Jews of the left/liberal camp espouse a complaint. It is that certain Jews exploit Judaism for political ends. Zionism, they assert, is foreign to how Judaism has developed since Jews lost their political sovereignty to the Romans in 135 C.E.
They use the terms “politicization of Judaism,” “instrumentalization of religion” or “appropriating Jewish tradition for political purposes.”
This is an old issue ever since the Reform movement decided to excise Zion from its prayerbooks. That was done when the Hamburg Temple dropped restoration prayers in 1818, when the Frankfurt Conference of 1845 voted to remove national restoration references and when the 1885 American Pittsburgh Platform stated: “We expect neither a return to Palestine nor the restoration of any of the laws concerning the Jewish state.”
This concern is not unique to Jews. In fact, in a recent academic study on the American settler period and the clash with the native Indians, we read that “religious differences were instrumentalized to justify territorial acquisition.” There are critics who accuse Christian nationalist movements in the United States of using Christianity to legitimize their positions on supposedly secular matters.
Those who oppose Islamism argue that Islamic concepts and institutions are mobilized to pursue political objectives. Even the idea of Hindutva is considered the politicization of Hindu identity, as when Vinayak Damodar Savarkar wrote in his 1923 “Who is a Hindu?“ that “this land … from the Indus to the seas [is] his Father-Land as well as his Holy-Land that is the cradle land of his religion.”
Of course, Jews who view themselves as liberal, progressive, radical or universalist can also be engaged in that activity. On Yom Kippur this year, a Yizkor service was conducted in Brooklyn, N.Y. The event’s description: “Jewish community members” gathered “in mass mourning, collective atonement and a call to action.”
The organizers informed the media that they “refuse to speak of Israel’s genocide in the past tense” and that they will not “be complicit in ethnic cleansing.” Nor will they “welcome wanted war criminals into our city,” a reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has not been designated a war criminal and who came to the city to speak at the United Nations on Sept. 24, days after Yom Kippur and right before the start of Sukkot.
The supporting organizations included Jews For Racial & Economic Justice, Rabbis for Ceasefire, IfNotNow, Shoresh, Congregation Kolot Chayeinu/Voices of Our Lives, The American Council for Judaism and Jewish Voice for Peace.
This adoption of Jewish rituals for political purposes is not only a wicked emptying of religious symbols. It is hypocrisy.
The special guest at the convocation, in addition to New York Jewish candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives Brad Lander, was none other than anti-Israel protest organizer and activist Mahmoud Khalil. Of Columbia University infamy, he is still awaiting his future in America; an outstanding immigration removal/deportation order is being challenged in court. But he was unrepentant, declaring his opposition to the “Zionist project” and stating that “Palestine is worth fighting for.” Those who came were asked to bring a small stone.
Khalil explained what it represented, saying: “I was asked to bring a stone, and this particular stone a friend of mine brought it to me from Jerusalem, and I try to keep it with me all the time just to connect with the land. It’s from old Jerusalem to remember that I’m connected to Palestine.”
David Friedman, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel, didn’t hold back on Lander, tweeting that his speech was a “great […] perversion of Jewish values” and “drivel emanating from this charlatan.”
Traditionally, leaving stones at a Jewish gravesite shows respect and remembrance; it’s a way of honoring the deceased, a way of reminding that someone was there.
Those who observe Judaism and treasure their cultural legacy well know that Jerusalem and a future Temple are mentioned repeatedly in their daily and festival prayers. Jerusalem is recalled at the end of the Passover seder ritual. A glass is broken at Jewish wedding service to recall the destruction of Jerusalem’s holy temples, even amid great joy.
And yet, those Jews milling about in Brooklyn are told that Khalil’s stone allows him to connect to “old Jerusalem” in “Palestine,” places he thinks Jews should feel uncomfortable in and disconnected from. (At least, he didn’t throw it at anyone.)
As someone named “Anne” posted, “This is a protest that stole Yom Kippur’s language. Yizkor is a memorial for the dead of your own people. They turned it into a stage where Jews confess the sin of genocide. … It is political theater. … They used Jewish sacred time for propaganda.”
Indeed, years ago, the Kaddish prayer was recited in New York and London for fallen Hamas terrorists who failed to get the chance to kill more Jewish men, women and children. This adoption of Jewish ritual is not only a wicked emptying of religious symbols. It is theft. And it is hypocrisy.
This orientation allows Khalil, who has been involved in encouraging anti-Jewish violence of different levels, to use the platform to call for God to “hold Israel accountable.” The Jews sharing the platform don’t care about God; if so, they stand against the Torah’s commandments—namely, “Thou shall not kill.” They don’t hold Hamas accountable for terrorism, violence, murder and rape.
In the terminology of professor Richard Landes, these Jews not only steal Judaism. Rather, they manipulate a malevolent mirror to facilitate pro-Palestinian forces using a lethal projection weapon to protect Islamist supremacism. They make up charges against Jewish and other pro-Israel supporters that are practiced by Arabs against Israel and Jews, as well as even non-Jews.
The Washington Free Beacon recently published an exposé of what it termed “Jews for Abdul” who are behind political ads for El-Sayed, claiming they are “‘social justice’ activists tied to a group that excused Oct. 7.” And now, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who is Jewish, has officially endorsed him.
Nessel, we should not forget, infamously and illogically said that Jews need to “sacrifice the comfort, safety and security, and even the very future of our own people, in exchange for the opportunity to save the rest of humanity.”
For Jews like these, their Judaism is tenuous at best—to be worn as an adornment or as a cover for their real goal of a progressive political agenda.
Hannah Gann is the latest poster girl for this hypocrisy and theft. She is white, Jewish, her family is well-off, and part of that family lives in Judea and Samaria. However, for years she presented herself as black, Palestinian, Tunisian-born and poor. What drives such a personality put-on? What possible deep-seated guilt must she hold?
The Jewish people as a collective have a rich history and a promising future. We have done much for ourselves and for humankind. We need to hold our peoplehood as a precious treasure, not yield to the pressures of hate from without or weakness from within.
