In the recent elections, Democratic candidates garnered a somewhat smaller-than-usual percentage of Jewish votes. One interpretation of these results not only distorts them drastically but. . .
Despite the claims of post-Zionists, anti-Zionists, and even a few on Israel’s extreme right, not only is Zionism compatible with liberal democratic ideals, but it. . .
American Jews are “secure” but lack “self-confidence.” So Irving Kristol wrote in 1991. Right then; right now?
Are liberalism and Zionism incompatible? The idea is widespread but baseless; it’s the alternatives to Zionism that are truly illiberal.
Liberal democracy, ascendant for two centuries, has been dogged all along by counter-ideologies. Radical Islam is the latest deadly example.
Has Israel’s conduct in Gaza alienated liberal American Jews? So some have warned—a warning that, when it comes to protecting its citizens, the Jewish state. . .
As against the pagan empires of antiquity, biblical civilization chose ordered freedom over both tyranny and anarchy; in today’s Israel, the same concept of liberty. . .
Many are the substitutes for God invented by non-believers; they have turned out to be no substitutes at all. But can the West recover its. . .
As the Exodus story suggests, the blessings of freedom are secured through laws: guardrails that tame the ego and remind us of permanent truths.
The founders of modern liberalism aspired to a society free of “religious prejudice.” The task was not as easy as they hoped.
If a prominent liberal Washington think-tank has its way, religion will be something that happens at home, in houses of worship, and nowhere else.
In asserting the Christian origins of modern liberalism, a new book obscures the Jewish roots of Pauline ethics and exaggerates the egalitarianism of medieval Christendom.
How can Jewish liberals defend the Women of the Wall when they don’t believe Jews should have the right to pray in “occupied” eastern. . .
Egypt’s so-called liberals grew out of a functionary class that was never interested in limiting the power of the state and has always been ambivalent. . .