Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A Right to Exist in Mutual Dignity

Opinion

A Right to Exist in Mutual Dignity

Paper cut-outs of people and the earth.

Getty Images, Liliia Bila

The question of Israel's right to exist isn't an abstract debate—it's written in the ashes of six million souls, in the tears of generations, and in the fierce determination of a people who refuse to let their story end in darkness. Any questioning of Israel's right to exist is to whisper that the Jewish people's centuries-long journey of survival, resilience, and hope, somehow matters less than others. As a Black American, I know too well how systems of oppression work to deny people their fundamental humanity.

When Hamas' charter calls for Israel's destruction, it echoes the same dehumanizing logic that has justified countless atrocities past and present. However, there is an inconvenient truth one must remain answerable to. Israel's right to exist doesn't permit any of us to look away from Palestinian suffering. Personal experiences with injustice inform the understanding that pain doesn't cancel out pain. Trauma doesn't negate trauma. The Jewish people have a right to security and self-determination in their uniquely established territorial homeland alongside—not in opposition to—the Palestinian people's right to dignity and self determination in their ancestral homeland.


The evidence of Jewish connection to this land runs deeper than politics. It's etched in stone, written on scrolls, and woven into daily prayers that have been lifted across the diaspora. For three millennia, every Jewish heart has turned toward Jerusalem in prayer; every wedding remembers its destruction, and every Passover ends with the promise: "Next year in Jerusalem." The mantra isn't just ancient poetry—it's identity, memory, and hope, braided together across generations.

Israel's existence isn't validated solely by ancient claims or religious canon. The modern State of Israel emerged in 1948 as the world's belated answer to centuries of persecution, culminating in the Holocaust's unprecedented horror. The United Nations' recognition wasn't charity—it was the international community's acknowledgment that the Jewish people needed and deserved safety to live and thrive.

Today, Israel stands as one of the Middle East's leading expressions of democracy, however imperfect. It's a nation that has absorbed Jewish refugees from Ethiopia to Ukraine, from Yemen to Russia, not without controversy. In a time when antisemitism is surging again—where Jewish students feel unsafe on college campuses and synagogues need armed guards—Israel's existence as a haven isn't a luxury. It's a necessity. And yet, Israel's security cannot come at the cost of Palestinian dignity. Moreover, no individual or nation's security, prosperity, or inalienable rightness should be at the cost of another's! I have stood at the fortified divide of the West Bank, reminded of the visible and invisible barriers that have divided communities globally over the years. When I hear of Palestinian family displacement, I immediately think of the many acts of segregation and forced relocations exacted in America.

The moral challenge of our time isn't choosing sides—it's choosing humanity. It's recognizing that supporting Israel's right to exist doesn't require us to endorse every Israeli policy, just as supporting Palestinian rights doesn't mean accepting violence against civilians brought on by Hamas. We can and must hold space for both and all peoples' legitimate aspirations.

The path forward demands what theologian Reinhold Niebuhr called "moral imagination"—the ability to envision a future and ethics different from the past. All people deserve to live free from fear, raise their children in peace, and build communities where hope outweighs hatred. Israel's right to exist is non-negotiable. Not because it's perfect, again, no nation is. This premise should not diminish Palestinian rights; rather, it sets the stage for genuine dialogue about how both peoples can flourish.

In the end, this isn't just about Israel and Palestine—it's about who we are as a human family. Can we build a world where "never again" means never again for everyone? The answer lies not in choosing between rights but expanding our circle of moral concern until it encompasses all who seek to live in dignity and peace.


Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson is a spiritual entrepreneur, author, and scholar-practitioner whose leadership and strategies around social and racial justice issues are nationally recognized and applied.

Read More

A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together
Political polarization
Polarization and the politics of love

A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together

As we face ever-growing partisan polarization in American society, the need for large-scale action becomes increasingly urgent. As James Coan and I have written about in the Fulcrum during my time at More Like US, there are approaches grounded in a significant body of social psychological research that can help address this rapidly growing problem, namely different variations of social contact theory, especially vicarious contact. Until recently, much of the research and thus much of the basis for our articles has been focused on applying social contact theory to other problems facing society: prejudice against members of the LGBTQ community, individuals with autism, and immigrant schoolchildren, among other examples.

It was therefore exciting when last fall I saw the publication of an article in Political Science Research and Methods titled "Content That's as Good as Contact?: Vicarious Intergroup Contact and the Promise of Depolarization at Scale." The study, conducted in 2022 in conjunction with YouGov, finally attempted to measure the effectiveness of indirect contact as a path to depolarization, primarily through the vicarious experience of productive political conversation. Encompassing over 2,000 participants gathered from a nationally representative sample recruited by YouGov’s online panel, the study looked to test affective polarization, measured attitudinally, and interest and investment in depolarization, measured behaviorally. To this end, the study tested multiple media interventions, namely a 50-minute Braver Angels documentary featuring a “Red-Blue” depolarization workshop; a 50-minute placebo nature documentary about wildebeest migration; a 5-minute version of the Braver Angels documentary; a second 5-minute version that emphasized partisan misperception correction; and a pure control group, with no treatment.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Red and Blue America Can Stay Together by Pulling Apart

United States Marine Corps Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II STOVL stealth multirole fighters belonging to the VMFA-121 "Green Knights" taxiing at the MCAS Iwakuni in Yamaguchi, Japan, on March 23, 2017.

(viper-zero / Getty Images)

How Red and Blue America Can Stay Together by Pulling Apart

In earlier essays, I argued that America’s political division has grown so deep that a peaceful “American Union” of two sovereign nations — one broadly red, one broadly blue — is worth considering. I also argued that relocation fears are overstated, that cooperation could increase economic prosperity, and that separation could help heal the lingering wounds of the Civil War.

But how would this all actually work? What happens to the national debt? Who gets the military bases, federal lands, and nuclear weapons? Will Social Security be protected? Could two nations share the dollar, defend themselves together, and resolve their disagreements?

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view of teenage boy walking with arm around friends

Why many young men feel politically and socially adrift, how changing gender roles affect masculinity, self-esteem, relationships, and the future of society.

Maskot / Getty Images

Lost Boys - What Is the Role of a Man in Today's Society?

A recent New York Times article stated that young males who provided an important swing vote for Trump in 2024 are discouraged by what Trump has done and not done while in office. But they are nevertheless not particularly inclined to vote Democratic because they don't see the Party as welcoming their view of masculinity and they don't know where they fit in this society.

These young men assume that because the Party supports equality for women in the workplace and because many young women no longer have marriage and having children at the top of their agenda, the Party would not be a welcoming home for them. They see themselves as striving for the masculinity of their fathers' or grandfathers' day, where the man was the breadwinner in the family and had respect and authority. Not the weaker half in relationships with women.

Keep ReadingShow less
Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

NECHAMA volunteers in Western North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

As the Atlantic hurricane season officially began on June 1, disaster response organizations across the country are preparing for the next storm. That preparation includes coordinating logistics, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and strengthening partnerships. It now also requires planning for an environment shaped by misinformation, distrust, and competing narratives.

A recent 60 Minutes segment examining extremist groups in disaster zones highlighted how quickly public perceptions can form after a disaster. Recovery efforts are now followed by outside groups and online networks attempting to influence how events are understood while communities are still in crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less