American Jewish Political Culture and the Liberal Persuasion by Henry L. Feingold (review)

Having recently read some of Henry Feingold’s work on the nature of modern Jewish politics in the United States, I was excited to learn he had just produced a book-length treatment of the topic. Although I was disappointed in places, the book itself is a very good overview of the puzzle that is contemporary Jewish liberalism. Feingold’s writing has lost none of its pungency, wit or wisdom, making this a good read regardless of audience.

To explain the distinctive, moderately leftist politics of American Jewry, Feingold emphasizes the New Deal, Zionism, and Holocaust consciousness. In identifying these factors as the pillars of American Jewish politics, Feingold does not differ much from Lawrence Fuchs or Jonathan Woocher. Yet unlike the former, who drew on survey data, Feingold employs a methodology that seeks to penetrate the core of “the American Jewish political psyche, where the secrets of political behavior are buried” (ix). This sounds a great deal like cultural history and he carries it off well.

Feingold sees the New Deal as the critical period when modern Jewish political culture took root. The creation of the welfare state resonated with Jews who had long appreciated the role of government in securing the well-being of the citizenry. Hence Roosevelt’s domestic regime did not create but simply consolidated a “pre-existing statist orientation” in American Jewish politics (114). Zionism also contributed to the politicization of American Jews. The idea of a Jewish state was compelling to Jews who envisioned the new homeland as a means of protection and source of Jewish renewal. (This commitment became somewhat anomalous when a particularistic style of Jewishness came to dominate Israeli public life in the late 1970s, conflicting with the universalistic temper of post-war Jewish liberalism.) As if it were necessary given the lachrymose interpretation of Jewish history, the Holocaust imparted a “catastrophe perspective” (later called a “paranoic streak”) that continues to instill a sense of urgency about Jewish survival. This triad of concerns subsumes “virtually all the issues and interactions that today form the substance of American Jewish political culture” (xi).

After a long introductory chapter, Feingold turns to his core argument about the deep roots of Jewish liberalism. Echoing Leonard Fein, the author contends that the Jewish heritage as a small, often despised minority in exile has prompted the embrace of “general liberal principles like tolerance, racial harmony, and the empowerment of suppressed groups” (71). The basis of this political culture, he avers, is not solely religious values or altruism but also self-interest, the recognition that programs inspired by liberalism enhance social cohesion and reduce inter-communal tensions that engender anti-Semitism. Subsequent chapters reaffirm the foundational role of Jewish concern for group survival in stimulating the embrace of Zionism and Holocaust consciousness.

The author was not particularly well-served by copyediting that allowed a remarkable number of typos: the “affect” of anti-Semitism (31), Saul Orlinsky for Alinsky (138), agreement among “researches” (ibid.), repeated references to “Evangelic” Christians, “sacrilize” (262), and “it’s impact” (270), among others. More seriously, the manuscript offers a number of internal contradictions. On the same page that begins by asserting that the 1972 election “demonstrated the firmness of the Jewish commitment to liberal principles,” we learn that the Jewish Republican vote more than doubled in 1972, leading some to anticipate a pro-Republican Jewish realignment (123). The author repeatedly identifies faith in the state as an agent of social betterment to be the principal source of American Jewish liberalism yet tells us that “American Jewry’s special connection to Israel holds the highest place” in the community’s culture (189).

I anticipated that Feingold would use this book to document the sources for some claims that were not identified in his prior publications. Yet far too many sources went unnamed in service to the goal of producing “a sustained discussion in essay form” (xiii). My copy of the book is littered...