The author, journalist, and political commentator Peter Beinart will step into the sanctuary of the Woodstock Jewish Congregation next Tuesday, May 13—not to deliver a lecture, but to engage in dialogue. He’ll be in conversation with Rabbi Jonathan Kligler, the congregation’s rabbi emeritus, as part of an ongoing series of public programs on Israel and Palestine.
The event, co-sponsored by Jewish Currents, a progressive American Jewish magazine, is part of Beinart’s international tour for his 2025 book, “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning.”
The conversation arrives at a moment of profound tension for American Jews, many of whom are struggling with how to speak—or whether to speak—about the war in Gaza. In his book and recent essays, Beinart argues that a story of Jewish victimhood has come to dominate American Jewish identity, even as the Israeli government carries out what he and others have called a campaign of mass displacement and destruction. He challenges readers to imagine a Jewish identity not built on state power, but on moral clarity, rooted in the tradition’s most humane teachings.
Rabbi Karen Levine, one of the event’s organizers, said inviting Beinart to speak in Woodstock was a carefully considered decision. “The opportunity to host an internationally-recognized speaker in our small-town shul felt like an important opportunity for us to open up some thoughtful and compassionate engagement with the current realities of the war in Gaza and the increasing violence of the Israeli settler movement,” Levine said.
Still, she made one condition clear: “We would not be giving Peter the pulpit to lecture us on his views, which I understand are controversial and might be upsetting for some people.” Instead, the event will follow a format similar to a recent dialogue hosted by the congregation between Rabbi Kligler and former editor of Jewish Currents Lawrence Bush on “Zionism and the Diaspora.” That conversation, Levine said, “seemed like a good model to replicate.”
In an increasingly polarized moment, Levine acknowledged, “some in our community are confused or angry about this choice.” But to her, “bringing in a speaker who is provocative and challenging to the status quo does not necessarily equate with advocacy.”
“Can we land in a place that is hopeful?” she asked. “Recognizing that there may be little we can do to change external circumstances, there is much we can do to build relationships and connect in meaningful ways.”
That question—of whether it’s possible to lead with empathy, and to hold one another dear across deep ideological divides—animates the spirit of the evening. “Bringing multiple, often conflicting viewpoints into the light and discussing them is a core Jewish value. Respecting all human beings, even when we disagree with them, is a cornerstone value of our tradition,” Levine said.
I spoke with Beinart by phone ahead of his Woodstock appearance. Our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity, explored the future of American Jewish identity, how antisemitism is weaponized in political discourse, and what moral clarity might require from both Palestinian and Israeli leaders.
In your book “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning” and in a New York Times op-ed piece last week, you argue that the American Jewish establishment has redefined Jewishness to mean unwavering support for Israel, ultimately excluding Jews that dissent in that process. So how do you see this redefining of Jewish identity affecting the future of American Judaism?
Peter Beinart: I think that we’re in the early stages of a pretty substantial schism in which the American Jewish establishment and political allies have read a large section of American Jews out of Judaism, out of Jewishness, by making the de facto definition of what it means to be a Jew in good standing virtually unconditional support for the State of Israel as it relates to Palestinians. But the problem is that there is a growing number of Americans, particularly younger ones, who simply dissent. It’s not a small minority. It may be a minority, but it’s quite a substantial minority, especially among young people. And so I think what those people are going to do is create parallel institutions and also ally with other people who share their values outside of the Jewish world.
What kind of moral vision or symbolic “north star” should replace Zionism for American Jews? How should that communal identity around Israel be reimagined?
Peter Beinart: I would start with the idea that for me, the Torah begins not with Jews, but with universal human beings, which I think makes the point that all human beings are created equal in the image of God. And so the political ramifications of that theological principle is that we should believe in equality under the law, irrespective of people’s religion, race, or ethnicity. We should fight for that in the United States, in India, in Israel and Palestine, and beyond. And then we should try to cultivate experiences of education, joy, and commitment to Judaism, which don’t rely on a particular relationship to a particular state. We should not have groups like Hillel or others that put a relationship to Israel and make that a litmus test. We should basically try to find ways of giving American Jews an opportunity to connect to a tradition and a set of sacred texts that can offer ideas about how to live a good life.
Do you feel that the discourse around antisemitism has become weaponized to silence Palestinian voices or anti-Zionist Jews? And how do you balance those two things: the rise of antisemitism, but also, as you state in the title of your book, “the destruction of Gaza”?
