The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy

Notes and Bio From A Frustrated Jewish, Zionist, Israeli, Texas American

by Bernard J. Shapiro
Courtesy of Freeman Center for Strategic Studies.

PART ONE: EARLY BIO

I was always a Jew, but something happened to me in 1959 that turned me into a Zionist. Don’t laugh, but I took a course in modern Jewish history and two of the reading assignments were: Exodus by Leon Uris and The Course of Modern Jewish History by Howard M. Sacher. Coming from a Reform Jewish background in a state known more for its Texas pride than Jewish pride, I have come a long way. It has been an exciting journey, but now I am sad and frustrated.

I went to Israel for the first time with the Israel Summer Institute in 1960, and of course, fell in love with Eretz Yisrael. I returned to complete my studies at the University of California at Berkeley. My love for Israel seemed to be growing daily and expressed itself in multiple pro-Israel activities on the campus. I turned Hillel into and instrument of Zionist influence on the campus. The Hillel rabbi (like most of them was not a true Zionist) and sought to rain me in. He failed as I formed the Student Zionist Organization and increased my activities. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, April 28, 2008.

Since anti-Semitism is sweeping cross England and Europe, I want to read some passages from England’s greatest statesman, Winston Churchill, who, more than any other man, saved England Europe from Nazi tyranny.

I propose to read passages from Churchill’s official biographer Sir Martin Gilbert, whose recent book, Churchill & the Jews (2007) is fascinating.

Before I begin, I want to point out that Churchill was first and foremost a British statesman, and his duties as a British statesmen must be taken into account in any assessment one makes of his attitude toward Jews and Palestine.

Despite the anti-Zionist attitude of many of his Conservative Party colleagues, Churchill was steadfast in his support of the Jews, as Gilbert thoroughly documents. (more…)

Extracted (apart from the conclusion) from Paul Eidelberg, Demophrenia: Israel and the Malaise of Democracy, 1994.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, post-Zionism did not begin with the Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement of September 13, 1993. Zionism ceased to activate Israel’s political elites immediately after the 1948-49 War of Independence.

To understand this phenomenon, we must go back even before the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 and examine the mentality of its ruling elites.

European education profoundly influenced the founders and faculties of Israel’s academic institutions. Historical or cultural relativism has ever flourished in Israel’s secular universities. Martin Buber wrote: “There is no scale of values for the [world-historical] function of peoples. One cannot be ranked above another.” It is in this light that we are to understand why this Hebrew University professor and his colleague, Dr. Judah Magnes (the university’s first president), favored a bi-national Arab-Jewish state in the land of Israel. In 1947, they declared in a joint statement:

We do not favour Palestine as a Jewish country or Palestine as an Arab country, but a bi-national Palestine as the common country of two peoples…. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, March 31, 2008.

Just returned from a US lecture tour. After a lively discussion at one of my talks, a member of the audience, I’ll call him “Mr. X,” engaged me in a remarkable conversation, one that has prompted me to formulate the following dialogue:

Mr. X: “Professor, I have read many of your articles, but you say nothing about American organizations that want to keep Israel weak by opposing any change in its impotent and unstable system of government.”

PE. “What organizations are you referring to?”

Mr. X. “Zionist organizations, whose leaders have a vested interest in keeping Israel weak—those who never call for basic reform of Israel’s decrepit system of government.” (more…)

The “self-hating Jew,” an idea bandied about especially by prominent Israelis of the so-called Right, is utterly misleading. Far more significant and revealing about that Jew is his fear or lack of courage: the courage to stand alone in a world hostile to Judaism.

And what applies to the fearful Jew applies the fearful State of Israel.

To take this a step further and deeper, however, this fearfulness is nothing less than the fear to acknowledge the existence of the God of Israel and the demands or obligations such cognizance makes on the Jewish People. (more…)

Speech by Meir Jolowitz on the occasion of the 17th yahrzeit of Rabbi Meir Kahane, ob”m.

Something terrible is happening to Israel.

There is a war being fought, and the people of Israel don’t even know it.

And we ask the question:

Does anyone notice?

Does anybody care?

