No political camp is going to end the Jewish condition. Every coalition contains the logic by which Jews can be useful, suspect, defended, and discarded in rapid succession.
Thank you for this excellent article. The metaphor of tenancy is a good one. Despite my family being in this country for over one hundred years, I’ve been feeling like a guest here since 10/7. This is still a country of laws, and there are many individuals working to ensure that our civil rights are protected (they have not been protected on many campuses and K-12 schools), but we are a small and vulnerable minority and might always be guests (tenants) here. That’s why there are signs at Ben Gurion airport that say “Welcome Home”.
I think you're pointing to a real distinction: tenancy does not mean we do not belong here, but it does name the contingency many Jews have felt since 10/7.
America can be home, and still feel less secure than we thought. Israel can be home in a different, deeper civilizational sense. and your point about the “Welcome Home” signs at Ben Gurion says a lot. Grateful you read it so closely.
Brenden, excellent article. My takeaway is slightly different: people — and especially Jews — should vote based on policy, policy, policy, not personality or blind party loyalty. I’ve never believed in attaching myself permanently to one party. I look at the world as it is, I look at who best represents my values and protects my people at that moment, and that’s how I vote.
Too many Jews treat political affiliation like identity. That’s a mistake because parties change, circumstances change, and ideologies change. The Democratic Party of today is not the Democratic Party of decades ago — just as history reminds us that parties can radically evolve over time. Blind loyalty in politics is foolish. In real estate they say location, location, location. In politics, it should be policy, policy, policy.
Love this, and I think we should all be chanting “policy, policy, policy” from now on whenever we encounter Jews showing blind loyalty to a coalition.
That’s exactly the discipline I’m trying to point toward: not treating politics as identity, but as strategy. Parties change, coalitions change, threats change. The question has to be: what actually protects Jewish life, dignity, and continuity in this moment?
Basically right or just, but firstly, which "party" is/will/can ever be electable in the sense that it pursues a consistently or at least predominantly rational, reasonable, and objective policy..?
And secondly, which "voters" would predominantly vote for such "parties"? The "voter" would first have to be predominantly willing, able, and capable of wanting and supporting rational, reasonable, and objective policies.
But they are either dumbed down or willingly allow themselves to be dumbed down by "television" "newspapers", "parties" and so on.
The problem lies in the fact that "democracy" is confused with or equated to the "majority" principle. "Whoever provides a majority is right". So all parties chase after "majorities" that are determined by the stupidity of the "people."
The very least that can be done to achieve a reality that respects human rights and promotes rational behaviour would be for so-called "majorities" to be acknowledged at most as a kind of reflection of (current) public "opinion" and an indication of what "the people" currently "think" (or whatever else one might call it).
Instead, however, social stability, human and civil rights, freedom of trade, and freedom of opinion—all of which should be inviolable—are constantly threatened by "elections" and "decisions" made by "majorities."
Free, unbiased thought and speech, which is the very foundation for well-considered action, are also constantly under threat.
This (mis)understood "democracy" as a "tyranny of the majority" is profoundly undemocratic and self-destructs as long as fundamental human, civil, and human rights are continually jeopardized by "majorities" or Mamdummys and their wives.
Instead, so fundamental human, civil, and human rights are constantly undermined by "majorities." As long as this (self-)endangerment is not eliminated and contained, so-called "democracy" remains perpetually threatened by the fact that those who most "skillfully" pander to the "majority" ("populists") will be the most "successful."
This threat does not "only" affect Jews, but all people who are deemed not to conform to or belong to "the majority."
As long as this threat to and self-destruction of (pseudo-)"democracy" is not addressed and eliminated, there can be no talk of genuine democracy, freedom, or reason. And "parties" and "The People" will behave accordingly.
I agree with the concern about democracy becoming vulnerable to populism, but I’d push back on the idea that “majorities” are the core problem.
To me, the deeper issue is upstream: the systems that form public opinion have changed dramatically over the last two decades, while our institutions, media, and political frameworks still behave as if we live in the old world.
Our information systems are corrupted and brittle. The very basis of how people come to “know” things has fractured. That makes us less capable of dialogue, less able to metabolize complexity, and much more vulnerable to false certainty.
So yes, majority rule can become dangerous. But the root problem is the machinery producing public opinion. And when that machinery breaks, minorities like Jews often feel the danger first.
Heartworker, fair point — and I agree that uninformed voters manipulated by media and ideology are a major problem. But that wasn’t really the group I was talking about.
