New on the site: Michi-bot. An intelligent assistant based on the writings of Rabbi Michael Avraham.

The moral status of a Zionist view in exile

שו”תCategory: moralThe moral status of a Zionist view in exile
asked 4 years ago

In the SD
In honor of Rabbi Michael,
Many Jews living in the Diaspora hold a Zionist outlook. This is expressed in support for the State of Israel and varying levels of identification with it. This is clear even to the Gentiles around them, as every American politician, whether Democrat or Republican, knows how to talk about his enthusiastic support for the State of Israel and the Zionist project when it comes to trying to “suppress the Jewish voice” (there is a well-known story about one of them who even tried this trick on the Satmar Rebbe ztzu”l!). Many of these Jews have no real ambition to move to Israel, and the reasons are partly clear. After all, their life in the Diaspora is quite comfortable. They are educated, earn well, live in relative security, etc. In most Western democracies (certainly in America, where the largest Jewish population outside the United States is located), they cannot make claims against Gentiles for having deceived them or harmed them. And the question arises: as long as they live in the diaspora and do not plan to move to Israel in the foreseeable future, do they not have a moral obligation towards the Gentiles among whom they live, specifically, to care first and foremost for the interests of their Gentile neighbor and to prioritize them over the interests of the Jewish state? Isn’t the situation in which a politician tries to convince a citizen to vote for him by promising benefits to a foreign entity, however friendly, very problematic in the first place?


Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

0 Answers
מיכי Staff answered 4 years ago
I won’t go into the question here of whether this will actually bring him Jewish votes. I think he will also lose quite a few Jewish votes with such statements. I think the gain is more in evangelical votes. I don’t see this as a problem, as long as the other entity is not an enemy. For two reasons:
  1. Taking care of another entity does not necessarily contradict the local interest.
  2. Furthermore, sometimes it is permissible to take care of them at the expense of the locals, because it is not black and white. Let’s say that my duty to take care of my citizens (Americans) is X, but my duty to take care of my people (Jews) is Y. Even if X is greater than Y, Y still has weight. Therefore, it is reasonable to want to invest a little effort at the expense of Americans to take care of the Jews. And since it is in the interest of the Jewish citizens of the United States, it is legitimate for a politician to promise them to act on his behalf within reasonable limits.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

קלונימוס replied 4 years ago

(1) True, although at least in the American case there is a conflict between the local interest and the interest of the foreign entity. The locals are harmed economically. I am aware of the argument that essentially everything “returns to them”, but it seems absurd to me. There are things that by definition cannot “return to them”, such as time and manpower.

(2) I think the problem is not concern for your own people per se, but rather the moral identification with and support for a foreign entity (an entity that is not necessarily hostile, but still foreign, and who knows what will happen one day?). There is no law for a Jew from New York to donate his money to his brother in another country (and it doesn't matter whether he donates to a kollel in Jerusalem, to the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Paris, or to a chocolatier in London, all of which have quite a few Jews) as there is for a Jew from New York to influence the political system in America to promote a policy that prioritizes the interests of a foreign country over the interests of the country in which he lives and which he has no intention of leaving. Similarly, an American Catholic is allowed to support Catholic causes around the world (and is even expected to do so), but he will be subject to a lot of criticism if it turns out that he is subjugating American interests to the needs of the Vatican State.

Another question: If you were a Gentile, what would you think of the loyalty and status of your Jewish neighbor? Would you accept his demand that you treat him (at least conceptually) like any other citizen?

מיכי Staff replied 4 years ago

As I explained, I see no difference.
Absolutely. I could be angry or disagree, but that's his right.

Leave a Reply

Back to top button