r/jewishleft

I was at the protest, and ill try to give my account of what happened before, during, and after it because many people are going off of hearsay and reading articles or watching highly edited clips to solidify the narrative they follow.

On Monday, May 11th, the Synagogue Young Israel of Midwood held an internationally-illegal land sale that included the sale of stolen Palestinian land in the West Bank, with the intent on selling it to settlers who would go and displace Palestinian families in the West Bank. Aside from the clear moral quandaries of selling stolen land, this sale was illegal under international law ( Under Article 49 of the Geneva Convention, settlements have been determined by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2004 to be serious breaches of international law, constituting war crimes) and illegal based on NYC and American laws (The Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit discrimination in housing sales based on several protected characteristics, including religion, ethnicity, and national origin. U.S. real estate agencies are bound by both their state and federal laws to ensure that the sale of property is open to all prospective buyers) This is the context behind the land sale that was being protested, and the context is completely absent in much of the pro-Israeli side of framing this protest as being "against jews" or "antisemetic".

Anyways, I got to the protest at 5:15, about an hour and 15 before the Palestinian contigent was supposed to arrive. There were small amounts of barriers up around Young Israel of Midwood and about 30 or 40 police officers. They immediately began blocking off the entire block of Ocean and Ave L. There was a small pro-Israel group there already, and they soon formed a larger group across the street from where the land sale was taking place.

I was moved to the press area, which was stationed next to the pro-Israeli group. I was filming the event, and one of the members of the pro-Israeli side recognized me. I am openly pro-Palestinian and have covered other land sales in NYC, and was quickly surrounded by around 20 or so zionists, jeering and yelling at me. I was pulled into the police barrier by the NYPD and moved to a different area.

After a while, the anti-zionist Hasidic group Neturei Karta arrived with a few pro-Palestinian protesters around 6:15 or so. Immediately, the pro-Israel side began yelling insults, slurs, and horrible hate speech at the members of Neturei Karta. Things like "Kapo" and calling them "not jews" and one protester even began calling them "rats" which is a known antisemetic trope. This went on for 5 or so minutes as the pro-Palestine side began their chants. Every few minutes, another pro-Israeli protester would walk by Neturei Karta and yell an obscenity or slur at them, and multiple times the police had to step in to defend the peaceful Neturei Karta group.

Another section of the pro Palestinian protest group was held at Ocean and Ave M by NYPD. I headed over there, and it was a lot more contentious. As I walked over, i had multiple people walk by me and the people i was walking with (who were wearing keffiyehs) and had slurs and threats leveled against us. The Ave M group was surrounded by NYPD and the zionist group, with multiple places of the two protesting groups clashing, yelling at each other woth NYPD standing in between. A few times, both groups instigated small scuffles.

A zionist threw eggs at the pro-palestine side, and one hit a cop, which caused the NYPD to arrest the two people who threw them. A huge group of Zionists followed the police to their car, yelling and trying to get their two people de-arrested. The pro-Palestine side got ready to march to meet with the Neturei Karta group, which had been sectioned off on Ocean and unable to march to them directly. So the pro-Palestine side began marching East down Ave M towards E 19th or 18th. We marched north on either 18th or 19th, with a large group of pro-Israel supporters running alongside the march, instigating fights, yelling obscenities, spitting on the hasidic group marching with us, and antagonizing the march as it moved peacefully through the surround neighborhood (again, only done because the NYPD wouldnt let us meet with our other group safely)

During the march, the NYPD was completely absent, and multiple fights broke out, instigated (from what I could tell) primarily by the pro-Israel side. There were chants during the march, matched equally by "death to arabs" chanted in hebrew, along with "USA" and "Am Yisrael Chai".

We made it to the other group at Ave L after marching a large circle around the block to reunite. The muslim members of the march prayed, and the members of Neturei Karta put up their banners to shield them from the pro-Israeli group that had surrounded the pro-Palestine group on all 3 sides (the final side being the NYPD barrier). It was around this time I noticed a lone marcher flying a Hezbollah flag. Compared to the various members of the pro-Israel side wearing IDF uniforms and shirts, multiple Jewish Defense League Shirts, and tons of Israeli flags, the media and cycle seemed to have locked onto the lone Hezbollah flag flown by a single member of the pro-Palestine group.

After a while, and a few small scuffles on both sides, the pro-Palestine side began marching towards the Ave H stop on the Q to disperse the protest (it was around 9pm at this time) in order to keep the pro-Palestinian protesters safe, as other protests ended with dispersals that led to members of the pro-Palestine side being targeted, harrassed, and attacked by large groups of Zionist antagonizers (Eastern Parkway Protest April 28, 2025).

