“For the last three decades we have felt that we were living in the initial phases of the greatest crisis humanity has ever known. It grows increasingly clear to us that the tremendous happenings of the past years, too, can be understood only as symptoms of this crisis. It is not merely the crisis of one economic and social system being superseded by another, more or less ready to take its place; rather all systems, old and new, are equally involved in the crisis. What is in question, therefore, is nothing less than man’s whole existence in the world.” Martin Buber, Paths in Utopia
“It is a matter of honor for me to be absolutely clean and unequivocal regarding antisemitism, namely opposed to it.” Friedrich Nietzsche, Selected Letters of Friedrich Nietzsche
My copy of Jewish Anarchist Voices arrived at my door the day after the Golders Green antisemitic attack; an incident that has followed from several others across the UK. It is a short pocket book containing 3 “accounts”, 2 anonymously published pieces and Fredy Perlman’s well known piece Anti-Semitism and the Beirut Pogrom, which I drew from in my first Against Antisemitism essay. The two newer pieces are titled On The Inherent Anti-Semitism of Zionism & the Recuperation of Jewish Struggle by the West (2024), and Heritage & Discontent (2019). I do find it somewhat disappointing that these pieces have been published without even a pen-name, as I feel it is worth voices who are Jews and anarchists putting a name to their pieces as a means of standing by what they have said; but I also appreciate that there are challenges to being open about being a Jew and being an anarchist. My intention, even though Perlman’s piece takes up the bulk of this 3 piece collection, is to focus on the 2 newer pieces in this essay, which is a choice made on the ground that they are more relevant to present/contemporary conversations regarding voices of Jewish anarchist thought.
Following the publication of part one of this essay, which I wrote immediately following the Bondi Beach attack in Australia, a single response was made by multiple individuals that I wish to address before focusing on the content of the book. This response was that, given that the state and establishment are engaging in – very spectacularised – politics of “stopping antisemitism” through “law enforcement” (also known as state-violence) means that anarchists and anti-racist activists need not engage in active revolt against antisemitism. That is that the state is the solution to antisemitism. It is worth noting that this was largely pushed by so-called opponents of statist-Zionism, but is also entirely the logic of statist-Zionism; that Jewish safety and resistance towards antisemitism lies in the violence of the state. In the first part of this essay I had entirely rejected this rationalisation of Zionist-statism and feel to affirm again that this is not a real or adequate response to antisemitism. Sure, the state can engage in spectacles of its violence with displays of punishment and encaging those individuals who it proclaims as criminal (for performing violences far less devastating that those it engages with everyday). But, with antisemitic incidents becoming more normal upon these isles, this push for statism reveals, again, that statism is not an answer to the matter of antisemitism.
The bulk of my critical response to the content of this collection is directed towards the first article On The Inherent Anti-Semitism of Zionism & the Recuperation of Jewish Struggle by the West. My critique, which I will get into in the next paragraphs, can be simply put that, in my eyes, the writer of this essay, whilst articulating a lot that is worthwhile and worth reading, does not really understand antisemitism/Anti-Semitism or Zionism.
On the matter of the first Anonymous Jewish anarchist voice not really understanding antisemitism I wish to first and foremost state that I am by no means looking to disregard or undermine their personal experience of antisemitism, which is unique to the life of every Jewish individual. To do so would be lacking in integrity on my part. Their experience of antisemitism is theirs and unique to their individuality. That being said and not disregarded, their treatment of antisemitism as meaning racism towards semitic peoples, which extends further than referencing Jewish peoples, is not, in my eyes, a historically or culturally accurate usage of the term. As I affirmed in the first part of this essay, antisemitism is a term, created by Wilhelm Marr in the 19th Century, that refers to a political ideology centred around hatred of Jewish people. Quoting Marxist philosopher Moishe Postone from his essay Antisemitism and National Socialism : “(i)t is characteristic of modern antisemitism that the Jews are considered to be the force behind those ‘apparent’ opposites: plutocratic capitalism and socialism. ‘International Jewery’ is, moreover, perceived to be centred in the ‘asphalt jungles’ of the newly emergent urban megalopoi, to be behind ‘vulgar, materialist, modern culture’ and, in general, all forces contributing to the decline of traditional social groupings, values, and institutions”. The pessimist philosopher of history Theodor Lessing, killed by Nazis in 1933 for his opposition to Hitler, wrote in his essay Otto Weininger – a critique of the antisemitism and misogyny of the philosophy of Weininger, for being anti-life – “(a)nd in the same way (at pleasure) today socialism, Bolshevism, is ‘Jewish’ and tomorrow, capitalism. Or, today: progress, radicalism, revolution. Tomorrow, on the contrary: standstill, stagnation and reaction”. Considering antisemitism as an ideology oriented towards ethnic hatred and conspiracy theory towards Jewish peoples specifically, it strikes me as overly simplistic and just not the truth to treat antisemitism as racial hostility towards semitic people; though I appreciate how that is an easy mistake to make. I do not say this with any denial of the brutality of the violence towards Palestinian Arabs, Samaritans, Bedouins, Assyrians, Mandaeans, or any other non-Jewish semitic peoples living in proximity to or within the borders of the state of Israel by that state – as well as that towards Jews and non-semitic peoples too. Like the Anonymous writer, I too am revolted by what the state of Israel has done and is doing, and want to encourage anyone reading this to do what they can to revolt against the violence of that state. My criticism of their treatment of antisemitism comes from a desire for honesty about what antisemitism is first and foremost.
