Steve Schwartzberg,”A Passionate Pro-Labor Social Democrat for Congress

“A passionate pro-labor Social Democrat.” That is how Steve Schwartzberg was described in an October 2005 review of his first book in the journal Foreign Affairs. Throughout his writings—whether he is talking about American support for the postwar land reform in Japan that benefited millions of small farmers, or American support for democratic working-class movements in Latin America in the 1940s, or the failure of the United States to respect tribal sovereignty that culminated in the genocidal Trail of Tears and Death in the 1830s—Steve has shown himself to be a consistent champion of social justice and of social democratic principles.

As a high school student active in the SDUSA in the late 1970s, Steve helped lobby the Congress to help rescue the “boat people,” the hundreds of thousands of Indochinese refugees risking their lives on the South China Sea to escape communist totalitarianism. As a college student in the early 1980s, he helped raise funds to be smuggled into Poland to help the Solidarity underground in its fight for democracy and free trade unions. In recent years, he has volunteered, and helped organize volunteers, to provide free clothes and free food to the homeless, canvassed door-to-door for Bernie Sanders in the primaries, and then canvassed for Hillary Clinton in the general.

Steve has championed Medicare for All. He has championed a Marshall Plan for America involving massive investment in the nation’s infrastructure as well as a national commitment to “decarbonize” our economy. And he has championed a Freedom Budget for the 21st Century with which to begin to abolish poverty through investments in education and housing and job training. Steve has always stood for what the American people could do to help themselves, and the rest of the world, to build a more just, prosperous, and ecologically-sound future.

Having fought for many worthy causes over the decades, both at home and abroad, the SDUSA is delighted to endorse Steve Schwartzberg in the Democratic primary in the Illinois 5th District.

Posted in Uncategorized by David Hacker. 3 Comments

New Year’s Letter to our Members & Friends Announcing the Contract between ProQuest & SDUSA to Digitize the SP Papers & Documents that are Archived at the Library at Duke University

Dear Comrades & Friends;

We are writing to wish you a Happiest of Holidays and a great New Year and to inform you of a major development for our organization and its members. 2017 was a difficult year for all of us. We have suffer through the first year of the Donald Trump Administration. We still cannot believe that this man is our president. Therefore, we have been an essential part of the Resistance opposing him. In fact, we began this resistance, immediately after the 2016 election with our “Keeping the Political Revolution Alive” conference that was held on November 19, 2016 in Buffalo N.Y, that was organized by SD’s 1st Vice Chair, Comrade Michael Mottern. We held our National Convention in August and were able to share a video of the public forum to all of our members and friends on our website. We passed various resolutions at the Convention, including “Religion and Reproductive Justice,” “American Drug Policy,” endorsing the “People’s Platform.” Specifically controversial was the introduction of a resolution, “After Fifty Years of Occupation, A Social Democratic/Democratic Zionist Case Critically Endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement.” This resolution was sent to the National Committee where it was passed by a very narrow margin. At the same time, the members who opposed this resolution were encouraged to write a minority report with their alternative proposals to critically endorsing the BDS movement. No one was ostracized for their opinion on this very contentious issue in our discussion on the BDS resolution. However, the fact that this kind of resolution was submitted to our national convention and later approved by the NC, is prove positive that the reorganized Social Democrats, USA, has evolved and can no longer be charged as being neoconservative. On the other hand, the SD remains explicitly committed to the survival and security of Israel alongside a state of Palestine on the West Bank & Gaza with Jerusalem as the capital of both states. And we remain firm in our critique of the political anti-Zionism that is expressed on both the Alt-Right and much of the Left, as oppose to constructive criticisms of aspect of Zionist ideology and history of the movement that still affirms the right of the Jewish people to self determination.

Therefore,we hope that 2018 is fruitful and positive for all of us, with a continuing resurgence of the Left in the United States, ending the year with the defeat of the Republican majority in Congress and many state governments. We have been doing our part in achieving this goal. Despite, the small size of the SD, our treasurer Rick D’Loss has been a elected member of the city council of Carnegie, Pennsylvania since 2009, as a socialist in the Democratic Party. Steven Schwartzberg, a SD member since the 1970s, is running for Congress for the Illinois 5th District, under the slogan, “Stands Where Bernie Sanders Does: Social Democratic Leadership for the Illinois 5th District.” Comrade Schwartzberg states, “I am running for Congress because I am a social democrat who thinks that it is time for a moral as well as a political revolution in this country. I believe that my background and skills will enable me to help advance that twin revolution better than any of the other candidates in the race.”

Please go to http://www.schwartzbergforcongress.com/#home for information about Steve and his campaign.