**

It happened only a few years ago.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak invited Yasir Arafat, a mass murderer, into his home in the exclusive community of Kochav Yair, on Erev Shabbat. (more…)

Although the title of this article may appear outrageous, it is the only logical conclusion one can draw from irrefutable facts about Israel’s Knesset..

No one will deny that the Knesset’s three Arab parties (10 seats) are not Zionist—right?

No one will deny that the Knesset’s “ultra-religious” parties, Shas (12 seats) and Torah United Judaism (6 seats), are not Zionist—right?

No one will deny that Kadima (29 seats), Labor-Meimad (19 seats), Gil Pensioners (7 seats), and Meretz-Yachad (5 seats) are not Zionist—indeed, all support the policy of “Jewish land for peace”—right?

But what about Israel Beiteinu (11 seats), Likud (12 seats), and the National Religious-National Union coalition (9 seats)? Sorry, but they too are not Zionist! (more…)

Edited version of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, December 12, 2007. The reader should bear in mind that I have also subjected Israel’s religious parties to critical analysis, including the Zionist National Religious Party. What is more, I now oppose religious parties, and that Israel’s religious communities should not be beholden, primarily, to government handouts. Finally, this critique is meant to be constructive, to prompt all pro-Israel organizations to engage in self-criticism with a view to making themselves more effective champions of Israel.

With due respect to all Zionist organizations, those that lack a Torah orientation inherently lack an adequate understanding of the basic causes of Israel’s present malaise. Although what I am about to say will not endear me to these organizations or to their supporters, perhaps it will prompt them to undertake serious self-criticism.

When a doctor examines a sick patient, he tries to relate the symptoms of their illness to some underlying cause. Certain organizations in Israel and the United States have devoted enormous time and energy to making Israel safe and strong. No wonder they have failed to achieved this objective! Surely, they should be aware that despite the decades during which they have been working to make Israel safe and strong, Israel today has never been more insecure. (more…)

The announcement of the New Jewish Congress, which convened in Jerusalem on November 27, 2007, contained one very meaningful and potentially powerful statement: “The Sovereignty of the Jewish Nation over the Jewish State of Eretz-Israel.”

This statement recalls a policy paper I wrote several years ago entitled: “Must the State of Israel Perish for Israel to Survive?” By the “State” I mean, primarily, its political and judicial institutions: the Knesset, the Cabinet, and, above all the Supreme Court. These institutions must “perish,” meaning, they must be replaced by radically different ones. They must be replaced by institutions that do not fragment the nation into an absurd multiplicity of rival parties, that render the people powerless between elections, and that undermine Jewish national identity. The so-called Jewish State of Israel is an institutional catastrophe, as was known to eminent people in Israel in 1951 after the first two elections.

What was not known, and what is not understood to this day, is that very concept of a “Jewish State” is an oxymoron. (more…)

Here is that famous letter written in 1969!

This “letter” (written by Eliezer Whartman) first appeared as an editorial in the summer of ‘69 in the Times of Israel (long defunct).

Some of the sentences do not fit today’s situation perfectly, but the point of the letter, and its passion is as on the mark as it was over 38 years ago.

Who should read this letter? People—nonJews or Jews—who think that Jerusalem does not belong to the Jewish People, and only to the Jewish People.

And what about Jews who love Jerusalem and want to see it and all of Israel in Jewish hands? This letter is wonderful chizuk. Enjoy it! (more…)

by Hillel Fendel
Courtesy of Arutz Sheva

(IsraelNN.com) The New Jewish Congress was launched in Jerusalem on Tuesday—the same day as the Annapolis summit, whose defeatism it seeks to fight.

Organizations, speakers and supporters from across the spectrum of nationalist and religious thought were present at the Renaissance Jerusalem Hotel to take part in the opening sessions.

The plenary session was chaired by Congress co-organizer Prof. Hillel Weiss of Bar Ilan University. Others responsible for organizing the Congress were Katy Cohen and Prof. Arieh Zaritzky, while a fourth co-organizer, Dr. Gadi Eshel, read aloud the Congress charter, entitled: “The Eternal People in an Eternal Covenant in the Land of Israel.” Excerpts: (more…)

In a previous article I pointed out that Jewish control of the Temple Mount, Israel’s holiest site, is a fundamental precondition of uncontested Jewish control of Jerusalem and, eventually, of Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel. Moreover, Jewish control over the Temple Mount will restore to the Jewish people the esteem of the nations and enable Israel to fulfill its historical mission: to declare from Jerusalem—from Zion—G‑d’s sovereignty in the world.

