Stanford Politics

The American media often reduces voters to a particular bloc, based on their gender, age, race, or religion. While debates persist about the accuracy of this type of heuristic, it certainly provides compelling method of predicting and analyzing elections. Less studied, however, is what happens when voters belong to multiple, conflicting identity groups. A particularly interesting case study is the emergence of young, Jewish progressives. On issues ranging from Wall Street to Israel, many Jewish millennials are choosing progressive values, much to the chagrin of older, more establishment-minded Jewish Americans. Gallup trends show that young Jews are significantly more likely to categorize themselves as “very liberal” than their older counterparts. This generational divide could have far-reaching implications for the social fabric of Jewish American communities as well as the future of the Democratic Party.

Since the modern party alignment of the early 20th century, American Jews have overwhelmingly supported the Democratic Party. In presidential elections, Democrats Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt won nearly 90% of the Jewish vote, while no Republican has fared better than Reagan’s 39% in 1980 (perhaps Jews in Hollywood had a soft spot for the former actor).

Several explanations have been offered for the left-leaning tendencies of American Jewry. The prevailing hypothesis, sometimes called the “Judaic” explanation, is that Jewish teachings emphasize focus on the marginalized, a focus that aligns with Democratic policies from welfare programs to minority advancement. This explanation is bolstered by stories and pictures of Jewish leaders like Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel marching on the front lines of the civil rights movement alongside Martin Luther King Jr. Other scholars, such as American Jewish Culture Professor Kenneth Wald of the University of Florida, reject the Judaic explanation. Instead, they posit that the GOP’s alignment with conservative Christian values has driven Jewish Americans into the arms of the Democratic Party. Wald argues that the American model which separates citizenship and religion was a new and welcome system for Jewish immigrants, and that the primary determinant of the Jewish vote is whichever party better separates Church and State. Whichever hypothesis you accept, there is no doubt that in general, American Jews have been a loyal voting bloc for the Democratic Party.

Nevertheless, many older Jews remain relatively conservative on American-Israeli relations and economic policy, especially by the standards of today’s Democratic Party. For obvious reasons, American Jews have tended to be staunch supporters of Israel, favoring an unconditional U.S. support of Israel even when many in the international community and on the left have been openly critical of the Netanyahu administration’s tactics. This uncompromising position has led to friction with some of the Democratic Party’s most prominent leaders.

For instance, in 2011, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) had to urge its delegates not to boo President Obama when he spoke at their annual policy conference. Today, many older members of the Jewish community believe Obama has betrayed Israel in time of desperate need. Moreover, the platform committee at this summer’s Democratic National Convention included two Bernie Sanders appointees — Princeton Professor Cornel West and the Arab American Institute’s James Zogby — who have consistently espoused anti-Israel views. This was an especially distressing development for pro-Israel Jews, considering Sanders is perhaps the most successful Jewish presidential candidate in American history.

The internal battle that played out within the platform committee was a microcosm of the larger battle currently taking place among Jewish Americans. On one side were the Sanders forces arguing for more stringent condemnation of Israeli “occupation.” These advocates represented the views of millennial Jews on progressive college campuses, Jewish liberals in academia, and young Jews living in progressive urban centers like New York and San Francisco. Across the aisle were the backers of establishment Democrat Hillary Clinton, who pushed for more diplomatic language regarding “dignity for Palestinians” and insisting that Israel retain its “qualitative military edge.” In so doing, these delegates defended the views cherished by an older generation of more hawkish American Jews.

During this continuing fight, young, progressive Jews often use the language of “occupation” and “apartheid,” and express support for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions proposals. Meanwhile older, establishment members of the Jewish faith tend to see these measures as rooted in anti-Semitism, and establishing a false moral equivalency between Palestinian terrorism and Israeli defense. They also line-up behind separate advocacy groups; older Jews prefer AIPAC, long-standing advocate for the cause of American Jews and staunch supporter of Israeli policy, while millennials generally support newer organizations like J-Street, which takes a much more egalitarian and pro-Palestinian approach to Israeli issues. The divide between American Jews on support for Israel and progressive values has implications across political, social, and international spheres.

This schism has substantial implications for the future of Jewish support for the Democratic Party. If the progressive, millennial wing of Democrats drives policy on Israel, economics, and more, Democrats risk losing loyal support from older generations of American Jews. While Jews comprise only 2% of the electorate, they have disproportionate importance to Democrats because of the plethora of Jewish Democratic mega-donors, as well as the fact that Jews comprise 10% of Democratic seats in Congress.

Many political scientists, like Benjamin Ginsberg of Johns Hopkins, believe that the left turn of the Democratic Party on Israel presents a major opportunity for Republicans with older Jewish voters. For years, the Republican party has been frustrated that despite claiming itself as the party of Israel, Jewish voters have remained tepid in their support. In fact, the GOP’s consistently pro-Israel and pro-Netanyahu stance has helped them far more with Evangelical Christians than with Jewish Americans, suggesting that Jews, contrary to popular belief, don’t base their vote on Israel. However, the emerging Democratic left-turn, spearheaded by criticism of Netanyahu, may create a niche among Jewish voters that Republican strategists will continue to take a keen interest in.

