February 21, 2005
CONTRADICTIONS DO TEND TO RESOLVE THEMSELVES:
Europe's Jews Seek Solace on the Right (CRAIG S. SMITH, 2/20/05, NY Times)
A curious thing is happening in Belgium these days: a small but vocal number of Jews are supporting a far-right party whose founders were Nazi collaborators. The xenophobic party, Vlaams Belang, plays on fears of Arab immigrants and, unlike the prewar parties from which it is descended, courts Jewish votes. Perhaps 5 percent of the city of Antwerp's Jews gave it their votes in the last election.The Belgian example is extreme, but it represents the sharpest edge of a much broader political shift by European Jews - away from the left, particularly the far left, and toward the center and right, in the face of rising displays of anti-Semitism and the European left's embrace of the Palestinian cause.
This drift from the left has "been going on steadily for the last 20 or 30 years," said Tony Lerman, who runs London's Hanadiv Charitable Foundation, which supports Jewish life in Europe.
Of course, the shift is not monolithic and some of it is also associated with a rise in Jews' social and economic status. In the vast majority of cases it represents a move toward tolerant parties of the center or center-right rather than a leap to the far end of the spectrum - where many xenophobic parties remain unfriendly to Jews as well as to Arabs. So the number of Jews on the far right remains a very slim minority.
But the fact that there are any at all is a measure of the degree to which many of Europe's 2.4 million Jews feel abandoned by the left and are still searching for a comfortable place in European politics.
Meanwhile, they are becoming increasingly active in the mainstream right.
Kind of ironic that it is precisely the lack of danger in America that makes it possible for American Jews to stay loyal to a Democratic Party that opposes their interests. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 21, 2005 6:50 AM
Facts which, of course, should be considered as we analyze the US administration as it formulates policy in the Middle East.
I have no doubt that Bush will remain friendly and supportive of Israel for his own reasons, but the opinions of American Jews certainly will not be a factor.
After what is universally agreed as four years of the most stalwart Israel-supportive administration in US history (at least since Truman), US Jews voted for Kerry four out of five.
The blunt truth now is that Bush, and Republicans for that matter, owe US Jews jack-squat.
Speaking as one who has defended both Israel and Jews overall quite passionately over the last bitter year, I'd say it's time for US Jews to get the hell off that reservation, for the same reason that their remaining European siblings are. Totalitarianism has NEVER been a friend to Jews, and it ain't on the right that the spectre of totalitarianism lives and breathes today.
Posted by: Andrew X at February 21, 2005 10:30 AMWhile this oughtn't change the sentiment too drastically, 24% of Jews (not four of five) voted for Bush last November
In the 2000 elections, 19% of voting Jews cast their vote for Bush.
As far as I can ascertain (though I haven't polled every Jewish voter, obviously) those 76% who voted for Kerry believed that he better represented their vision of a liberal America on the one hand and would have continued to support Israel strongly on the other.
I happen to think that they were mistaken on both counts. Apparently, so did that additional 5% of Jewish voters.
How much all this actually means may be moot. I would like to think though (biased as I am) that the additional 5% made a difference in Florida and/or Ohio.
Posted by: Barry Meislin at February 21, 2005 11:19 AMSorry, that first sentence should read "...(not one out of five)..."
Posted by: Barry Meislin at February 21, 2005 11:21 AMSo corrected. Thanks.
Posted by: Andrew X at February 21, 2005 11:42 AMAs Gertrude Himmelfarb demonstrated, the polling of Jews overstates the votes of secular, suburban Jews and understates that of religious urban Jews, creating a liberal bias. Just look at polling data that purports to canvass Jews and ask yourself if when the poll was conducted 'over a weekend' they were calling Boro Park, Brooklyn on a Friday evening.
Giuliani won a majority of the Jewish vote in each of his mayoral races, despite being a Republican, and Lazio did better among Jews than he did among Christians in the NY Senate race against the Hildebeest, losing the Jewish vote only 47-53, while losing overall by 44-56.
Another important statistic is that Jewish contributions were evenly split between the parties. And we know that in 2000, over 40% of Jews 18-30 voted for Bush, and that number could only have increased this time around.
The main reason the Democrats hold on to the bulk of Jewish vote is their party's secularity. Historically, a muscular Christianity has been seen among Jews as a prelude to pogroms or worse and with very good reason. As Jews become more religious and more comfortable in America, that will change. My closest friend in politics is a NJ Assemblyman who is Irish Catholic and Right-To-Life. When he first ran for office, he was utterly amazed not only that a large number of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews(they are a significant presence in his district) voted for him but the reasons they did so were so seemed so odd(to me as well). They liked him because he was pro-Life and pro-school voucher. Their kids don't go to public schools and they benefit from vouchers just as Catholic or Evangelical parents would. And Jewish law is very clear on its opposition to abortion.
Think of it as a ladder, the question is not which rung you are on but which direction you are moving.
Posted by: Bart at February 21, 2005 12:49 PMBart:
NY is unique because Jews live in proximity to blacks.
Posted by: oj at February 21, 2005 12:57 PMoj, ever been to miami :) ?
Posted by: cjm at February 21, 2005 1:26 PMChicago, Philly, LA, Atlanta, Baltimore, DC, Cleveland, Cincinnati, St. Louis and New Orleans all have significant, long-standing Jewish populations, as well as significant Black populations.
Posted by: Bart at February 21, 2005 1:35 PMNot living on top of each other.
Posted by: oj at February 21, 2005 1:40 PMThey do in Cincinnati. The major Cincinnati Jewish neighborhoods are changing now just like Harlem did. The middle class blacks move in, the middle class Jews move out, then the lower class blacks move in and the rest of the Jews move to the next suburb. Result is that the blacks and the Jews live right next to each other. Think Avondale and Roselawn. The Orthodox synagogues are moving from Avondale to Roselawn and the congregations are moving with them. The communities are right next to each other. The Jewish shops are still in Avondale.
Posted by: dick at February 21, 2005 1:52 PMYes, Cincinnati proves the point:
http://www.cincypost.com/2002/12/05/fount120502.html
Posted by: oj at February 21, 2005 4:03 PMOJ, I don't understand your point. If party afiliation were geographic we would expect adjacent or overlaping communities to polarize politically, not align.
In fact the ethnopolitcal alliances in this country are historic and based on patterns of immigration and assimalation. Jews are Democrats because they were assimilated into American political life by the big city machines of the urban Northeast in the first half of the 20th century.
Blacks are the anomaly. By all rights they should be Republicans out of historic aversion to the party of the solid south.
The fact is that neither group has been well served by the Democrats, which just shows how easy it is to get sold out when you are taken for granted.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at February 21, 2005 10:42 PM