#263 / Editorial
Among the differences that set the European and American diasporas apart, there is at least one that can be viewed with a certain degree of envy, particularly in these troubled times. Reading Michael Walzer’s interview, originally published in January in Haaretz, which we are featuring this week, this difference is immediately apparent: it is the freedom of speech with which the American intellectual speaks of the Israel he holds dear, even as he voices his harshest criticism of it. Why, conversely, is it so difficult for European Jews to criticize Israel without feeling as though they are betraying themselves, or even being accused of treason? Where does this defensive reflex come from, which all too often restrains critical expression of their Zionism? It can undoubtedly be explained by the history of a guilty Europe, and thus one plagued by deep doubt regarding its own ability to protect its Jews. The result is an anxiety that confers upon the State of Israel the status of guardian, the ultimate recourse for their protection. This contrasts with the position of American Jews, citizens of the “guardian of the guardian” – a status assumed by the United States in recent decades, even if it is now being called into question by the Trump administration’s purely opportunistic relationship with Israel. In other words, American Jews are in a position to believe that, deep down, they can do without this state; Europeans do not have the luxury of such relative detachment. Nevertheless, we must fully grasp the reactionary shift taking place in this state to which we are existentially attached, and find the resources to avoid betraying our principles through silence. This is all the more urgent as this shift is manifesting itself in its departure from the State of Israel’s historical roots in the European diaspora. The unjust and discriminatory death penalty law that has just been adopted by the Knesset, a subject we will return to, compels us to do so once again. The injustice it manifests brings us back to the most salient point of Walzer’s critique, namely the pursuit of a logic of war that ultimately radically calls into question the legitimacy of what the war was meant to defend. By reading what the great thinker of Just and Unjust Wars has to say about what happened in Gaza, we can hope to find insights for understanding the current situation. This is precisely what the editorial team of K. set out to do with candor in an introductory text on the subject.
Related articles
Michael Walzer: From Just War to Politics Gone Awry
«The moment there was a political path to defeat Hamas and release the hostages, the war became unjust.»
Neo-Nazism in Southern Brazil: A Brief History of the Present
In Brazil, it is a very different kind of frankness that is making headlines. This one consists first and foremost of openly expressing regret for a bygone era when the imaginary hierarchy of races was well-ordered, and of celebrating the one who promised to rid the world of those Jews who threatened it. In fact, over the past few decades, and especially since Bolsonaro’s presidency, neo-Nazi groups have proliferated in southern Brazil, to the point where their activities have made headlines. This week, Brazilian philosopher Renato Levin-Borges offers us a deep dive into this world of news stories and swastikas, along with a psycho-sociological reflection on the unique roots of neo-Nazism in Brazil. Recalling the waves of Italian and German immigration in the mid-20th century, and the persistence of a racial imagination inherited from colonization, he shows how this history intersects with current anxieties about social decline to produce a particularly virulent form of antisemitism.
