Sociology in the Garden: Beyond the Liberal Grammar of Contemporary Sociology

Abstract

This article poses a simple question: why do marginalized Mizrahim, a group most likely to benefit from liberal justice and human rights, so vehemently and repeatedly reject the liberal message? To address this question, we shift the direction of inquiry from problems in the message's transmission or reception to the message itself. By doing so, we seek to go beyond the 'liberal grammar' shared by most social activists and critical sociologists. The insight emerging from this theoretical turn is that the politics of universalism, rooted in the liberal grammar of human rights and viewed from the liberal standpoint as a key to social emancipation, is experienced by the target population as a heartless betrayal and a grave identity threat. This article offers the initial outline for a new interpretive space and seeks to surpass both the limits of the Israeli case and those of the liberal grammar of contemporary critical sociology.

Competing ethical regimes in a diverse society: Israeli military refusers

“…One of the most common Mizrahim complaints about liberal conscientious objection is that its hierarchy of worthy victims places Palestinians above the oppressed who are “closer to home.” Ashkenazi‐dominated activism against the oppression of Palestinians has met with consistent critiques from Mizrahim that Ashkenazim address only the wrongs done to “strangers,” while perpetrating crimes of neglect and discrimination against their own coreligionists (Lavie ; Mizrachi ). For example, Mizrahi academic and activist Smadar Lavie writes favorably of activism that follows the “old Jewish ‘sages of blessed memory,’ who advised, ‘Put the poor of your home before those of your town, and the poor of your town before those of the next town’” (2011, 65).…”

“…There are, however, compelling reasons to consider these groups and their ethical regimes as sufficiently separate to allow comparison. Both the ultra‐Orthodox and the Mizrahim have, since the founding of the state, chaffed against the hegemonic liberal institutional foundations implemented by the Ashkenazi establishment (Fischer ; Mizrachi ). My interlocutors frequently and explicitly mentioned their group affiliation and used phrases such as “in our sector” or “in our community” to refer to their distinct values and justifications for military refusal.…”

“…Similarly, despite the diverse origins of the Mizrahim, their shared experience in Israel has forged cultural commonalities beyond those shared by virtue of their Middle Eastern heritage. Mizrahi ethics and political traditions shape expectations of civic engagement and citizenship that differ from those of their Ashkenazi counterparts (Lavie , ; Mizrachi ). Furthermore, since the time I conducted this research, Mizrahi academics and activist groups (e.g., Ars Poetica and Ahoti) have increasingly called for the recognition of Mizrahi Israelis’ separate culture and values, contesting the assimilationist claims of Ashkenazi and Zionist ideology (Margolin ).…”

“…The stance of Mizrahi Jews often reflects their ambivalent position as both part of the privileged majority as Jews and as marginalized outsiders because of their Middle Eastern roots. On the one hand, militant patriotism and an aversion to public critique of the state or the military is very strong among Mizrahim (Mizrachi ). On the other hand, Mizrahim also frequently express antistate and antimilitary sentiments, including harsh criticism of government policy (Lavie ).…”

Shades of Universality: Variation of Performances in the Glocalized Israeli Human Rights Discourse

“…Originally stemming from a universal justice movement operating within national borders, human rights organizations usually face local challenges. And while it is common to focus on organizations' challenges to gain public legitimacy external to the rights discourse (see Mizrachi 2016), I suggest that it is no less important to focus on the internal conflicts of the expanding rights community. Drawing on An-Na'im's call for cross-cultural dialogue to create a broader concept of human rights (An-Na'im 1992), I argue that social research may contribute to this endeavor by revealing intranational variations in the discourse, as more and more groups present distinct visions and claims of authenticity.…”