It’s possible this opportunity is already coming to fruition. In the 2006 midterm elections, only 13% of Jews voted for Republican candidates; in 2014, that number nearly tripled to 34%. In 2014, New York Republican Lee Zeldin was elected to the House of Representatives, ending the Democratic Party’s monopoly on Jewish members of Congress.

Complicating matters for Republicans is the election of Donald Trump, and the corresponding rise of the alt-right, which often espouses dangerously anti-semitic rhetoric. American Jews swung heavily back towards the Democrats on November 8th, voting 82% in favor of Hillary Clinton. Despite President Obama’s relative unpopularity among many older Jewish voters, their distaste for Trump’s seemingly authoritarian and nationalist tendencies seems to have been a far more powerful drive. These concerns certainly won’t be eased by Trump’s choice of former Breitbart Chief Stephen Bannon as Chief Strategist, considering Breitbart was often a haven for anti-semitic, alt-right internet warriors, and Bannon himself has been accused of anti-semitism on several occasions. These dangerous developments have many Jews on both sides of the aisle uniting against an unfortunately all-too-common foe: populist scapegoating of Jews. In the long-term, this may temper Jewish support for the GOP.

More immediate, perhaps, is the effect of this divide on American-Israeli relations. The rocky relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu has been well documented, but compared to many progressives, Obama’s criticism of Netanyahu’s policies is subdued. Meanwhile, traditional American Jewry has frequently been incensed at President Obama’s subtle slights at Netanyahu and relatively unbiased stance toward Israel-Palestine negotiations. In the middle are more secular, older Jews, who tend not to affiliate with AIPAC, and instead favor the Obama mold of constructive criticism.

However, there are certainly some moderate American Jews who have such a strong distaste for the left turn of progressive Democrats on Israel that they are moving to the right in protest. Some of this is due to a “backlash” effect in direct response to progressives’ alleged abandonment of Israel. While populist members of the Republican party are emphatically turning away from the neoconservatism of the Bush years, unquestioned support for Israel remains the norm among all factions of the GOP; this is an appealing trait to some older American Jews who feel betrayed by the left’s anti-Israel rhetoric.

Finally, young progressive Jews are likely to think Obama hasn’t gone far enough in his denunciation of settlements and the Israeli government’s treatment of Arab citizens. This is largely due to increasing apathy towards Israel — 18 to 29-year-olds are more likely to identify as “somewhat” or “not very” attached to Israel than as “very attached.” These millennial Jews are more likely to prefer a dramatic shift in US military and diplomatic support for Israel, signaling the largest departure from foreign policy orthodoxy since Israel was officially recognized by the United States. Should this latter group gain control of a rejuvenated Democratic Party, they could substantially restructure American policy towards Israel. In the long term, the fate of American-Israeli relations may already be sealed in favor of progressives; after all, in just a few decades, millennials will be the leaders of both parties. One thing is clear: the diversity of political opinions on American-Israeli relations has never been greater, and — thanks in large part to young Jews — the era of a bipartisan pro-Israel consensus is already over.

The chasm between different generations of American Jews also foments social divides in the Jewish community. Politics is emerging as one of many contentious topics for university-aged Jews and their parents. Already, generational opinions diverge over intermarriage and secularism. A recent Pew survey found that the intermarriage rate among non-orthodox American Jews is 71%, an unprecedented number that alarmed many, old and young. If an older generation of Jews believes that millennials are betraying the family unit, this disappointment is likely compounded by a belief that the next generation is betraying their homeland. On the other hand, a college student or young adult surrounded by progressive ideas likely dismisses their parent’s views of family, Israel, and the economy alike as archaic or regressive. When Jewish students come home for break, it’s safe to say that Shabbat dinner conversation could get tense.

This isn’t the first time a particular voting demographic has undergone a generational split (for example, young, single women are far more liberal than older, married women), nor will it be the last. It also shouldn’t be forgotten that in general, people are more liberal while they’re young. However, the split between young and old American Jews is revealing due to the shockingly accurate picture it paints of America as whole. Young Americans are choosing secularism and progressive values over religion. Political polarization is larger than ever, as both sides retreat to the fringes. Older generations are split between moderate, establishment solutions and more radical, populist sentiments. The parallels are too stark to ignore. After the 2016 elections, political junkies will undoubtedly pore through detailed geographic and demographic breakdowns seeking to understand the state of our nation. While the Jewish vote won’t be first on their list of key demographics to breakdown, perhaps it shouldn’t be last — it could speak volumes about the new, progressive America that millennials hope to create, and the traditional, establishment forces trying to curb their gaining momentum.

---

Micah Cash is an undeclared freshman.