What is collective blame?

Collective blame means holding a larger group of people accountable for the actions of a singular person or small faction. So, collective blame thrives when individuals lose the ability to distinguish a bad actor from an entire group of people. Whether in politics, religion, or national identity, holding individuals, not communities, accountable for their actions is essential because it prevents entire populations from being judged for decisions they did not make.

Collective blame is often easiest to spot when a controversial public figure becomes closely associated with a broader community. In wider culture today, it has become evident to Jewish people, Zionists, and supporters of the longtime prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu.

For years, Netanyahu has played a careful geopolitical game in the name of the security of Israel. In doing so, he has inarguably tarnished Israel’s reputation by presiding over a disastrous campaign in Gaza, where according to independent sources, tens of thousands of civilians have died. He has also funded the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank, been caught in corruption charges, and miserably failed in intervening in the internal Palestinian conflict by initially allowing Qatari funds to flow into Gaza, where a fringe political group known as Hamas, years later, was behind the October 7th, 2023 attack.

And while one can argue over the morality or intent of these actions, it’s clear that Jews and Zionists who see these terrible things happening and oppose the status quo still face the opposition of many pro-Palestinian groups who accept nothing other than absolute allegiance to their cause, or a complete disassociation from the State of Israel.

For context, recent Israeli polls suggest that a majority of Israelis would prefer a different prime minister after the next election, even as Netanyahu's Likud remains one of the country's largest political parties. Furthermore, frequent American polling has shown a dislike for Netanyahu among American Jews. Nevertheless, Netanyahu, whether it is his intention or not, continues to be the face of Jews worldwide — while simultaneously causing others to question the morality of Judaism as a whole. Ironically, his greatest lesson may have little to do with politics. His policies demonstrate how quickly the actions of a single leader can become a label to millions of people who neither elected him nor supported him.

Let me be clear: Netanyahu’s actions do not represent our values as a people. Rather, he will do, say, or represent himself as anything to remain in power. That is what makes a leader like him dangerous: the distinction between his policies and our global identity has been erased, and diaspora communities are left to face the consequences. For Jews in New York, London, Toronto, and Buenos Aires, the conflation of our identity and Bibi’s actions creates an impossible and unjust burden. Local synagogues, Jewish community centers, kosher businesses, and college students face harassment, vandalism, and exclusion under the guise of "anti-war protest."

Demanding that every Jew and Zionist must denounce Israel as a whole and pronounce that a genocide has occurred is an ideological litmus test which alienates potential allies who also want to see an end to civilian suffering, and actively enforces the aforementioned concept of collective blame. If they “fail,” they end up excluded from movements they once called home.

Of course, this problem isn’t limited to Jews. In the yearslong aftermath of September 11th, 2001, American Muslims faced discrimination and hate for the actions of terrorists who did not represent the ideas of Islam. This hate and fear caused everyday people to turn on neighbors who just days before were looked at as part of their communities.

There’s something very important to learn here.

The parallel between the modern targeting of Jewish communities and the post-9/11 discrimination faced by American Muslims reveals a recurring flaw in human behavior. When there is a crisis, our minds revert to a concept called “tribalism.” Us versus them, good versus evil. With this binary perspective, it’s impossible to get anything done, and often the minority is forced to pay the price.

Fighting oppression or injustice by applying collective guilt is hypocrisy. You cannot pave the way to human rights for one group by stripping them away from another. You must recognize who is the root of the problem, and address them, not an entire people.

The modern advocates of today must learn to criticize political actions without generalizing to a nationality, religion, race, etc. When it comes to Israel, the target of critique must remain specific: the Netanyahu administration, a governing cabinet, or a military command.

Progress depends entirely on removing sweeping labels and recognizing the vast internal diversity within every group. Accountability requires responsibility for the decisions individuals make, not the identity they hold. Only when we refuse to let geopolitical conflicts erode our capacity to see each other as individuals can we hope to dismantle the cycle of blame and build relationships rooted in actual, lasting peace.

This isn’t just a theoretical problem for the diaspora; it is a live debate inside our movement. This past week at ILTC, we were discussing the place Israel has in the future of our orders. We agreed that chapters, councils, and regions must unite under one definition of Zionism. And in order for this progress to happen, we must make clear how support for Israel’s government is not necessary for one to be a Zionist. Rather, one must believe in the inherent right to self-determination for the Jewish people.