Katy Tur of MSNOW asked an important question on the air recently: Are the Democrats diverse or divided?
Let’s face it: The Democrats are divided between so-called moderates (those closer to the political center) and so-called progressives (those on the political left who are also referred to as social democrats).
This is my third straight column to examine the issue of Israel. But it’s important insofar as U.S. policy toward Israel is the major wedge issue between moderates and progressives. No other issue is as divisive among Democrats. Indeed, their prospects in this year’s midterm elections largely depend on whether Democrats can bridge this schism within the party.
Increased anti-Israel sentiment is scary
Of course, it’s the progressives who occupy the Democrats’ anti-Israel wing. They paint the Jewish state with labels like “genocide” and “colonizer” with little perspective. It’s as if Israel attacked Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, and not the other way around. Truth be told, in all of Israel’s wars with its neighbors, the Jewish state’s measures have been either defensive or retaliatory. In the face of Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel is not and has not been the aggressor. This assertion will meet with resistance from progressives, but this doesn’t make it any less true.
The irony is the political evolution of Israel in the mind of America. At this time, 80 years ago, in the lead-up to the rebirth of the Jewish state in 1948, progressives here in the United States were staunch supporters of the Zionists. Democrats in Congress were so pro-Israel that they even criticized President Harry Truman (who recognized Israel) as not being supportive enough of Jewish aspirations in Palestine.
Indeed, a cursory examination of progressives in the 1940s reveals a who’s who in support of Israel. The most notable Zionist sympathizer was Eleanor Roosevelt (who first pushed FDR in the direction of a Jewish state before pushing Truman in the same direction after FDR’s death). Another influential Zionist sympathizer in the progressive mold was U.S. Supreme Court Justice Frank Murphy, a former governor of Michigan.
An interesting Zionist sympathizer of the progressive bent was Henry Wallace (FDR’s vice president from 1941 to 1945, who also served for a year as commerce secretary under Truman). Wallace had presidential ambitions in 1948 and was prepared to confront Truman that year for not being a strong enough supporter of the Zionists in Palestine, only to be undermined by Truman’s recognition of Israel in May of that year.
Regarding sympathy for Zionism in the 1940s, most interesting is that of The Nation, which is still published today as a left-of-liberal magazine. For the most part, the press in the United States favored the Zionists in Palestine. But no publication was as adamant for Jewish aspirations as The Nation. Yet in recent years, The Nation has been critical of Israel. The magazine has never quite explained either this irony or its own political odyssey.
Not that one has to go all the way back to the 1940s to discover progressives who supported Israel. As recently as the 1960s, the Democrats were united in support of Israel. While Vietnam divided the party with crippling political results, support for Israel was a solid common ground for Democrats of that era. Indeed, U.S. Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (D-New York), the brother of President John F. Kennedy, was assassinated in 1968 by Palestinian nationalist Sirhan Sirhan.
How did progressives come to be anti-Israel? Up until the Six-Day War in 1967, Middle East propaganda boasted the intent of Israel’s neighbors to destroy the Jewish state. In the immediate aftermath of Israel’s stunning victory, the Jewish state enjoyed a surge in popularity in the United States. But Israel has since been saddled with the occupied territories in Gaza and on the West Bank, taken in the Six-Day War (a burden, in my opinion, Israel would do well to relinquish). In clever public relations tactics, Israel’s adversaries have been able to portray the Jewish state to the world as the Goliath, as opposed to the David.
In any event, the Democrats have reached a point of acute division over U.S. policy to Israel. I remain doubtful that the midterm elections will do much to heal the division, but Democrats had best grasp the caveat that this rift within their party can only serve the Republicans.
John O’Neill of Allen Park writes a twice-weekly political column.
John O’Neill