One in three Jews were killed in the Holocaust. In its aftermath, those who remained and their descendent contemplated its lessons. We wondered: What was our path to safety?
There were two main schools of thought in the Jewish community.
One focused on how many non-Jews either stood by, or actively participated in, our genocide. The lesson was clear. Jews must turn inward, they argued, focus on protecting ourselves. Trust is an illusion. We should align ourselves with those who prioritize in-group safety over out-group freedom. Power was the ultimately goal.
The other reached the opposite conclusion. Never again meant never again for everyone. Jews not only had an obligation to stand up for the vulnerable, but our safety was bound up in systems that protected everyone. We were at our most vulnerable in societies where conspiracies prevailed and minority groups were scapegoated.
This question of Jewish safety long predated the Holocaust of course. The late 19th and early 20th century, with pogroms and anti-Jewish violence rising in Europe, called the question. For some, nationalism was the answer: a Jewish state. For others, communism was the answer: redistribution and mandated equality.
George Soros, who as a teenager survived the Holocaust using a false identity that hid his Jewishness, is neither a nationalist or a communist. He saw deep flaws in both systems. He named his philanthropy the Open Society Foundation because it reflected his core belief that humanity, including Jews and other vulnerable groups, thrived in open societies.
These societies are characterized by universal suffrage along with free and fair elections. A strong safety net. Protections for minority rights and civil liberties. Minimal use of law enforcement, state violence, and incarceration as tools of control and coercion. Meaningful pathways for civic engagement. Strong anti-corruption rules.
Those who took a different lesson from the persecution of Jews are furious at Soros and others who share his faith (and investment) in open societies. This is, in their view, a form of suicide. Jews need a state. Jews need an army. Jews need police protection. Jews need to punish those seeking to harm us. Jews need stop and frisk. Jews need preemptive military action. Jews need walls and guns. Jews need tough leaders, ready to use violence.
The debate around Soros today often revolves around accusations, and denials, that attacks on him are rooted in — or at least tap into — antisemitic tropes of a global Jewish conspiracy. I do think it’s important to point out how Soros has become, in essence, the Rothschild of 21st century antisemitism. But one bi-product of this focus is that it has obscured a substantive debate over how Jews should think about our safety.
Irving Kristol once defined a neo-conservative as “a liberal who has been mugged by reality.” To borrow this parlance, Soros was mugged by the Nazis, yet the experience had the opposite effect. I think it’s time to talk about why.
