JVP Response to New Federation Guidelines

The Jewish tradition of free debate and a multiplicity of opinions was dealt a blow with the adoption by the Jewish Community Federation (JCF) of its new policy on Israel-related programming.  The policy, which begins in a truly Orwellian style by professing its commitment to "pluralistic expressions" and "wide-ranging perspectives", requires prospective grantees to undergo preemptive censorship by documenting in advance how their programs will conform to the JCF's political line on Israel.  Most chillingly, the restrictions apply not only to the grantee's own activities, but to the statements and activities of organizations that grantees may associate with. The announcement mirrors disturbing moves in Israel to use financial pressure to silence human rights groups such as Rabbis for Human Rights and B'Tselem. (see the JVP blog The Only Democracy?). We emphatically reject the notion that censorship of ideas benefits the Jewish community.  All Jews, regardless of their views on Israeli policy, should oppose this attempt to dictate what they may be permitted to hear. The JCF, of course, has the power to make its own decisions about who it funds.  But in order not to mislead potential donors, the JCF should remove from its materials all references to supporting pluralism or diversity of perspectives, or to serving the whole Jewish community, and openly acknowledge that grantees must meet an ideological litmus test. The JCF should also retract its claim that a wide range of representatives from "all sides" of this issue participated in developing its policy.  It has not disclosed who the participants were or explained its process.  As one of the primary targets of the Jewish Film Festival "Rachel" controversy, Jewish Voice for Peace indisputably represents one of the "sides", and requested to participate when this process was announced.  We received no reply from the JCF. The JCF must make a choice: it can respect its stated mission to serve the Jewish community with "mutual respect and accommodation of diversity within Jewish life", and rescind this policy, or it can abandon that mission and openly embrace its new role as thought police.  For the sake of everyone in our community, we hope it chooses the former.