth, money or investments at all, that is a blood libelous trope.
5. Boycott Israeli products. I cannot check every label. I cannot stop going to my favourite café or convenience store. It is an inconvenience. It’s called convenience food for a reason.
A Note to the Ungrateful
The work continues, the houses in the settlements for jews are built, my book is written, we have done our part, as much as can be expected. We have condemned, Hamas and the Israeli Government. We have been, in our own small way, good. We can now rest in peace, that we are good jews.
This piece is a modern day updating of the classic piece of satire from 1729 by Jonathan Swift, which can be read here.
