Cohen argued that “an American Jew can live a rich and complex Jewish life without public visibility and without the need of public endorsement.” In Israel, he contended, “this remains impossible, in part because Israel’s society today demands not unity but unanimity.” The result, he said, is that “there is a kind of monolithic aspect to Israeli society that needs a ‘kulturkampf’ to bring about change.” Those views were strongly challenged by Prof. David Landes of Harvard University and by two Israelis –Dan Leon of the Jewish Agency and author of several books on the kibbutz system, and Dr. Nathan Lerner, executive director of the Israeli branch of the World Jewish Congress. Prof. Landes asserted that the American attachment to Israel represented “a healthy instinct.” He declared that the founding of Israel had been a “watershed” in American Jewish life, bringing about a change in the character of American Jews and opening “a new dimension” in diaspora life. Prof. Landes also argued that there was far more dissent and criticism in Israel than in any other new country in history. He criticized as “a gross distortion” the use of such “apocalyptic” language as “totalitarian” to describe Israeli intellectual life. Leon and Lerner agreed that there was “ample discussion” in Israel on many problems vital to Jewish life, though in some cases, they said, Israelis prefer to argue crucial issues in practical rather than in abstract terms.
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