It needs to be emphasized that the first concern of any statesman worthy of the name is national unity. But that is precisely what the Temple symbolizes for the Jewish people. Let us recur to Joshua Berman’s The Temple, to clarify the Temple’s vital significance. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, July 30, 2007.

The IDF—the Israel Defense Forces—has long been known as a “citizens army.” Since December 1987, however, when the first intifada broke out, the IDF has increasingly become a politician’s army. Its primary purpose is not to protect Israel’s civilian population, but to protect the international reputation of Israeli prime ministers. These prime ministers want to be perceived as humanitarians, exercising self-restraint vis-à-vis Arab terrorists.

This, they believe, will inspire respect for themselves (and Israel) as morally superior to their enemies. Self-restraint has thus become their badge of honor and reinforces Israel’s reputation as “the only democracy in the Middle East.” Given this reputation, Public Relations preoccupy Israel’s ruling elites. (more…)

Reflecting back on my 31 years in Israel, it seems to me the IDF has often served Israel’s government as an instrument to mislead the public in order to facilitate the government’s defeatist policy of “territory for peace.”

Before I cite the latest example, it should be noted that IDF spokesmen have repeatedly intoned the government’s mantra that there is no military solution to the problem of Arab terrorism. This means there is no alternative to territorial retreat. Indeed, if I am not mistaken, Israel’s Command and Staff College has taught the absurd doctrine that “self-restraint” is a form of strength. (more…)

The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy was established in 1995. Its constitutional reform program was published in the United States as well as in Israel. I am repeatedly asked: “Why doesn’t the nationalist camp in Israel or any prominent Zionist organization in the United States more or less endorse the Foundation’s program?” What prevents them from saying something like this: “We support, with some reservations, the institutional reforms proposed by the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy.”

This puzzles me because some Zionist organizations in the United States have occasionally sponsored one or another of my lectures. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, May 28, 2007.

When the Likud dropped to 12 seats in the March 2006 election, this meant that secular Zionism was dead. Moreover, in that election the National Religious Party had to unite with National Union to be politically visible—which suggests that religious Zionism is moribund. I conclude that 20^th century Zionism, which founded the State of Israel, is obsolete, and this means that Israel lacks the semblance of any ideology.

Zionism has metamorphosed into an anti-Jewish post-Zionism. Superficial observers blame the Labor Party for this decadent state of affairs. But the Likud is also blameworthy, (more…)

All those who went to Homesh to express their Jewish commitment to Eretz Israel deserve the greatest praise. Their evacuation by the police will not dishearten them. Among them will be the leaders of a future Israel.

But they should know and carefully consider the fact that events in Israel and in the Middle East are running much, much faster than their own current activities. (more…)

Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, March 19, 2007.

Fearful of anti-Semitism, some misguided people have said Israel is bad for the Jews. But it’s not Israel but Israel’s government that is bad for the Jews. We see this even when the government is led by the Likud, ostensibly a Zionist or nationalist party. But Likud Zionism is first and foremost political or secular, and this Zionism has turned out to be bad for the Jews.

This was foreseen by Dr. Isaac Breuer, a religious Zionist who was one of the greatest exponents of Jewish thought in the first half of the twentieth century. Although he admired Theodor Herzl, he maintained that only observant Jews can be true Zionists, (more…)

[Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, December 25, 2006.]

Israel is disintegrating. The basic causes of this disintegration may be listed under four headings: (1) disunity resulting from a lack of Jewish statesmanship and Jewish national purpose; (2) disunity resulting from a flawed system of government; (3) disunity resulting from excessive cultural heterogeneity; (4) disunity resulting from secular-religious discord.

Underlying each of these causes is a more fundamental one: a modern conception of democracy that clashes with Judaism and makes it impossible to achieve the national unity required for Israel’s survival. (more…)

From time to time we hear that secular Zionism is dead. Actually, secular Zionism was always a logical impossibility—as contradictory as atheism and theism. Let’s define our terms.

Secularism is the tendency of man to assert the autonomy of his own will or reason vis-à-vis any deity. (more…)