This is the first of a series of letters to our members & friends discussing how the SD can grow and prosper politically in 2018 and beyond. We also need to hear suggestions, ideas and proposals from you. We know that this is a very dangerous time for the U.S and the world. You can reach me at DHacker300@aol.com or 516-669-1748. The aurora of authoritarianism is coming from the White House, while the Republican Congress seeks to undo the entire legacy of the New Deal. Yes, the Class Struggle is real. And we know which side we are on. The side of Workers and the poor of all races, sexes, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. But we need your help. Whatever you can donate-especially if you have not paid your dues for 2017. Please send in your donations to Rick D’Loss at 225 E. Main St. Carnegie, Pa. 15106.

We are also writing to let you know that ProQuest, a Ann Arbor, Michigan-based global information-content and technology company founded in 1938 as University Microfilms has chosen Social Democrats,USA as the sole and rightful heir to the original Socialist Party of America and its legacy and ownership of the SP papers & documents that are archived at the David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library and University Archives at Duke University. This is not only a wonderful and meaningful honor. It has great legal/practical implications and benefits. – not the least of which will be future funding streams for the SDUSA and the access it will afford our members and others will be priceless. ProQuest has signed a contract with Duke University to scan and digitize the following materials: Socialist Party of America Papers (1897-1963)

Socialist Party of America Papers, Addendum (1919-1976).

As the legally recognized Licensor of these papers, the SD has to agree to give ProQuest permission to scan and digitize this archival collection. We have signed an agreement with ProQuest to proceed with this project. This is the agreement:

As for royalties from sales of the digitized collection, we reached the following agreement

This means that both the SD and Duke University will get 10 percent of the revenue of any sale of the Licensed SP papers. In addition, all members of Social Democrats USA will have free access to the digitized SP Papers archives. We have also discussed with ProQuest scanning and digitizing the Social Democrats, USA Records, 1937-1994 (Bulk 1970-1994) that are also at Duke University Library’s Rubinstein Archives.

We encourage you to use this amazing collection after the completion of the project in 2020. In the meantime, there are collection of Leftist papers, books, organizational journals, newsletters, etc. even art and political posters available to all of you, and accessible from your home. If you need recommendations and/or help visiting these collections, do not hesitate to contact David Hacker. I cannot overstate how important this agreement with ProQuest and their choice of us as the legal heir to the historic Socialist Party of Eugene V Debs & Norman Thomas. Comrades, this is hugh! The debate over which organization is the legal successor of the SP is over. The SDUSA is the historic SP. In future letters, I will discuss the full political meaning of this fact and how it gives our organization the flexibility to both work in the Democratic Party and also run independent local campaigns under the SP logo.

Yours in Solidarity;

Patty Friend, National Chair: SDUSA David Hacker, National Secretary: SDUSA

Posted in Uncategorized by David Hacker. No Comments

New video from Social Democrats USA

On August 12, SDUSA held a public program in conjunction with our convention.
The program was broken into 3 topics: Social Democracy in Eastern Europe, the
status of Labor Unions in America, and Social Democracy in America (a
conversation with Lane Kenworthy). The videos have been posted at this link:
http://socialistcurrents.org/?page_id=1873
Posted in Uncategorized by David Hacker. No Comments

Socialists See an Opening for Change

By JASON SIBERT

Social Democrats USA passed key resolutions and discussed a strategy to move the country forward in their Biennial National Convention in Carnegie, Pa. on Aug. 11-12.

Social Democrats USA is a faction of the old Eugene Debs/Norman Thomas Socialist Party. The Socialist Party of America merged with the Social Democratic Federation, once a part of the Socialist Party, in 1956 to form Socialist Party/Social Democratic Federation. Socialist Party/Social Democratic Federation changed its name to Social Democrats USA in 1972.

Internal differences led to a three-way party split. One faction formed a political party, Socialist Party USA, which still exists to this day, and another faction formed the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee. The DSOC later merged with the New American Movement to form the Democratic Socialists of America, an organization that still exists today. The Democratic Socialists of America has experienced a membership surge in the aftermath of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. SDUSA is a smaller organization.

“We trace our beginnings right back to the old Socialist Party of Eugene Debs,” SDUSA secretary-treasurer Rick D’Loss said. “There’s no other group around today that can say that. Debs originally belonged to a party called Social Democratic Party of America.”

SDUSA’s national office, once located in New York City, folded in 2005. This left the organization with a local affiliate in Johnstown, Pa. The people from the local spearheaded a revival in 2007. D’Loss believes in the potential for average people to work for change.