Along this march, there were multiple times where zionists targeted pro-Palestinian protesters that fell behind the march, being berated and harassed. Multiple pro-Israeli agitators used high powered flashlights and flashing devices on pro-Palestinian protesters, shining them directly into people's eyes and cameras. Tons of hateful slurs, rhetoric, and violent threats were hurled at the pro-Palestinian march all the way to the train stop. As the protest ended, multiple zionists using noisemakers played loud sirens and noises against the pro-Palestine side as they were dispersing.

All throughout the protest, the pro-Israeli side was the main agitator, attacking and provoking, making verbal threats, spitting, and grabbing flags of the pro-Palestinian side. The footage edited to show violence against the pro-Israeli side was done deliberately to set up a narrative of violent pro-Palestine protesters attacking and invading a jewish neighborhood. What wasnt shown was the many jewish protesters on the Palestinian side being harassed, called Kapos and rats, and attacked alongside the other Palestinian protesters. This was a one-sided peaceful protest, where the Palestinian side was restrained, attacked, and threatened, while the pro-Israeli group chased, harassed and threw slurs and insults the entire evening.

That was my recollection of the day, and the way that the media and pro-israeli groups have framed it is completely devoid of the reality of being there. This was an illegal land sale, hosted at a Synagogue BECAUSE of the optics of protesting in front of a Synagogue. Its a defensive mechanism, and makes any pushback against this illegal sale of land look antisemetic by default. It never takes into account the countless Jewish people on the side of Palestine protesting against these real estate events.

I hope my account can help dispell some of the horrible misinformation floating around the entire event. If anyone wants proof of anything Ive mentioned here, I can link video showing everything I mentioned. I hope these horrific land sales end, and if a Synagogue does not want to be protested, it should simply not host an illegal land sale of Palestinian land in real estate events.

I follow some extremely levelheaded antizionist Jews on bluesky and I’m looking to learn more about Antizionism as a whole. Books, articles, documentaries, anything is useful. Posting here specifically because other left wing subs don’t align with my values regarding this topic and I’d prefer to hear from Jews when it comes to this.

I have just recently found this place, and a quick look at some posts and flairs there are people who describe themselves as zionist leftists and there are posts decrying other leftists inability to understand/support zionism.

I think It is prudent to ask more jewish opinions before I take any stance on a jewish topic and calcify myself into it. a few questions based off reading, discusion etc. that id need to dispel some issues ive come up against if im to consider myself even neutral to the idea. I am asking these assuming there are peices to each question that i dont even know that i dont know.

• Is Zionism an ethnonationalist movement, if not what seperates the two?

Zionism as an idea seems to mean a lot of different things to different people, but largely from what I have read and understand its the reaction to historical and current discrimination that manifests as the need for the jewish peoples self-determination which translates itself into the need for a "Jewish state". Its my understanding that at its baseline its a desire for an jewish ethnostate, as the requirements for any ethnic people to retain total self-determination in a country is to restrict political power and rights from other ethnic groups in some way or over time you would have different ethnic groups in power again.

• What seperates this movement from colonialism?

Based off my understanding of zionism as a desire for a jewish state specifically in the lands of the Isreal of jewish history. to be more personal, It reads very similarly to colonizaton especially the history of liberia as the descendants of displaced and discriminated people returning to the lands of their forefathers and displacing the people who lived their currently. but while the situations echo eachother liberia is widely agreed to be colonisation while that label seem heavily argued on for Zionism. How is zionism seperate from colonialism?

Adam Johnson’s book “How To Sell a Genocide” is excellent. I’m halfway through. Curious if anyone else in this sub has read it or is currently reading it?

For those who may not be familiar with the late Sadiq Jalal al-Azm, he was a professor at the University of Damascus and was a visiting professor at Princeton University, where he taught Kantian Philosophy and Near East Studies. Sadiq Jalal al-Azm was a Marxist with a strong focus on secularism, rational criticism, anti-authoritarianism, and the political/intellectual failures of the modern Arab world. One of his articles, "Orientalism in Reverse," shares his analysis of the late Edward Said's critique of Orientalism while also warning against a reverse form of essentialism.

From my understanding, Sadiq did not deny that Orientalism, racism, colonialism, and Western imperialism were real, as he understood that Western scholars, states, and colonial institutions often portrayed Arabs, Muslims, and “the East” through racist and essentialist stereotypes that many of us are aware of, such as irrational, backward, despotic, overly religious, passive, or incapable of self-government. However, he also argued that some Arab, Muslim, or anti-imperialist thinkers responded to Orientalism by simply reversing the binary. Instead of saying “the West is rational and the East is irrational,” they would say something like “the West is inherently materialist, imperialist, soulless, and corrupt, while the East, Islam, or the Arab world is inherently authentic, spiritual, communal, and liberatory.