I’m talking about people who are informed enough to know better and still vote out of blind loyalty or personal hatred of a politician’s personality. I know many people whose entire political philosophy begins and ends with “I hate Trump,” yet when you ask them which actual policies harmed them, they often can’t name one.
That kind of tribal voting is incredibly dangerous. Parties change, policies change, and the world changes. Voting should be based on real-world outcomes and policy, not emotional attachment to a party label or hatred of a personality. And frankly, when I still see groups like “Jews for Democrats” or blind loyalty in either direction, I think it’s deeply irrational.
As a Diaspora Jew, I know that I will be a tenant anywhere except in the Land of Israel. Landlords change, policies change - none of that makes a difference in who we are. The existence of independent Israel is the only protection we have. No need to be a coward and “read” the room to make yourself feel better. There is only one objective truth of a false historical blood libel, spoken or not.
In the diaspora, one of our worst enemies is the liberal Jew, who in my opinion is a traitor to us all. As a people, we have always disagreed, however as a minority, to turn on one another, is only assisting our enemies. Jews who raise Jewish children without the love of our history, ancestry, customs, Israel, and one another, will be the diasporas’ unraveling and saddens me deeply. I was not raised religious, but love for my heritage, customs, history and people have been treasures that continue to enrich my and my children’s lives enormously.
I hear the pain in this, especially around Jewish continuity. I’m hesitant to call liberal Jews “traitors,” because I think that kind of language can flatten a much more complicated reality. But I do agree with the deeper concern: Jews who sever themselves from Jewish peoplehood, history, Israel, and shared responsibility often do not become the ones who carry Jewish continuity forward.
That is not a new phenomenon. Jewish history has always included people who distance themselves, assimilate, or turn against the collective in order to survive, belong, or feel morally clean. But continuity ultimately rests with the Jews who keep choosing the people, even when it is costly, complicated, and uncomfortable.
Nope. Diaspora’s Jews are not even tenants. Tenants have rights. Tenants have a lease. Tenants have legal protections. Diaspora Jews think they have these but they don’t because when called upon to be honored it’s questionable as to whether they will be enforced.
Diaspora Jews are guests. Sometimes welcome guests…as long as they remain polite and in the background. These days more often unwelcome guests…like the Sidney at the Omega house pledge event in Animal House…shunted to the side with no real chance of admittance.
It’s always been that way even in the golden age in America when it was hidden because it was politically incorrect. We were fooled by the politeness. Took it as acceptance. But now we know different. We are guests being shown the door, sometimes politely more often not.
How many American jews who only vote D are indifferent to whether Israel continues to exist? Is that an unfair question to pose to someone constantly bashing Israel? Let me use an analogy of sorts: can you be friends with someone who is truly racist towards blacks? If the answer is no ( as it shpuld be in my opinion) I then ask what about a jew hater or someone who would defund israel ( but then I repeat myself: apologies to Tucker and the Jewish senators who side w Tucker on this matter?)
Yes, the Eternal ‘Other’: A cold avaricious logic in and by the countries we find ourselves in, which becomes Theft of our property, and then may include murder when our usefulness is complete. This may seem strange to the Liberal and Christian-minded non-Jews who befriend us. But the Fascist elements in these communities, although they do not have the upper hand yet thank goodness, are cultivated precisely for these acts of theft and murder. The whole (attempted) process, by Elements who have openly called themselves the re-formed Nazi Party here in Europe, has been monitored here in Europe once again. Our documentary monitoring is with you. And thus we dwell alone once again, in the country where we can be sovereign. Am Israel Chai.
Very good article. It lays out exactly what Prof. Ruth Wisse wrote in her book "Jews and Power". As the eternal minority in the Diaspora, we are subject to the shifting conditions whether they be liberal democracies, theocracies, or autocratic governments. I would recommend reading her book to get an even deeper understanding of Mr. Strauss' summary.
I enjoy short, concise, contemplative essays. This one fits those criteria. But, "the Jewish condition?" Hmmm. I need to contemplate this for a moment. It sounds too much like "the Jewish question" and we all know how that one was answered.
Meanwhile in NYC I just read that anti Zionist, pro Mandami Dem "Jew" Brad Landers has a "sizable lead" over moderate Dan Goldman in that heavily Jewish congressional district. That obnoxious, loud mouth scumbag will turn out to be the top "As a Jew "for Palestine and Moslems in Congress after Sanders becomes senile. Part of the enemy is us.