“Your average person that isn’t political or even particularly progressive believes in making things better,” he said. “The Democratic Socialists of America are pretty much radical leftists and not everyone is going to join a group like that. The guy on the street doesn’t see himself as a radical leftist and Social Democrats USA is a place where an average guy can fit in and say ‘we just want to make things better than they are now. We think people should be able to go to the doctor or make a better wage.’ They’re not radical people, they just want to make things better.”

At the SDUSA Board meeting on Aug. 11, the board passed a resolution supporting the decriminalization of marijuana. The resolution said decriminalization would mean less contact between police forces and those they police. Less contact would mean a more positive environment between police forces and the civilian community. In addition, the resolution also supported drug treatment programs.

The SDUSA Board also passed a resolution supporting the liberating force of religion as well as the separation of church and state. The resolution also committed the organization to a pro-choice position on abortion. It also supported expanded access to adoption services and sex education. The Board also committed Social Democrats to the Congressional Progressive Caucus’s People’s Budget which includes bold planks like universal healthcare and education, taxing Wall Street and transformation of our energy system away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy.

The Board also discussed a resolution supporting arms control and a foreign policy where diplomacy is front and center. The newly introduced resolution will be discussed at a later date. The resolution might be considered a break from the past. Some past members of SDUSA became what is termed “neoconservatives.” In the 1970’s Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee head Michael Harrington criticized the organization for its “obsessive anti-communism.” Harrington supported German Chancellor Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik, a policy of dealing with the Soviet Union in a diplomatic manner.

Carl Gershman, who was Executive Director of SDUSA from 1975-1980, served in the Reagan Administration as the US Representative to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights. Joshua Muravchick also belonged to SDUSA at one time. Muravchick, an advocate of the 2003 Iraq War, served on the State Department’s Advisory Committee on Democracy Promotion from 2002 to 2009.

Shortly after passing the resolution, SDUSA National Chair Patty Friend conducted a meeting on organizing SDUSA locals. Friend presented a simple philosophy on organizing.

“The biggest part of organizing is showing up,” she said. “Organizing is everything. It’s wonderful to have a broad base of people that think like you, but it’s not enough to have a base of people thinking the right thoughts. You need to be able to take action. The power of a group will always be bigger and more long-lasting than the power of one.”

Friend said the organization wanted for members to be active in local progressive causes and to charter locals. The national convention included a forum on Aug. 12 at Off the Wall Productions in Carnegie. Stressing the democratic ideology of the group, there was a banner that said “pro-democracy, pro-labor,” displayed in front of all live speakers. Friend, D’Loss and Michael Mottern moderated a discussion with European social democratic leaders via Skype. Veselin Tonev and Emil Knyazhin of the Bulgarian Social Democratic Party, Zsolt Csiszár of the Hungarian Social Democratic Party and Christian Hörbelt, a graduate Student at the Europa-Universität Viadrina, discussed the rise of European right-wing populism, the past of social democracy in Europe and the steps it has to take to regain a foothold on the continent.

The second session featured Union Edge talk radio host Charles Showalter speaking on the accomplishments of the labor movement. Union Edge is the only labor-oriented talk radio program in the Pittsburgh region. Carnegie is an inner-ring suburb of Pittsburgh. Showalter talked of the struggles of organizing unions amongst a hostile political environment and also the positive economic side of the union movement. He said that higher union wages lead to more money being spent in local communities.

The third section included University of California at San Diego Sociologist Lane Kenworthy. Kenworthy penned a book “Social Democratic America.” The sociologist reiterated the point stressed in his book and that’s that the United States will become more social democratic in the next 50 years. He talked about the need for wage-loss insurance, a higher minimum wage, increased educational opportunity, expanded early childhood education and more generous unemployment insurance and social security.

Jason Sibert worked for the Suburban Journals in the St. Louis area for over a decade and is currently executive director of the Peace Economy Project in St. Louis, Mo. Email jasonsibert@hotmail.com.

From The Progressive Populist, September 15, 2017


Posted in Uncategorized by David Hacker. 4 Comments

A Social Democratic/Democratic Zionist Case Critically Endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement

The following Resolution was not voted on at the Convention as it came up near the end of the Plenary Session on Resolutions. It was referred to next month’s meeting of the National Executive Committee. It was approved at the NEC by a close vote.

