The Hypocrisy of Separating Jewish Identity from Israel While Still Expecting Jewish Support

“If you’re equating ‘Israel lobby’ to Jews, I got a problem with that,” said Elissa Slotkin.

There’s a new political maneuver making the rounds, which I’m calling “Pulling a Slotkin.”

In a world where the Jewish community faces unprecedented challenges, it seems that some leaders are more concerned with how they’re perceived in the social media ecosystem than with the survival of our people. Take Elissa Slotkin—please—for example. Her recent statements highlight a bizarre trend where being a Jewish politician means you can conveniently distinguish yourself from being a supporter of Israel.

At this point, if you’re Jewish and deliberately distancing yourself—no one is saying you must approve of the Israeli government unconditionally—by refusing to take AIPAC money and announcing it like it’s some kind of badge of honor, then you have to accept the looming consequences when it comes to receiving support from the very community you’re signaling away from.

My mission is to make it clear that these politicians are not good investments for the Jewish community, writ large.

Between Bernie Sanders, whose criticism of Israel often goes beyond policy disagreement and into moral framing that singles it out in ways few other countries are treated, and Chuck Schumer, who is trying to straddle a widening divide between his party and the Jewish community, you begin to see a pattern. Add Jamie Raskin, whose shifts on support and funding signal a broader recalibration, and it becomes clear that this distance is not incidental—it carries consequences.

Let’s be clear about something. Disagreement with Israeli policy is not new, and it’s not disqualifying. Jews argue. That’s part of our tradition.

What is new is the expectation that you can publicly distance yourself from Israel—politically and rhetorically—while still justifying your need for support from a community for whom Israel is not an abstract issue. It is central—emotionally, historically, and strategically—to many Jewish and Christian Zionists.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

The same contradiction shows up in how AIPAC is treated. You can oppose AIPAC. You can disagree with its positions. That’s politics. But singling it out as uniquely suspect—while operating comfortably within the same donor and political ecosystem connected to it—doesn’t hold up.

AIPAC is one of many lobbying organizations in Washington. If the concern is lobbying power, then that conversation should include groups representing guns, pharmaceuticals, and energy. Treating one organization tied to Jewish interests as uniquely problematic, while ignoring others with far broader impact, isn’t principle. It’s selectivity. And it’s dangerous—for us.

And when the media focuses disproportionately on Jewish politicians in this context, it lands differently. It risks reinforcing the very narrative it claims to interrogate—casting suspicion in a way that puts a crosshair on those who engage with AIPAC, Jewish or otherwise.

What doesn’t work anymore is trying to have it both ways—distancing yourself from Israel while broadcasting that you won’t take money from AIPAC because it’s politically expedient for your Democratic Socialist constituents—and still expecting the same level of support from the people for whom Israel is central to their identity and values.

What this moment demands is not more lip service, but action.

This is the mission behind Won’t Be Silent—a coalition in progress aimed at galvanizing our community in the diaspora and fundamentally rethinking how we show up. This means shifting how we fund programs, rebuilding our communication networks, and recognizing the challenge for what it is—the fight we must prepare for. It’s not hyperbole—it’s happening in our streets and on our phones, where hatred and violence are amplified every day. Misinformation and disinformation are commonplace, and truth has left us dangerously vulnerable.

We must take a new course of assertive, meaningful action and rise to this occasion. Our forefathers did throughout the millennia, and now it is our turn.

If we are to confront what is unfolding, then we need to act with intention—supporting those who stand with the community, holding accountable those who don’t, and building a fierce network of people willing to respond unapologetically.

We will build a battalion of people committed to this mission and to doing what must be done, inspired by those who came before us.

Won’t Be Silent isn’t just a brand. It’s the line in the sand.

The words of Hillel the Elder, spoken more than two millennia ago, feel just as urgent today:

“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)