Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2021 The Somerville Times. All rights reserved.
(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries and letters to the Editor of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)
As members of Shalom Somerville, a grassroots coalition of Somerville residents, workers, and students dedicated to fostering an inclusive, respectful, and civil community in our city, we were deeply concerned and disappointed by the recent inclusion of the film Israelism in the Performance Opportunity Program (POP) series at Arts at the Armory.
Arts at the Armory claims to select content for the POP series based on how applicants incorporate values of inclusivity, community, and creativity. However, the decision to screen Israelism and the exclusionary manner in which the event was held starkly contradict these values.
Israelism is a documentary about two young American Jews who were raised to unconditionally love Israel. As they learn about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they come to believe that Israel is an oppressive force and adopt anti-Zionist views.
The film presents a one-sided and biased portrayal of Israel, ignoring the complex history of the Jewish people, Jewish American relationships with Israel, and the diverse and multicultural societies within Israel. Instead of critiquing specific policies or political leaders, Israelism attacks the very idea of a Jewish state. Denying the Jewish people the right to establish their own nation in their historic and cultural homeland, while simultaneously promoting a Palestinian state on the same land, is hypocritical and antisemitic.
The American Jews depicted in the film are reduced to antisemitic caricatures, portrayed as brainwashed supporters of Israel. This narrative evokes centuries-old European antisemitic tropes suggesting that Jews are somehow different, untrustworthy, and not loyal to their home countries. It erases our Jewish American experience and attempts to “other” us as not quite American enough. We reject the judgment of American Jewish “dual loyalty” to Israel.
During the film screening and panel discussion, the behavior of the event organizers was equally troubling. The Somerville Armory is a public building, and its facilities are accessible to all, regardless of national origin or creed. However, several organizers wore yellow vests as uniforms to pose as security, and repeatedly attempted to block entry of peaceful, pro-Israel attendees. This exclusionary gatekeeping behavior undermines Arts at the Armory’s stated objectives to provide an inclusive venue and exacerbates divisions within our community. It also ignores Somerville’s stated values of promoting inclusivity and honoring our community’s diversity.
We are concerned the organization’s leadership will continue to promote antisemitic programming and permit organizers to block members of the general public with opposing views from entering the Armory. In our correspondence with Arts at the Armory, the organization disavowed their curatorial responsibility to ensure the art they sponsor aligns with the organization’s values. They claim curation is akin to censorship. We disagree. While art can be controversial, it is critical to distinguish between controversial (e.g., cultural appropriation) and offensive (e.g., blackface). While art should open minds and invite new perspectives, propaganda reinforces false narratives. Arts at the Armory should know the difference. As a community, we must work together to create spaces where diverse viewpoints are respected and all members feel safe and included.
If you agree, write to Arts at the Armory at director@artsatthearmory.org and operations@artsandthearmory.org, and to Mayor Ballantyne at mayor@somervillema.gov, to tell them that discrimination has no place in Somerville.
Emma Lebwohl
on behalf of Shalom Somerville
If you found this article of interest, please consider sharing it.
So, to create spaces where diverse viewpoints are respected, we should censor the viewpoint that “genocide, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing are bad?” As for the pro-Israel protestors, did they register for the event? and did you just compare a film that you disagree with to blackface?
I am a Jewish Somervillian and I was at this event. I did not consider the documentary to be in any way anti-Semitic, but rather anti-Apartheid.
As a performance venue that hosts over 700 events a year, Arts at the Armory is an inclusive and welcoming space that takes patron safety extremely seriously. Much in the same way that the Editors of the Somerville Times state that the views reflected in the commentaries do not reflect those of the Times, Arts at the Armory holds the same position of events which occur in our spaces. The goal of Arts at the Armory is to provide a safe and well managed space in which art can be held. As we shared with Shalom Somerville, this event was a free public event in which everyone was welcome to engage in dialogue. The only requirement was pre-registration.
I co-sign what Andy said. Jewish Somervillian who attended the screening and found the documentary to be firmly anti-apartheid and anti-Zionist but not at all antisemitic. If anything, it prioritizes the cultural context and sensitivities of American Jews over all other relevant constituencies (since that’s this film’s particular angle).
I’ve now seen Israelism twice. Like Andy and Liz, I too am Jewish.
As many people know, there are several different definitions of anti-semitism. I myself have always been hesitant to label someone or something “anti-semitic” -unless it VERY obviously expresses hatred towards Jews – because it is extremely difficult to look into other peoples’ hearts or minds.
Having said this, “Israelism” presents such an offensive, cartoonish view of the American Jewish community – including absurdly implying that most Jews support Trumpism and other right-wing movements – that for Andy and Liz to actually praise the film (which they very clearly do) speaks volumes about their inability to see a heavy handed propagandistic con job for what it very clearly is.
I would go so far as to argue that even if someone was committed to an anti-Zionist point of view (which by definition means they do NOT support Israel’s right to exist!) something which Andy and Liz proudly align themselves with -they would have to be damn fools NOT to see how this film viciously mocks most American Jews and very deliberately (and cleverly) distorts just about everything in it.
Andy and Liz badly need to take a course in critical thinking skills – because from what they have written, they have close to none. They are mirror images of the kinds of people who attend Trump rallies and buy into the most transparently ridiculous arguments because.it makes them feel morally superior to everyone who sees things from a different point of view.
Anti-Zionists just add fuel to the fires of misunderstanding and hatred to the already combustible Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But some anti-Zionists are at least able to present an intellectually coherent (however wrong-headed) argument to support their ideologically driven points of view. “Israelism” is anti-Zionism for the naive and gullible ideologues who will swallow just about anything that reinforces their simple-minded versions of politics and history.
Most leftists and progressives who actually know how to incorporate nuances and shades of grey into their political views recognize that a two state solution is the only realistic path to achieve peace between the Israelis and Palestinians
Tragically, such a mutually agreed upon settlement isn’t something that is likely to occur in the near future. But one can only hope – and work towards – its achievement at some point down the road.
Propaganda like “Israelism” only serves to convince (some) people that eliminating the state of Israel will help bring peace and justice to the Middle East! Fortunately, even though the film has received a fair amount of publicity, most people are able to see it for what is – a deliberately deceitful effort to “solve” the Israeli -Palestinian conflict by delegitimizing Israel’s very right to exist.
When hating jews openly became socially unacceptable, the jew haters started saying that they’re not against jews, just against “Semitic” influences in society. When the antisemitic figleaf blew away after the holocaust, they invented “antizionizm” to hide their raging hate against the Jewish people.