On the matter of this writer not understanding what Zionism is, or perhaps having only a partial understanding, it feels worth differentiating – as I did in the first part of this essay – between the mode of nationalist ideology that is statist-Zionism that, like the writer of the piece, I am revolted by and would welcome the deconstruction and destruction of, and the spiritual-Zionism that came before. The spiritual-Zionist tradition within the religion of Judaism referred to a return to the land that we might call Israel or Palestine as something of religious pilgrimage and a renewal of “Israel” as the renewal of the people who wrestle with YHWH – arguably a truer meaning for the term Israel than that state – after centuries of diaspora and struggle. The nationalist ideology that is more commonly known today was initially the invention of Theodor Herzl and was meant to be an answer to the matter of antisemitism – Herzl’s rationalisations for nationalism could well be considered alongside Perlman’s assessments of nationalism’s (continuing) appeal to people who have experienced the violence of statism. Herzl’s ideology has nothing to do with the Zionism of anarchists like Martin Buber or anti-political utopian-socialist Hillel Zeitlin, which sought for the renewal of “Israel” as liberation from empire (which Herzl’s ideology is assimilation into) and return to Jerusalem (meaning returning to ethical-life). The Zionist-turned-anarchist rabbi Yaakov Meir Zalkind, in his writings for the Yiddish-anarchist newspaper Arbeter Fraynd, affirmed that it is not enough to simply oppose Zionism without affirming what Zionism gets right; which is something that we might affirm in the spiritual-Zionism of anarchists and anti-political utopian-socialists, as the truths of the need for a return to ethical-life for Jewish peoples, outside of Empire, and the need for Jews to be able to live with as much safety in the world as any other living being. Affirming these truths need not undermine that truth, well articulated by the famous atheist-Jew Emma Goldman, that patriotism and nationalism (including state-Zionist) are a menace to liberty, freedom, revolt, anarchy, life. Considering Zionism in this way, it is not true to say that Zionism is inherently antisemitic, in the sense that the Anonymous writer means or in the more accurate sense of antisemitism. The spiritual-Zionist tradition opposes one thing and that is Empire. Throughout his writings on Zionism, Martin Buber continually appeals for cultural diversity, co-existence, pluralism and non-hostility between Jewish and other-than-Jewish peoples. Like with the matter of antisemitism, like the Anonymous writer, I am wholly opposed to and revolted by statist-Zionism and desire opposition and revolt towards it, and I find their description of Zionism overly simplistic, not reflective of the truth and somewhat unhelpful.
I write these critiques with respect to the intentions of this writer, who obviously cares deeply about voicing challenge to the state of Israel and wants to encourage others to do the same. My want, should they read this, is for them to do so and not take this as a rejection of their article but a response that continues this task.
The aspect of this collection that I most appreciated is shared across all three pieces contained within, though, in my eyes, best exemplified in the piece Heritage & Discontent, is that they are all personally honest pieces that are – I ask readers to tolerate my use of a long portmanteau – eco-auto-phenomenologically dense, articulating much of their experience of being in the world. This kind of writing is intensely meaningful to me. When reading Heritage & Discontent, I found myself deeply moved by the Anonymous writer’s accounts of their struggles of being from a mixed ethnic and mixed religious background, living on the liminal boundaries of both spaces and somewhat exiled from both spaces – this resonated very with my personal experience. Their piece acknowledges well the impacts of intergenerational trauma and also does not accept this as a rationalisation for violence – much like Perlman’s affirmation in his piece contained in Jewish Anarchist Voices, that historical violence does not justify present violence. As someone like the writer of Heritage and Discontent who comes from a heritage of Jews who survived the antisemitism of early 20th century European antisemitism and that which preceded it; I reject the claim that the violences of Nazis and other advocates of antisemitism necessitates or justifies the violences of the state of Israel. From this same rejection of historicised-necessity, I feel to affirm that the violence towards Jewish people around the world of recent years and days is not a necessitated response to the Israeli state and that the rationalisation of antisemitic violence towards Jewish people as resistance towards the Israeli state is utterly absurd nonsense – such has been said of Bondi Beach, Golders Green and other examples of violence towards Jewish people for being Jews. This rationalisation of murder through murder – that in my book Noah’s Choice I called Kovnerism (after the Zionist Abba Kovner and his group Nakam, who after the Shoah sought to murder 6 million Germans in revenge) – is something that I have been saddened to see pushed by folks who call themselves anarchists and opponents of racism. To me it is nonsense to suggest that the murdering of Jewish peoples anywhere is necessitated by the violence of the Israeli state and consider such necessitarianism to be at its best shallow thinking and at its worst lies. Just as the attempted mass-murders of Kovner and Nakam were not necessary, so was Bondi Beach and other killings of Jews across the world. I hope that when readers of Jewish Anarchist Voices read both Heritage & Discontent and Perlman’s Anti-Semitism and the Beirut Pogrom, they do so as fully as possible.