Peter Beinart: I think that it has become harder and harder for American Jewish organizations and their allies to defend what Israel is doing. And so, in a way, the move is—rather than trying to defend what Israel is doing on the ground—turn the focus to the motives of the critics and basically try to make an equation between questioning the state and being anti-Jewish. And as Israel has destroyed the possibility of a two-state solution with settlement growth, it has put the question of what kind of one state we want on the table. And in response to that, it’s become more necessary to say that you can’t consider an alternative to this one Jewish supremacist state, because that alternative would be supposedly antisemitic—because in this definition, equality under the law is antisemitic. And then I think the second part is that Trump, in his effort to create an authoritarian regime, wants to take control over institutions in America that are independent—media, law firms, NGOs, universities. And so using antisemitism as a pretext is useful because it makes it harder to muster opposition, because so many Democrats in particular have already essentially conceded the premise that Palestinian solidarity activism is antisemitic and that the universities need to crack down much harder on it.
Some supporters of President Trump would argue that his unwavering support of Israel is proof that he’s not antisemitic. How would you respond to that?
Peter Beinart: Theodor Herzl famously said that the antisemites will be our greatest friends. If someone is an ethno-nationalist and they basically believe that every country should be controlled by one dominant tribe, then the idea of Jews being in “their country,” Israel, may be quite appealing, even if you have a problem with Jews in their own country. And I think that’s kind of the way in which Trump and his allies often relate to American Jews. They like Israel as an ethno-state. They see it as a kind of model for the United States: only let in people of your demographic group into the country, clear legal hierarchies based on religion, ethnicity, race. But they have a problem with Jews in the United States, often because Jews in the United States oppose that principle. They don’t want a white ethno-state. And so that often leads them to be in conflict with Jews here. So it’s not an incoherent position. It’s the same thing you see with Orban or the AfD or lots of pro-Israel people who flirt with antisemitism.
You’ve mentioned movements like the anti-apartheid movement and civil rights movement as catalysts for global pressure that amounted to real change. But with Israel-Palestine, there’s a clear lack of moral leadership on both sides. Do you fear that is ultimately going to hinder future prosperity or peace?
Peter Beinart: I think on the Palestinian side, one big problem is Palestinians have not been allowed to create a legitimate leadership in the way that you had with the ANC (African National Congress). The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) used to be an umbrella for different factions, but it’s basically been a dead letter. So you need to have elections and a process for the creation of a legitimate Palestinian leadership that can say what Palestinians want. Do they still support two states as the PLO embraced in 1988? Are they now returning to the older vision of one state? What kind of one state? Right now, the Palestine solidarity activist movement has actually captured the minds of a lot of people, but it’s limited because it doesn’t have a political Palestinian leadership to show that it can support, because Palestinians are divided and neither the PLO nor Hamas is offering a credible vision.
A critic argued recently that your book flattens or ignores Palestinian violence while overstating Jewish moral failure. Can you respond to that?
Peter Beinart: The second chapter of my book begins with a quite detailed description of what happened on October 7th. I talk about Hamas’s violence in the 1990s against civilians. So I don’t think I’m flattening it. I mean, look, the truth is that all movements virtually of people who are being denied basic human rights and oppressed respond with a combination of tactics: violence and nonviolence. And Palestinians have done the same. And that started long before Hamas. So to me, I’m not whitewashing Palestinian violence. I’m not apologizing for it. I say it again and again and again—that I oppose targeting civilians no matter what your grievance. But I think that to understand the fundamental problem and think about how to move beyond it, one has to recognize the denial of Palestinian freedom as the central underlying dynamic, just as we would naturally when we think about South Africa or Northern Ireland or Black Americans or any situation where you have a system of fundamental oppression.
Ireland is certainly one of the most pro-Palestinian nations. Why?
Peter Beinart: Because of the history. And the IRA (Irish Republican Army) was not a non-violent organization. It did some really terrible things. But I think the IRA is not blowing up things and is not planting bombs in London anymore because now Catholics in Northern Ireland have political equality.
So, where do we go from here? President Trump and Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu have a strong supportive relationship. What does the future of this conflict look like in your perspective?
Peter Beinart: If we continue to go down this path, the future is the destruction of the Palestinian people in ways that resemble the destruction of Native Americans in the 19th century in the United States, through the process of expulsion and killing. I think that’s the de facto policy. I think that the key for those of us who oppose that is to try to build, to be part of a movement that can ultimately end Israeli impunity, which means ending unconditional US military support and ending Israeli impunity in international institutions like the International Criminal Court, International Court of Justice, UN. So that, to me, is the central focus.
Peter Beinart will be at the Woodstock Jewish Congregation on Tuesday, May 13, from 7 to 8:30 p.m. to discuss the themes of his latest book, “Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning” with rabbi emeritus Jonathan Kligler. Register here for tickets ($18 donation) in person or online. The event is free for WJC members and members of Jewish Currents. All proceeds benefit the Woodstock Jewish Congregation. The Golden Notebook, a founding supporter of The Overlook, is supporting and promoting the event.
Noah Eckstein is the editor-in-chief of The Overlook. Send correspondence to noah@theoverlooknews.com.