Post-Zionism and
Democracy
Raya Epstein
Post-Zionism is not merely an ideology, it is also the reality
within which the State of Israel functions. The fact that the citizens
of the country – which was established in order to serve as a refuge
for the persecuted Jewish people – the fact that these citizens are
being murdered and wounded on a daily basis is intimately, directly
and categorically tied to the formation of the post-Zionist reality
in Israel.
*
The
Israeli Left, in the wake of the Six Day War, did not exchange one
form of liberal democracy for another, but rather carried out a silent
revolution, a reversal, which was neither brought to the attention of
the public nor recognized as such by the people. It exchanged the
outdated Labor Party approach, a combination of socialism and Zionism
of the Jewish secular variety (yes, it was still a Jewish identity –
even though it possessed a secular nature and rather crude atheistic
manifestations) for a secular atheistic religion, the democratic
faith, which was designed to constitute a total, absolute
alternative to any conceivable sort of Jewish identity.
*
The
early adherents of socialist Zionism find themselves incapable of
reconciling Zionism with anti-totalitarian principles. They sought to
restore the State of Israel to the course of the
socialist-collectivist Zionist past, which existed no more, instead of
attempting to develop the new, progressive approach of Zionism on the
basis of classic liberalism. In other words, in accordance with the
conservative Anglo-Saxon model of liberalism, as opposed to its French
model, which is laden with clear totalitarian tendencies (see Yaakov
Talmon’s writings on the matter). This classic liberal model, of
course, does not at all contradict Judaism, but on the contrary, its
roots are anchored to a large degree in the Jewish biblical foundation
of the Calvinist, Christian reformation. In contrast, both the
socialist component of Labor Zionism and its post-Zionist enemy – are
both anchored in the French totalitarian model, which is hostile to
Judaism.
The
serious problem, which makes our attempt to develop an authentic
liberal version of Zionism more difficult, is the fact that the
classic liberal model has failed today even in the West itself. The
“New Middle East”, which was, and continues to be, formed by the State
of Israel (both Zionist and post-Zionist) with the blood of its Jewish
citizens, has made a considerable contribution to the renewed victory
of totalitarian democracy, which in the wake of the collapse of the
Communist bloc has assumed the form of what is in fact a phony
liberalism.
Then, the members of Mapam sought positions of influence in the army.
The political hacks among them opposed the paratroopers under the
command of Ariel Sharon, because of the retaliatory actions, which
they opposed. Apparently, the Palmah alumni identified the General
Staff Reconnaissance Force as an army unit in which they could gain
influence. According to the testimonies of Dovik Tamari and Ehud Barak,
the thought of continuity of the Palmah spirit was the motivating
factor behind the unit’s founder, Avraham Ornan. These instances of
politicization led, in times of crisis, to the creation of
organizations like “Yesh Gvul”, (the name is a play on the
Hebrew words meaning “There is a Border”, i.e. “There is a Limit”) the
Peace Now officers’ letter and many other phenomena of ideological
delinquency, which endanger Israeli democracy.
