I have an operating assumption that guides me in assessing social theories. If a philosophy produces animosity towards Jews, by definition, the philosophy is flawed. It is neither just nor liberal, even if it employs the language of liberalism and justice.
If a theory produces hatred of the Jewish state, not criticism — fair or unfair — but obsessive loathing, by definition, there is something wrong with the theory. An intellectual approach that advocates for the destruction of Israel cannot be just or liberal, no matter the high-sounding words camouflaging its illiberalism.
Truly liberal approaches allow and encourage individuals and groups to define themselves. This is what diversity means to a liberal: that different cultures, languages, religions and traditions possess unique dignity and offer profound benefit to society. When it comes to the Jews, you don't get to define how we see ourselves. You only get to decide whether you want to accept Jews as we define Judaism. It's what you demand of every other group in the name of diversity, equity, inclusion and tolerance.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