After Fifty Years of Occupation, A Social Democratic/Democratic Zionist Case Critically Endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement:

A Resolution Essay (Submitted by Sheldon Ranz & David Hacker)

Historical Preamble to the Resolution

Social Democrats USA has been unique on the Left in explicitly defending the existence and security of the State of Israel. In fact, under the former leadership, and in front groups such as the Youth Committee for Peace in the Middle East, the emphasis was on attacking the anti-Israel positions of other Left organizations. What criticisms were made of the Israeli government, even under the pro-West Bank settlement positions of various Likud governments were minor, along with a general distrust that a Palestinian leadership would arise that would seek a real peace with Israel. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was viewed as an explicitly anti-Israel terrorist organization. In essence, SDUSA was aligned with the right-wing of the Israeli Labor Party. Only in September 1993, after the Israeli Labor government of Yitzhak Rabin signed the Oslo Agreement with the PLO, did the SD change its position on the PLO. However, the National Office began its slow disintegration after 1994; thus any evolution in the old leadership’s position after Oslo broke down in 2000 and criticisms of subsequent Israeli governments are unknown.

After the National Office closed (without informing the membership of the SD) and the subsequent reorganization of the SD by the remaining active members and one surviving Local, we still felt that it was necessary in our new Statement of Principles to have a plank stating unequivocally “WE DEFEND THE RIGHT OF ISRAEL TO EXIST.” In some versions, the title read, “WE DEFEND THE EXISTENCE OF ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE.” The more detailed version of this specific Principle that appears in the so-called “SD Manifesto” explained why we believe that we had to write such a plank and the historic background behind it:

The fact that we even have to make such a declaration, in our statement of principles, about an independent nation that is a member of the United Nations, is a result of the shameful view in a large percentage of the Left, worldwide that Israel is a product of ‘racism’ or ‘imperialism,’ and therefore illegitimate. We fervently disagree. It is a democratic society, though imperfect, especially in its treatment of Sephardic Jews from Arab countries and the native Arab or Palestinian citizens of Israel. Nevertheless, it should also be pointed out that Arabic is one of the two official languages of Israel and that Israeli Arabs, share the same democratic voting rights of all Israelis and also have representatives in the Israeli Knesset. Similar examples of democratic rights are denied to the citizens of most Arab countries in the Middle East. Israel’s (Labour) movement, the Histadrut, is led by Social Democrats, with the Red Flag of the international Socialist Movement proudly flying above its headquarters. During the first decades of its existence, Israel was founded and governed by a Social Democratic Labor Party. Then, what is the source of the hostility of much of the Left to Israel, in the last several decades, which goes so far as to question its very existence as a sovereign state, rather than focus its criticisms on the action of its government, as it does in the case of every other country in the world?

“A little historical background is necessary here. Up to the 1967 war, the Left was generally seen as pro-Israel and Israel, under the political domination of a socialist party, Mapai, in alignment with an even more Leftist Zionist party with Marxist-Leninist roots, Mapam, plus the Histadrut Labor Federation and the Kibbutz movement, was viewed as being on the Left and building a true democratic socialist society. The radical, independent pro-Soviet weekly newspaper, The National Guardian, was sympathetic to Israel from its first issue in 1948 till 1967. The CP-sponsored Anniversary Tours would advertise tours to the USSR, Eastern Europe and Israel. In 1948, the most pro-Israel candidate for President was Henry Wallace and the Progressive Party, which called for full de jure recognition of the State of Israel and an end to the arms embargo that the U.S. placed upon it, in its platform. In fact, the champion of Israel and the Zionist cause in the UN from 1947 to 1949 was the USSR and its Eastern European allies. A pre-state book that illustrates how anti-Cold War progressives in the immediate post war years were devoted to the cause of Jewish statehood and self-determination in Palestine was Behind The Silken Curtain: A Personal Account of Anglo-American Diplomacy in Palestine and The Middle East by Bartley C. Crum. Crum later became the attorney of the Hollywood 10. Even when publications like the National Guardian were critical of Israeli actions, such as in the 1956 Suez War, the critiques were written with sympathy for Israel’s dilemma of being surrounded by hostile Arab nations devoted to its destruction, and without any denouncing of Zionism, much less questioning the very existence of Israel as a Jewish state.

“Suddenly, groups like SNCC and the Youth Against War & Fascism attacked Israel, after the 1967 Six Day War, in almost identical language as the racist right-wing National States Rights Party. They, and the Socialist Workers Party, the Guardian (which purged the original founders of the newspaper and drop the word “National” from its name), and most of the radical or socialist Left, did not merely criticize Israel’s action in the war, but went on to deny its legitimacy as a sovereign state. Zionism became a new epithet on the Left. The exceptions to this anti-Israel position on the left were the Socialist Party and the two Jewish publications that came out of the CPUSA, Jewish Currents and the Morgan Freiheit. Similar reaction occurred in Leftist groups and journals around the world that were outside the social democratic movement

“Did the breaking of relations with Israel of the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies, with the exception of Romania, help spark this anti-Israel sentiment on the Left? Certainly, from that time, to the Gorbachev period, the Soviet Union conducted a crude anti-Zionist propaganda campaign, that was actually pure anti-Semitism, in the state-run media. Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank after the 1967 has been cited, by its critics on the Left, for the hostility toward it. The international dimensions of this campaign became so strong that the United Nations General Assembly, on November 9, 1975, passed a resolution which was called ‘Zionism, a Form of Racism.’

