What Is A Zionist?

And Why I'm Not One

Props to all who can name this painting and interpret its significance

No, I’m not asking that in the way Matt Walsh asked “What Is A Woman?” (which I thought was brilliant.)

I’m asking it in a 100% sincere way.

Many years ago I read a semi-masterpiece called Letters To An American Jewish Friend: A Zionist’s Polemic, by Hillel Halkin, a translator whose articles you can read here and there.

The book’s pub date was 1977 and the events it refers to occurred in the early 70s. Already then the word “Zionist” was a slur in leftist circles. Even then Israelis were doing things that made liberal American Jews feel mighty embarrassed. Halkin deals with this unflinchingly in the book.

The Palestinian may be my enemy and my victim, as he would make me his, but ethically we are equals, and our relationship is not philanthropic, because whatever amends I make to him or he wrings from me, whatever rectification of past or prevention of future injustices, involves immense risks to myself.¹

I call it a “semi-masterpiece” because there were holes in Halkin’s argument, which I’ll attempt to fill in another time.

For now, I call attention to it because it was also the best single account of modern Jewish history I’ve ever read; cleared up a lot that had been confusing me; and contained many little gems throughout that stuck with me.

One of these gems was this. Referring to the “Zionism Is Racism” vote in the UN, which took place on November 10, 1975, Halkin wrote:

It’s all very kind of Jews in New York or Los Angeles to wish to express their solidarity with us in the face of such a scandal and to find no better way to do so than to wear “I am a Zionist” buttons like carnations in their lapels, but since a Zionist is precisely what none of them is—for what Zionism happens to involve is the Jewish decision not to live in Los Angeles or New York—they are doing no one any service by confusing the issue even further.

Let them wear “Haman for Secretary General of the UN” buttons if they must, but, for heaven’s sake, spare us a word that has already been abused quite enough. (From the very inception of the Zionist movement, in fact, there has always been a tendency to refer by it to people who approve of other people leading Zionist lives—an attitude of the man who once said that he loved work so much, he could sit and watch it all day.)²

I remember reading that and saying to myself, “Yeah.”

That’s why I don’t call myself a Zionist. I haven’t earned that right. I’m a pro-Zionist.

Words either have meanings or they do not, and I don’t apologize for being passionate about that, and about this in particular.

I’d been meaning to write about this but something else always came up. A few days ago, I came across Jill Stein’s name in the comment thread of Benjamin Kerstein’s “Jews, Think About Your Vote”:

Jill disagreed with the pro-Trump slant of the post. Fine. But this, shall we say, gave me pause:

“I'm willing to give my vote to someone who I believe will do a better job protecting the rights of the masses and of minorities, perhaps at my own expense.” (emphasis added)

Perhaps at my own expense.

If that’s how she feels as an American voter, OK. If you want to sacrifice some of your own interests to vote for Kamala, go ahead. All voting entails compromise. No candidate is perfect. When it comes down to two candidates, you just have to suck it up and decide.

But in the context of the post, we’re not discussing secular American things. We’re discussing the fate of Israel and here is where Hillel Halkin’s insistence on definitional cleanliness comes in as well as his observation that the Israeli is not in the position of being “philanthropic” to the Palestinian. Anything he concedes is at a risk to his life and to the lives of his children.

Is that true of Jill Stein? No? Then don’t call yourself a Zionist. Vote for Kamala as an American Jew — but not in the guise (or should I say disguise?) of the Zionist you aren’t.

And spare us the St. Golda bullshit. She was completely ill-equipped for the job of being Israel’s prime minister and is in many ways emblematic of the cultural and intellectual deficiencies of Eastern European Labor Zionism and its inability to comprehend its environment. Again: another story for another day, but shouldn’t a “Zionist” know about this?

Even a left-wing Israeli wouldn’t say: “Vote for Kamala even at my expense.” A left-wing Israeli would say, if consulted, that he favors Kamala because he or she legitimately feels that she’s the better candidate for him in the long run. I don’t agree, but that’s honest and logical.³

This is the genesis of the note I wrote here.

Jill took extreme exception to my “diatribe” (of a bit more than 300 words; attention spans are short nowadays) and returned repeatedly to respond to me, protesting each time how unimportant I was and thanking me for getting her paid subscribers.⁴

You’re welcome, Jill. Be happy with the $5 a month and the backrubs from your subscribers. They mean nothing.

I’d suggest you read Halkin’s book and try to think about these things a little more deeply but I doubt you could understand what he’s talking about.

1. Halkin, Hillel. Letters to an American Jewish Friend: a Zionist's Polemic (Kindle Locations 1616-1617). Gefen Publishing House. Kindle Edition.

2. Halkin, Hillel. Letters to an American Jewish Friend: a Zionist's Polemic (Kindle Locations 628-630). Gefen Publishing House. Kindle Edition.

3. Although I don’t think Trump will be a lot better—again, another story for another day.

4. Jill’s response: snide ridicule and contempt is not surprising from a Kamala supporter; their chief characteristic is a word that rhymes with “grunt” and ends in “—iness.”