While the eco-auto-phenomenological density of this text is perhaps the greatest quality of the writings within the collection, this is not what strikes me as most valuable about the actual collection Jewish Anarchist Voices. What strikes me as most valuable about the collection is that it is entirely an encouragement of ethical reflection and integrity for its readers. This, for me, meets that which Hillel Zeitlin sought to encourage in his attempt at creating Yavneh, as a society of Jewish individuals dedicated to spiritual reflection and ethical renewal, amidst the violences of antisemitism. In his essay What is Yavneh, Zeitlin affirmed his desire for an anti-political group of individuals (which I would call a tribe) to gather and share in ethical and spiritual reflection and renewal to “revive the souls of Jews” – this meeting his spiritual-Zionist desire for life away from Empire. This, to me, mirrors that appeal made by Jewish anarchist Gustav Landauer of through separation (though I favour the term individuation) to community (though I would use the word tribe) and is where opposition against antisemitism is perhaps best found. This is to individuate as different from the defenders and justifiers of statist-Zionism, the Israeli state and antisemitism, as Jews, anarchists and/or opponents of racism and to orient ourselves towards the pursuit of gathering as tribes that advocate for ethical reflection and renewal as well as cultural diversity, pluralism and co-existence. A similar project that could also be described in this sort of way as an example of a Yavneh-project is that of the new Jewish-anarchist publishing project Circle Aleph, whose seeming appeal for anarchy within diaspora resonates much with my own feeling. From the engagement of individuals sharing in dialogue their ethical refections, we might encourage something of healing from the wounds of Empire. This small collection might be a seed for those who read it that grows into something wild and awesome.
“The mountaintop and heaven meet
He raises his right fist to swear
Then he will follow it up there;
Since when, too short of time, he’s run
From east to west, just like the sun.
The sun comes up, the sun descends:
He climbs, and falls – it never ends.
Man, that ape.”
Moshe Leib Halpern, Man That Ape
Post-script
I feel here to respond to the replies made to my original Against Antisemitism essay that affirmed the truth that the antisemitism of today is not the same as that of the early 20th century. This is true. The antisemitism I experience, the two Anonymous contributors to Jewish Anarchist Voices experience, those involved in Circle Aleph experience and Perlman experienced, is not the same as our parents, grandparents, great grandparents or the antisemitism of any previous generation. This is true. It is also true that the misogynies of today are not the same as those a hundred years ago or more, or that the racism experienced by black peoples today is not the same as previous generations, or that the exploitation of industrial workers today is not the same as that of previous generations, or that the Islamaphobia of today is not the same as the Islamaphobia of previous generations, or that the homophobia of today is not the same as that of previous generations. Yes, it is true that the antisemitism of today is not the same as that of those who walked into Nazi factories to be slaughtered, or that experienced by Jews who were expelled from their homes throughout the centuries. This is true. It is also true that, like women, LGBTQIA+ folks, Muslims, black peoples, workers and many other examples, Jews are now far more assimilated within the totality of the state than they once were and so live with the privileges and comforts of such assimilation, as well as the violences and repressions of captivity; the like of which anarchists have continuously named. With this and like those others who I have also named, it is true that Jews are today far more systematised and spectacularised under the banners of inclusion and representation; which serve as rationalisations for our captivity rather than our industrial annihilation. Misogyny exists today and is worth revolting against, in my eyes; as is violence and abuse towards folks who do not conform with heterosexual norms, bigotry towards Muslims, racism towards black peoples and the exploitation of those we call workers, and many other folks, tribes, peoples also experience abuses whilst being assimilated into the machine that are worth revolt against. This difference in antisemitisms does not lessen my revolt towards antisemitism, be it the spoken or written word, or the gas chamber, be it the bullets at Bondi Beach or the stabbings at Golders Green, or whatever other example that might be named. Yes, the antisemitism of today is not the same as that which murdered Simon Dubnow and Hillel Zeitlin, Benjamin Fondane and Kalonymus Kalman Shapira, Theodor Lessing and multitudes upon multitudes of other Jewish individuals, as well as multitudes upon multitudes of other-than-Jewish folks. Yes, you are correct and I stand by what I have said.
“The anti-Semitic movement is nothing but the final convulsion of a dying political and social system.” Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
“Where necessity reigns, there is no freedom.” Lev Shestov, Athens and Jerusalem
Add new comment