“Thus, forgotten was the fact that from 1949 to June 1967, Jews were barred from the Old City of Jerusalem, including the holiest site in Judaism, the Western Wall. Now imagine how Catholics would feel if they were to forbidden to visit Vatican City and Moslems were banned from their sacred cities of Mecca and Medina? Also forgotten were the100,000 Jews living in the Arab world, many for 1,000 years, who were forced to flee after the establishment of Israel in 1948. When Egypt occupied Gaza from 1949 -1967 and Jordan, East Jerusalem and the West Bank, during the same period, there were no calls from anywhere for a Palestinian state to be created in that area. Where were the criticisms of those occupations? In fact, from the late 1950s to the 1967 Six Day War, the call in the Arab world was Pan Arabism, the unification of all the Arab states into one central country. That is why Egypt under Gamal Abdal Nasser was called the United Arab Republic. His plan was for Egypt to be the center of a united Arabia. It was only after 1967 that Palestinian nationalism arose and replaced the cause of Pan-Arabism.

“Accordingly, we are unconditional advocates of Israel’s right to exist, and that our support does not depend on its being “nice” in order to deserve our defense. But that doesn’t mean that we are never uncritical of its governmental policies. We oppose the settlements policy of the right-wing Likud government. We support Israeli democratic ideals and those who work for them. Whenever those ideals are compromised, we will vigorously protest because we are pro-Israel. Sometimes, being pro-Israel means being critical of the policies of its government. Rather our slogan is Israel is here to stay and also Israel must be saved. But at times, we could add, Israel must be saved from itself, if we believe that some governmental policy or action that it is engaged in would be detrimental to establishing a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, etc.”

Since that statement was written in 2008, the political situation, and the fate of democracy itself, has greatly deteriorated after 50 years of occupation of the Palestinians in the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza. Rather the slogan, Israel must be saved from itself, is becoming more and more the relevant cry for those of us on the Left who care for the survival and security of Israel. Palestinian citizens of Israel have had their rights to vote threatened and their Knesset members threatened with expulsion. There have also been calls in Israel’s parliament to drop Arabic as being one of the official languages of the nation. Freedom of the press and the right to dissent has been attacked by the Israeli government. Representatives of American Zionist organizations such as the New Israel Fund, who oppose the occupation, have had travel restrictions placed on them coming to Israel, as have Jews who merely support a limited boycott of goods that are produced in Israeli settlements on the West Bank.

The collapse of the Oslo Agreement in 2000 has led to more restrictions on the Palestinians who live under occupation, along with continued expansion of Jewish settlements, making it almost impossible to envision a viable Palestinian state, next to Israel, needed to achieve the goal of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. More and more, it is become clear the present right-wing Israeli government’s true aim is a Jewish-dominated one-state solution, without any national rights for the Palestinians.

Rather than fill up this Historic Preamble with pages giving the ugly details of the current situation, we are reprinting, as an appendix to the Resolution, an essay by Dr. Alon Ben-Meir entitled “Fifty Years of Immoral Occupation.” Dr. Ben-Meir is a professor and Senior Fellow in the Center for Global Affairs at NYU and Senior Fellow at the World Policy Institute. Dr. Ben-Meir is an expert on Middle East affairs specializing in international negotiations and conflict resolution, and was actively involved in the past two decades in various negotiations between Israel and its neighboring countries and Turkey. In addition, Dr. Ben-Meir has written two open letters, one to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the other to Palestinian Authority President Abbas, that give a balanced critique of each side’s activities and positions, the general gist of which should inform how Social Democrats USA views the conflict. The letters can be found at http://alonben-meir.com/writing/unfinished-six-day-war-open-letter-prime-minister-netanyahu/ and http://alonben-meir.com/writing/fifty-years-occupation-whats-next-open-letter-president-mahmoud-abbas/. His latest article is at http://alonben-meir.com/writing/gaza-disaster-making/

Dr. Ben-Meir doesn’t discuss in these essays what should be the policy of the United States or political organizations in light of the real facts on the ground. U.S. governmental calls for the Israeli government to stop building settlements in the West Bank has fallen mainly on deaf ears. And how serious could the Israeli government take these calls when there are no threats of cutting off economic and/or military aid to Israel? Rather, Israel defies the U.S. and the U.S. responds by raising military aid to Israel to record levels.

