I am deeply disturbed to see A Jewish Voice for Peace fall for the neo-Stalinist anti-free speech position adopted by the four organizations that have been organizing the demonstrations against the Iraq war.
I have attended many of those demonstrations and intend to continue doing so but your organization, by going along with this outrageous ban on free speech within the movement, is undermining this progressive movement.
You argue that Jews other than Lerner have been allowed to speak because they did not publicly attack ANSWER. That is, as long as anyone, Jew or gentile, does not refer to ANSWER's position that the state of Israel has no right to exist he or she is allowed on the platform at the rallies against the war. Do you remember the Fawlty Towers episode where Fawlty runs around the place desperately warning guests NOT TO TALK ABOUT THE WAR in the presence of German tourists? Do you remember the dénouement of that episode?
I am for Answer's right to present their views. In fact, I think it would be a service to the movement if they were presented more openly so that they could be discussed and debated.
This kind of open debate is the only way to build a broad-based movement. I understand the urge to avoid debate that might "split the movement" but suppression of free speech only forces people who on principle reject ANSWER's position to set up their own counter marches, teach-ins and rallies.
This is not a tactical question or a minor one. The Bush administration, with the aid of the Likkud wing of the American Jewish community which seems to be in control of the main Jewish organizations and the US congress, is using the reactionary "death to Israel" rhetoric of Saudi-style fundamentalism and the equally reactionary neo-Stalinism of regimes like that of Saddam Hussein to confuse and divide public opinion here and abroad. To refuse to allow anyone to even question this rhetoric openly simply because it might offend ANSWER is to play into Bush's hands.
I, personally, do not agree with Lerner's free use of the charge of anti-Semitism. I think current anti-Israeli sentiment (not anti-Sharon or even anti-Zionist rhetoric but the denial of Israel's right to exist) has a lot to do with the politics and actions of the Israeli government and the Zionist movement since the 1920s and very little to do with classical European anti-Semitism. In fact, as we all know, in the US the traditionally anti-Semitic fundamentalist Christians are gung ho for the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
But this is a complicated and serious question and a full debate of all points of view is vital to the movement if it is going to be capable of winning the propaganda war with the Bush administration and winning over the people who are still frightened and confused by what is going on in the Middle East.
Ernie Haberkern
-----------------------------------------