Introduction
Sel-Departure, Exile, and the Critique o Zionism
every book begins by considering is own impossibiliy, bu his book’s compleion has depended on a way o working wih ha impossibiliy wihou a clear resoluion. Even so, somehing o ha impos-sibiliy has o be susained wihin he wriing, even i i coninually hreaens o bring he projec o a hal. Wha sared as a book seeking o debunk he claim ha any and all criicism o he Sae o Israel is effecively ani-Semiic has become a mediaion on he necessiy o arrying wih he impossible. I will ry o make his clear in wha ollows, bu le me sae he risk o his endeavor clearly rom he sar. I I succeed in showing ha here are Jewish resources or he criicism o sae violence, he colonial subjugaion o populaions, expulsion and dispossession, hen I will have managed o show ha a Jewish criique o Israeli sae violence is a leas possible, i no ehically obligaory. I I show, urher, ha here are Jewish values o cohabiaion wih he non-Jew ha are par o he very ehical subsance o diasporic Jewishness, hen i will be possible o conclude ha commimens o social equaliy and social jusice have been an inegral par o Jewish secular, social-is, and religious radiions. Tough his should come as no surprise, i has become necessary o reierae his argumen over and agains a public discourse ha assumes any criicism o he Israeli occupaion, o inernal inequaliies wihin Israel, o land confiscaions, and o violen bombardmens o rapped populaions such as hose we saw in Operaion Cas Lead—indeed, any objecions o he requiremens o ciizenship in ha counry—is ani-Semiic or ani-Jewish, no in he service o he Jewish people, or in no way in line wih wha we migh generally call Jewish values. In oher words, i would be a painul irony indeed i he Jewish sruggle or social jusice were isel cas as ani-Jewish.
Copyrighted Material
Le’s say I succeed in showing ha here are no only bona fide bu imperaive Jewish radiions ha oppose sae violence and modes o colonial expulsion and conainmen. I hen succeed in affirming a differen Jewishness han he one in whose name he Israeli sae claims o speak. And I help o show ha here are no only significan differences among Jews—secular, religious, hisorically consiued—bu also acive sruggles wihin ha communiy abou he meaning o jusice, equaliy, and he criique o sae violence and colonial subjugaion. Indeed, i he argumen were o sop here, and i proved persuasive, hen i would esablish ha i is surely no ani-Jewish or couner-Jewish o offer a criique o he orms o sae violence insiued and mainained by poliical Zionism (which would include he massive dispossessions o Palesinians in , he appropriaion o land in , and he recurren confiscaions o Palesinian lands ha coninues now wih he building o he wall and he expansion o setlemens). Tis alone is imporan, since Israel claims o represen he Jewish people, and popular opinion ends o assume ha Jews “suppor” Israel wihou aking ino accoun Jewish radiions o ani-Zionism and he presence o Jews in coaliions ha oppose he Israeli colonial subjugaion o Palesinians.I I win he poin on hese erms, I am immediaely conroned, however, wih anoher problem. By claiming here is a significan Jewish radiion affirming modes o jusice and equaliy ha would, o necessiy, lead o a criicism o he Israeli sae, I esablish a Jewish perspecive ha is non-Zionis, even ani-Zionis, a he risk o making even he resisance o Zionism ino a “Jewish” value and so assering, indirecly, he excepional ehical resources o Jewishness. Bu i he criique o Zionism is o be effecive and subsanial, ha claim o excepionalism has o be reused in avor o more undamenal democraic values. However imporan i may be o esablish Jewish opposiions o Zionism, his canno be done wihou a crii-cal move ha quesions he sufficiency o a Jewish ramework, however alernaive and progressive, as he defining horizon o he ehical. Te opposiion o Zionism requires he deparure rom Jewishness as an exclusionary ramework or hinking boh ehics and poliics. Any legiimae way o hink abou a poliy or he region would have o emerge rom he conesing ehical and poliical radiions ha inorm conduc, hinking, modes o belonging, and anagonism in he region. In oher words, alhough i is surely possible o claim ha here are Jewish grounds or a criique o sae violence, ones ha ough legiimaely o be exended o he Sae o Israel isel, ha remains a parial, hough imporan, argumen o be made during hese imes. I he prin-
Copyrighted Material