This has led Middle East analyst, such as Nathan Thrall in his new book The Only Language They Understand: Forcing Compromise in Israel and Palestine, to conclude that “the United States has consistently sheltered Israel from accountability for its policies in the West Bank by putting up a facade of opposition to settlements that in practice is a bulwark against more significant pressure to dismantle them.” Therefore only coercion by the United States, such as cutting economic and military aid to Israel and UN sanctions can pressure the Israeli government to change its intransigent position, or the citizens of Israel to elect a new government which would negotiate, in good faith with the Palestinians a successful and just two-state solution of the crisis.

This directly leads this organization that has always been a friend of Israel, though often times critical, equipped with a sharp sense of knowing which critiques of Israel and Zionism are constructive and which are merely code words for the expression of anti-Semitism, to consider the current Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. We have been skeptical and suspicious of the motives behind the organizers of BDS. We remember the Arab State’s economic boycott against Israel after the Jewish State’s creation in 1948. Is BDS actually a boycott against Jews, in general, when academic bodies vote to exclude at their conferences Israeli scholars, even if they have been openly critical of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank? Thus, we have been wary of engaging, much less, endorsing the BDS movement and have turned to other less coercive methods of pressuring Israel, including boycotting products that were made on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Nevertheless, all similar efforts short of BDS have failed thus far, and the crisis in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is only getting worse, with no peaceful solution in sight. Therefore, we, as members of Social Democrats USA, as lifelong Democratic Zionists, sons of Holocaust resistors and survivors, urge Social Democrats USA to formally vote at this National Convention to critically support BDS from a Democratic Zionist, Social Democratic / Democratic Socialist standpoint. There is simply no alternative. In other words, we ask our fellow members & friends who would disagree with the SD giving critical support to BDS, what are the alternatives that other Comrades would support, in place of BDS, since nothing else has worked thus far to move the Israel government to agree to a just resolution to the crisis between Israel and Palestine?

—————————————————————————————————————————-

RESOLUTION

While the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement started in 2005 with little media attention, it has now burst on the public scene to such an extent that attempts in Congress to criminalize advocacy of BDS now make front-page news. Over 170 Palestinian non-governmental groups formed the BDS National Committee to promote the boycott of Israel, divestment from Israel and international sanctions against Israel. Inspired by a similar campaign against apartheid South Africa, the now-global BDS movement calls for Israel to meet its obligations under international law by complying with these three demands: ending the occupation of surrounding Arab lands that began with the Six Day War of 1967; recognizing the fundamental rights of Israel’s Palestinian Arab citizens to full equality, and instituting and promoting a Palestinian Right of Return that allows Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and property in Israel in accordance with UN resolutions.

Increasing numbers of US student bodies have endorsed it; so have the Connecticut branch of the AFL-CIO and the United Electrical Workers Union. Two of Bernie Sanders’ delegates to the Democratic Party platform committee, John Abourezk and Cornel West, are outspoken advocates of BDS. Depending on how authorities choose to enforce anti-BDS laws, supporters of BDS would be subject to fines, jail time, or both. This is such a clear threat to civil liberties that one initial co-sponsor, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), withdrew her support after protests erupted.

The BDS movement, which is non-violent and recognizes Israel, has had slow but steady success in getting international corporations to divest from Israel, especially from the Occupied West Bank, where egregious violations of the human rights of the Palestinians occur daily. By contrast, a smaller, less organized tendency among those whose views fall within the dovish part of the Israeli spectrum to boycott only products made in West Bank settlements has not produced a single known success.

So, can Zionists & Social Democrats support BDS? That question needs to be answered first with another question – what kind of Zionists? From an institutional framework, there are two kinds of Zionism: State Zionism and Democratic Zionism. Democratic Zionism posits that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people and the state of all its citizens, period. State Zionism is the doctrine that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people and the state of all of its Jewish citizens who are to enjoy a wide range of privileges over its Gentile citizens. No State Zionist, by definition, would endorse the demands of BDS.

Looking at the three demands of BDS from a Democratic Zionist perspective results in the following:

  • Demand #1 calls for an end to the 1967 occupation, a long-standing goal of Israel’s Peace Now movement and Left Zionist opposition.

  • Demand #2 calls for Israel to live up to the words of its own Declaration of Independence:

“…THE STATE OF ISRAEL…will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants…it will ensure complete equality (emphasis mine) of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex…WE APPEAL…to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions…”

However, immediately after the State of Israel was born, its Arab inhabitants were subjected to military rule; their movements restricted; they were deemed a security risk. After Israel imposed this military rule, it rolled out other laws discriminating against its Arab, indeed, against all of its Gentile inhabitants. Today, there are around fifty such laws; one of the most odious is the law, enshrined by the Jewish National Fund, barring Gentiles from owning land. Looking at these laws as one package led the Black Lives Matter movement to characterize not just the occupied West Bank but Israel as a whole as an apartheid state. While this label is controversial, these laws clearly undermine democracy and promote bigotry.