Thank you for this excellent article. The metaphor of tenancy is a good one. Despite my family being in this country for over one hundred years, I’ve been feeling like a guest here since 10/7. This is still a country of laws, and there are many individuals working to ensure that our civil rights are protected (they have not been protected on many campuses and K-12 schools), but we are a small and vulnerable minority and might always be guests (tenants) here. That’s why there are signs at Ben Gurion airport that say “Welcome Home”.
I think you're pointing to a real distinction: tenancy does not mean we do not belong here, but it does name the contingency many Jews have felt since 10/7.
America can be home, and still feel less secure than we thought. Israel can be home in a different, deeper civilizational sense. and your point about the “Welcome Home” signs at Ben Gurion says a lot. Grateful you read it so closely.
Brenden, excellent article. My takeaway is slightly different: people — and especially Jews — should vote based on policy, policy, policy, not personality or blind party loyalty. I’ve never believed in attaching myself permanently to one party. I look at the world as it is, I look at who best represents my values and protects my people at that moment, and that’s how I vote.
Too many Jews treat political affiliation like identity. That’s a mistake because parties change, circumstances change, and ideologies change. The Democratic Party of today is not the Democratic Party of decades ago — just as history reminds us that parties can radically evolve over time. Blind loyalty in politics is foolish. In real estate they say location, location, location. In politics, it should be policy, policy, policy.
Love this, and I think we should all be chanting “policy, policy, policy” from now on whenever we encounter Jews showing blind loyalty to a coalition.
That’s exactly the discipline I’m trying to point toward: not treating politics as identity, but as strategy. Parties change, coalitions change, threats change. The question has to be: what actually protects Jewish life, dignity, and continuity in this moment?
Basically right or just, but firstly, which "party" is/will/can ever be electable in the sense that it pursues a consistently or at least predominantly rational, reasonable, and objective policy..?
And secondly, which "voters" would predominantly vote for such "parties"? The "voter" would first have to be predominantly willing, able, and capable of wanting and supporting rational, reasonable, and objective policies.
But they are either dumbed down or willingly allow themselves to be dumbed down by "television" "newspapers", "parties" and so on.
The problem lies in the fact that "democracy" is confused with or equated to the "majority" principle. "Whoever provides a majority is right". So all parties chase after "majorities" that are determined by the stupidity of the "people."
The very least that can be done to achieve a reality that respects human rights and promotes rational behaviour would be for so-called "majorities" to be acknowledged at most as a kind of reflection of (current) public "opinion" and an indication of what "the people" currently "think" (or whatever else one might call it).
Instead, however, social stability, human and civil rights, freedom of trade, and freedom of opinion—all of which should be inviolable—are constantly threatened by "elections" and "decisions" made by "majorities."
Free, unbiased thought and speech, which is the very foundation for well-considered action, are also constantly under threat.
This (mis)understood "democracy" as a "tyranny of the majority" is profoundly undemocratic and self-destructs as long as fundamental human, civil, and human rights are continually jeopardized by "majorities" or Mamdummys and their wives.
Instead, so fundamental human, civil, and human rights are constantly undermined by "majorities." As long as this (self-)endangerment is not eliminated and contained, so-called "democracy" remains perpetually threatened by the fact that those who most "skillfully" pander to the "majority" ("populists") will be the most "successful."
This threat does not "only" affect Jews, but all people who are deemed not to conform to or belong to "the majority."
As long as this threat to and self-destruction of (pseudo-)"democracy" is not addressed and eliminated, there can be no talk of genuine democracy, freedom, or reason. And "parties" and "The People" will behave accordingly.
I agree with the concern about democracy becoming vulnerable to populism, but I’d push back on the idea that “majorities” are the core problem.
To me, the deeper issue is upstream: the systems that form public opinion have changed dramatically over the last two decades, while our institutions, media, and political frameworks still behave as if we live in the old world.
Our information systems are corrupted and brittle. The very basis of how people come to “know” things has fractured. That makes us less capable of dialogue, less able to metabolize complexity, and much more vulnerable to false certainty.
So yes, majority rule can become dangerous. But the root problem is the machinery producing public opinion. And when that machinery breaks, minorities like Jews often feel the danger first.
Heartworker, fair point — and I agree that uninformed voters manipulated by media and ideology are a major problem. But that wasn’t really the group I was talking about.
I’m talking about people who are informed enough to know better and still vote out of blind loyalty or personal hatred of a politician’s personality. I know many people whose entire political philosophy begins and ends with “I hate Trump,” yet when you ask them which actual policies harmed them, they often can’t name one.