As someone originally from Southeast Asia and who grew up in both a Chinese and Filipino cultural context, I agree with Edward Said's notion that American conservative academics have long viewed precolonial or non-Western societies through a civilizational hierarchy, in which the natives of the conquered land are deemed incapable of developing modern political institutions without Western intervention. However, due to such academics utilizing an orientalist framework in their scholarship of non-Western societies, some Western leftist academics have responded by over-romanticizing precolonial, non-Western societies as inherently more communal, egalitarian, spiritual, or liberatory.

In the context of Sadiq’s article, I think the danger of what he calls “Orientalism in reverse” becomes clear; if we respond to Orientalism by simply asserting that the West is evil and the East is pure, then we have not actually escaped the Orientalist framework. We have only reversed the moral judgment. Instead of treating non-Western societies as fully human, historically complex, and politically diverse, we end up turning them into symbols for Western guilt, anti-Western authenticity, or revolutionary fantasy. That being said, I want to reiterate that I am neither a Western apologist nor am I a sole believer that the ills of non-Western societies are inherently due to Western hegemony alone. Personally, I think that such framing can be intellectually limiting because it removes agency from non-Western societies and treats them as merely acted upon, rather than as societies with their own internal challenges.

At the same time, I do not want to minimize the ways in which Western powers have actively shaped the political and economic conditions of much of the world. The point is not to deny Western responsibility. The point is to avoid turning the West and the East into fixed moral categories where one side is always corrupt and the other is always innocent. Sadiq’s ideas about Islam within the context of “Orientalism in reverse” were also rooted in this concern. He was critical of the idea that Islam, the East, or the Arab world should be treated as a single timeless essence that explains everything about those societies. He was not denying that Islam matters historically, culturally, or politically. Rather, he was warning against turning Islam into an all-purpose explanation for why Muslim societies are the way they are, whether that explanation comes from Western Orientalists or from anti-Western thinkers who romanticize Islam as inherently authentic and liberatory.

I think his critique is useful for left-wing discussions today. It reminds us that we can criticize Western imperialism while also recognizing that non-Western societies have their own internal problems, hierarchies, and forms of domination. Otherwise, anti-imperialism can turn into campism, where the only thing that matters is whether someone is against the West. Al-Azm was not writing only about Palestine/Israel; however, I do think his warning can apply to parts of that discourse, as it can develop a stronger form of activism that does not rely on essentialist thinking.

What are your thoughts?

Yair Golan published an op-ed in Haaretz recently (co-authored with Chuck Freilich) laying out their vision for the "Zionist left." What was most interesting to me was what Golan and Freilich have to say about the Palestinians:

>It means recognizing that a two-state solution is unrealistic for the foreseeable future, even while continuing to strive to this end at all times. It means working to turn the Palestinian Authority into a viable partner by restoring its authority in both the West Bank and Gaza, while advancing civilian – but not military – separation in the West Bank as an interim measure. Above all, it means acknowledging the greatest lie of all: that Israel can annex the West Bank without ultimately destroying itself. To be the Zionist left means understanding that rebuilding and withdrawing from Gaza, except for the buffer zone, is in Israel's interests.

Golan's position here means that there is no Zionist party in Israel which supports the 2SS, in the sense of "if you vote for me I will work to implement a 2SS." Golan's position is closer to theoretical openness to a 2SS (if we are being generous, theoretical support) of a 2SS, at a time and on conditions of Israel's choosing. In addition, Golan also seems to be endorsing indefinite Israeli occupation of "the buffer zone" in Gaza.

Because much of what he calls for is so vague (perhaps purposefully so), I don't think Golan's position is meaningfully different from those of centrist politicians like Yair Lapid, Gadi Eizenkot or even those further to the right.

For his ideas to be taken seriously, I think Golan would need to provide answers to at least the following questions:

• Under what conditions does Golan think a 2SS would be possible?
• What does "civilian separation" in the WB actually mean?
• What is the "buffer zone" in Gaza and under what conditions should Israel withdraw?

My answers would likely be different from his, but reasonable responses could show he is serious about peace with the Palestinians. Without them, I think it's hard to distinguish Golan's position from mere lip service to the idea of the 2SS.

I'm most interesting in hearing what others who describe themselves as left Zionists think of this, and whether you think Golan's positions here can fairly be described as left.