  • Demand #3 appears on first glance to play into fears that it would force Israel to accept a flood of Palestinian refugees that would turn Israel’s Jewish majority into a minority. Not only is this highly unlikely, since Jews have never flooded Israel under the Jewish Law of Return, but the demand’s wording only deals with the principle of the Right of Return and does not concern itself with its actual implementation. More importantly, Israel owes recompense to its loyal Arab citizens who were victimized by false promises of equality, and this should include repatriation of some of their displaced relatives from the Palestinian Diaspora.

In summary, all three demands actually promote the spirit and substance of Democratic Zionism.

Why is BDS especially important right now? The current direction of Israel paints a bleak picture. In 2014, its government launched an unprovoked attack on the Gaza Strip. This resulted in the deaths of over 1800 Palestinian civilians, including 500 children. This was the first time in Israel’s history that it directly committed mass murder. Israel is now led by the most right-wing government in its history, featuring a Justice Minister, Ayelet Shaked, who has called for the extermination of the entire Palestinian people, and a Prime Minster, Benjamin Netanyahu, whose followers cheered the 1995 assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, the Labor Party chief who helped negotiate the Oslo Agreements.

Although Netanyahu is the Prime Minister, Shaked is the true face of Israel. She will be so in the future if the BDS movement does not succeed. We believe that the most effective way to help this movement is to do so as Democratic Zionists. It is not necessary to be Jewish to support Democratic Zionism. American taxpayers should be appalled that billions of our tax dollars are being sent every year to Israel, whose government is saying and doing all these terrible things.

If the BDS movement fails, then this most right-wing government in Israeli history, joined with this most right-wing government in American history, will plunge the entire Middle East into a regional apocalypse. BDS is the last best hope for a genuine lasting peace with justice between Israel and Palestine.

Therefore, we resolve that Social Democrats USA not only oppose any restrictions on the right to advocate BDS, but join in its advocacy. We support pressuring our government to, in turn, pressure Israel, our largest foreign aid recipient, to adhere to its own founding documents by complying with the three demands of the BDS movement.

However, as defenders of the right of Israel to exist and militant opponents of any kind of anti-Semitism, either subtle or overt, Social Democrats USA reserves the right to engage critically with the BDS movement and disengage from supporting it, if we discover that the movement has been hijacked by extremists.

It is in that sense that we believe DSA’s resolution endorsing BDS at their recent national convention will alienate not only dovish Jewish organizations such as Americans for Peace Now, Partners for a Progressive Israel or J Street but also the majority of American Jews who feel an emotional attachment to Israel and who, historically, have comprised a critical constituency for any social justice movement. DSA’s resolution, mean-spirited and prosecutorial in tone, reads like a list of demands on Israel, and Jews in general, without addressing the understandable fears of American Jews. There is only a pro forma reference to anti-Semitism in the document. Similarly, it does not try to reach out to Gentiles on the democratic Left who both care about the survival and security of Israel and are strong critics of Israeli governmental policies. The resolution is ahistorical, oblivious to the fact that the merger agreement that created DSA explicitly committed the organization to support American military aid to Israel.

What the DSA resolution also lacks is the acknowledgment that just as there were bad actors and extremists in the anti-Vietnam War movement and the anti-South Africa apartheid movements, so there are among those who advocate BDS against Israel. The Chicago Dyke March Coalition expelled three Jewish lesbians from its event after they were seen marching with a Jewish Pride flag and interrogated by other marchers as to their views on Zionism. Members of the Coalition hurled anti-Semitic epithets, including the term ‘Zio’ coined by Klansman David Duke, at a transgender Jewish reporter for writing honestly about the March. Then, two noted Jewish anti-occupation groups, Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now, piled on, endorsing the expulsions, as did Alicia Garza, one of the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement. SDUSA condemns the Chicago Dyke March for its actions and expresses great disappointment with the other aforementioned groups, who contradicted their own stated goals to oppose all forms of bigotry.

We firmly believe that it is our critical backing of the BDS movement, without ideological blinders, that can move it to be accepted by the mainstream American Jewish community, Democratic Zionists, and the democratic Left, in general.

Therefore, SDUSA view that the final resolution toward a two-state solution of Israel living in peace and harmony with a united sovereign state of Palestine that incorporates the Occupied Territories, while situating their respective capitals in Jerusalem, will only occur when they both have a commitment to a secular, democratic and social democratic future in their respective states.