That kind of tribal voting is incredibly dangerous. Parties change, policies change, and the world changes. Voting should be based on real-world outcomes and policy, not emotional attachment to a party label or hatred of a personality. And frankly, when I still see groups like “Jews for Democrats” or blind loyalty in either direction, I think it’s deeply irrational.
As a Diaspora Jew, I know that I will be a tenant anywhere except in the Land of Israel. Landlords change, policies change - none of that makes a difference in who we are. The existence of independent Israel is the only protection we have. No need to be a coward and “read” the room to make yourself feel better. There is only one objective truth of a false historical blood libel, spoken or not.
A great way of explaining the "As a Jew" phenomenon.
In the diaspora, one of our worst enemies is the liberal Jew, who in my opinion is a traitor to us all. As a people, we have always disagreed, however as a minority, to turn on one another, is only assisting our enemies. Jews who raise Jewish children without the love of our history, ancestry, customs, Israel, and one another, will be the diasporas’ unraveling and saddens me deeply. I was not raised religious, but love for my heritage, customs, history and people have been treasures that continue to enrich my and my children’s lives enormously.
I hear the pain in this, especially around Jewish continuity. I’m hesitant to call liberal Jews “traitors,” because I think that kind of language can flatten a much more complicated reality. But I do agree with the deeper concern: Jews who sever themselves from Jewish peoplehood, history, Israel, and shared responsibility often do not become the ones who carry Jewish continuity forward.
That is not a new phenomenon. Jewish history has always included people who distance themselves, assimilate, or turn against the collective in order to survive, belong, or feel morally clean. But continuity ultimately rests with the Jews who keep choosing the people, even when it is costly, complicated, and uncomfortable.
Nope. Diaspora’s Jews are not even tenants. Tenants have rights. Tenants have a lease. Tenants have legal protections. Diaspora Jews think they have these but they don’t because when called upon to be honored it’s questionable as to whether they will be enforced.
Diaspora Jews are guests. Sometimes welcome guests…as long as they remain polite and in the background. These days more often unwelcome guests…like the Sidney at the Omega house pledge event in Animal House…shunted to the side with no real chance of admittance.
It’s always been that way even in the golden age in America when it was hidden because it was politically incorrect. We were fooled by the politeness. Took it as acceptance. But now we know different. We are guests being shown the door, sometimes politely more often not.
How many American jews who only vote D are indifferent to whether Israel continues to exist? Is that an unfair question to pose to someone constantly bashing Israel? Let me use an analogy of sorts: can you be friends with someone who is truly racist towards blacks? If the answer is no ( as it shpuld be in my opinion) I then ask what about a jew hater or someone who would defund israel ( but then I repeat myself: apologies to Tucker and the Jewish senators who side w Tucker on this matter?)
Yes, the Eternal ‘Other’: A cold avaricious logic in and by the countries we find ourselves in, which becomes Theft of our property, and then may include murder when our usefulness is complete. This may seem strange to the Liberal and Christian-minded non-Jews who befriend us. But the Fascist elements in these communities, although they do not have the upper hand yet thank goodness, are cultivated precisely for these acts of theft and murder. The whole (attempted) process, by Elements who have openly called themselves the re-formed Nazi Party here in Europe, has been monitored here in Europe once again. Our documentary monitoring is with you. And thus we dwell alone once again, in the country where we can be sovereign. Am Israel Chai.
Very good article. It lays out exactly what Prof. Ruth Wisse wrote in her book "Jews and Power". As the eternal minority in the Diaspora, we are subject to the shifting conditions whether they be liberal democracies, theocracies, or autocratic governments. I would recommend reading her book to get an even deeper understanding of Mr. Strauss' summary.
…“to build a Jewish life that depends on it less.” Define building that life please.
Your essay captured what I have been feeling/experiencing in words I didn't know existed so clearly. Thank you.
I enjoy short, concise, contemplative essays. This one fits those criteria. But, "the Jewish condition?" Hmmm. I need to contemplate this for a moment. It sounds too much like "the Jewish question" and we all know how that one was answered.
Meanwhile in NYC I just read that anti Zionist, pro Mandami Dem "Jew" Brad Landers has a "sizable lead" over moderate Dan Goldman in that heavily Jewish congressional district. That obnoxious, loud mouth scumbag will turn out to be the top "As a Jew "for Palestine and Moslems in Congress after Sanders becomes senile. Part of the enemy is us.
I've been saying this for a while now. Just not so articulately or eloquently.