It is in this spirit that we resolve that Social Democrats USA will assist in whatever way it can to promote BDS in a principled, anti-racist manner.

—————————————————————————————————————————-

APPENDIX

Fifty Years Of Immoral Occupation

By Dr. Alon Ben-Meir

Today, the Israeli occupation of the West Bank has reached the milestone of 50 years that will be recalled in shame.

Fifty years that have dehumanized both the occupier and the occupied; years of failing to muster the courage to right the wrong.

Fifty years that bred nothing but hatred and contempt for the other; years of illusions trying to deny the other the right to a home of their own.

Fifty years of yearning for peace only to be crushed time and again; years of submission to hopelessness and despair.

Fifty years of pessimism, paralysis, and abdication of responsibility; years of fearing to grasp the only solution but choosing instead to hold onto self-delusion.

Fifty years of disingenuous engagement with one another for the worthiest cause of peace; years of mutual victimization and finding comfort in self-pity and stolen dreams.

Fifty years of occupation that transcends the pale of human decency, subjecting the Palestinians to dejection and despair; years of colonization, home demolitions, terrifying night raids, uprooting of olive trees; years of usurping Palestinian land, robbing them of their dream to be independent and free.

Fifty years of inflicting pain and anguish that spared but a few; years of constant fear of administrative detention and incarceration, with thousands of political prisoners languishing in jails; years of being deprived of their basic rights, not knowing what tomorrow will bring; years of outcry of Palestinian youth, born and reared under occupation with no hope and no prospect of being unshackled from the chains of dishonor and despair.

For fifty years, Israel denied the Palestinians self-determination, justifying it in the name of national security—but nothing threatens its security more than the continuation of the occupation. Breaching the moral law and flouting the Palestinians’ human rights only nurtures another generation who live to resent, live to hate, and live to harm, for there is nothing left for them to lose.

For many Israelis, fifty years of occupation seems to pass as if it were normal, conditions to which they have simply become accustomed—never mind that moral erosion has infected the Israelis’ social fabric, defying the moral principle on which the state was erected.

They have been led astray by corrupted leaders with no courage of conviction to change direction, exempting themselves of the moral obligation to be just and fair. They have become indifferent and complacent, blind to the light, with little concern about where Israel will be in ten or fifteen years if they do not end the inhumane occupation.

Israel has spent fifty years preparing its youth for the next violent battle, injecting the poison of hatred into their veins, and viewing the Palestinians as objects that can be dispossessed without any sense of moral culpability.

To end the occupation, the Palestinians must do their share. Years of misguidance, division, and violent extremism, while remaining bent on destroying Israel and inciting the people to violence, was nothing but self-defeating.

Plagued by factionalism and blind rivalry, the Palestinians missed one opportunity after another to reach out for peace, choosing instead to fight hopelessly unwinnable wars, leaving them shattered yet still holding onto the illusion they can prevail.

Palestinian leaders have spent fifty years squandering resources for personal gains, guarding their power while riding on the backs of the poor and despondent. They have victimized one generation after another, robbing them of a promising future, alienating and leaving them languishing in the darkness of their despair, rather than defying the Israelis by building a free, independent, and flourishing country in which they can take pride.

When will this all end? How many more children must die for an elusive goal that defies reality and common sense? Those Israelis and Palestinians who believe in a shared destiny must never agree to cooperate with the corrupt leaders who are oblivious of how ominous the future will be if there is no change.

Israeli leaders must end the occupation and stop reveling in the lies of their own creation. It is time to recognize that the occupation is an albatross choking every Israeli ever so slowly, sapping their spirit, corrupting their soul, and stripping Israel and the Jews the world over of the values of what is right, what is just, and what is caring—the pillars of their very survival.

I call on every man and woman of conscience to bring the madness of this debilitating conflict to an end. No Israeli or Palestinian child should die in another violent conflict between the two sides that will change nothing but bring more suffering, despondency, bloodshed, and sorrow.

As the late President Kennedy said in the 1960s, “[the] people expect more from us than cries of indignation and attack. The times are too grave, the challenge too urgent, and the stakes too high…”

It is time for both sides to rise and demand that their leaders compromise and come to terms with a reality that neither can change, and seek a just and fair solution that must bring an end to the occupation.

If the Israelis and Palestinians continue to hate, resent, and kill each other, they will be consumed by the land they are fighting for. But if they learn to live in harmony and peace, together they will make the land exude milk and honey, ushering in a renaissance the likes of which has never been seen before.

Posted in Uncategorized by David Hacker. 36 Comments