Ronit Heyd: ‘If Israel becomes less democratic, it will become less Jewish’

Transcripts are lightly edited. Please excuse any imperfections.

Ronit Heyd:
If the country is less democratic, it will be less Jewish. You cannot separate the two. Hi, I’m Ronit Heyd. I am a Jerusalemite and a social change activist and leader. This is 18 Questions, 40 Israeli Thinkers from 18Forty.

Sruli Fruchter:
From 18Forty, this is 18 Questions, 40 Israeli Thinkers. I’m your host Sruli Fruchter. 18 Questions, 40 Israeli Thinkers is a new podcast that interviews Israel’s leading voices to explore those critical questions people are having today on Zionism, the Israel-Hamas war, democracy, morality, Judaism, peace, Israel’s future, and so much more. Every week, we introduce you to fresh perspectives and challenging ideas about Israel from across the political spectrum that you won’t find anywhere else. So, if you’re the kind of person who wants to learn, understand, and dive deeper into Israel, then join us on our journey as we pose 18 pressing questions to the 40 Israeli journalists, scholars, and religious thinkers you need to hear from today.

In the description of this podcast, we say the leading Israeli thinkers because we’re not celebrity-fishing here. We want to hear from the voices shaping Israeli society in their sector of work, in their perspective, who are thinking about the questions that we have in critical ways and are leading the Jewish state forward. Today’s guest is one such person, Ronit Heyd. Ronit is vice president and director of Shalom Hartman Institute’s Center for Israeli and Jewish Identity.

For those unfamiliar, Hartman is a leading Jewish thinktank with tons of different channels and avenues for Jewish ideas, Jewish policies, specifically and I think most notably, their work relating to the state of Israel and day-to-day life. Some of the big values that are guiding Hartman is pluralism and liberal values in Israel and in the Jewish world and the diaspora and very much in promoting the democratic character of Israel in their own words. So, there’s no surprise to some extent about the political orientation of Hartman and their perspectives and how those perspectives shape the work that they’re doing and guide it. So, Ronit is not one of those people who I think you drop her name and everyone is like, “Oh, my God. Ronit Heyd, of course.”

But again, we’re not celebrity-fishing. We’re not just after big names. We’re after people who have ideas, people who are invested in the project, so to speak, of the Jewish state of Israel and can help us think through these issues through these questions in a time that is so desperately needed. Ronit spent over 20 years developing and leading social initiatives in Israel. Previously, she has led the New Israel Fund, Social Justice Initiative, the Religious Freedom Project, and the capacity-building arm, Shatil. So, to have someone’s voice who is doing the on-the-ground work in Israel is so vital.

I mean, it makes a lot of sense for this year given the state that Israel’s in, but I think beyond this year and before this year, people tend to think of Israel as a country solely defined and solely governed by the conflicts and the security threats that it faces. But like every other country, Israel has its own internal temperament and policies that are guiding and operating the state, economic policies, social policies, religious policies. Ronit works and worked intimately in all of those spaces. She holds an MPA from the Harvard Kennedy School as a Wexner fellow and an MA in social psychology from the Hebrew University of Yerushalayim or Jerusalem is properly what it’s called. It was a real pleasure to work with her.

One important note is we always have in our episode descriptions when the episode was recorded and when the interview was held because we want transparency about where the guest was in the point that they were speaking. Because especially when we’re talking about issues that are constantly developing and questions that will always be guided and informed by the situation that Israel finds itself in against Hamas in the larger war and in the state of the world. So, our interview is from June 18th and Ronit was one of the earliest interviews that we held. Even though it was a month and a half ago, the ideas that she shares, her insights and perspectives informed by decades of work in this field are timelessly relevant.

So, on that note, if you have questions you want us to ask or guests that you want us to feature, shoot us an email at info@18forty.org. I will tell you personally, I have received tons of feedback from people and it is all being incorporated. We have amazing guest suggestions, people that we look into, ways we’re developing and forming the podcast. So, your feedback is valuable and actually imported into the work that we do. So, on that same note, if you’re interested in sponsoring an episode of the podcast, shoot us an email at that same email.

So that we can reach new listeners that I can feel good about myself and the podcast can grow. Please rate and subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, wherever you get your podcast. But without further ado, here is 18 questions with Ronit Heyd. So I guess we’ll begin with where we’re at now. As an Israeli and as a Jew, how are you feeling at this moment in Israeli history?

Ronit Heyd:
I think this is a moment where history is writing itself and we are taking part in writing that history because the way we tell the story of what is happening now, the way we tell the story of what happened yesterday, of what happened eight or nine months ago, what happened on October 7th and what happened on October 8th, and everything that we say now is the way that we will shape our own history and our own story for the future, which is why I think it is such a critical moment because we are in the making of our own identity.

If we choose to lean into the values and the stories of Israel and the Jews being those who are always under attack or are always persecuted, if we lean into that side, if we lean into what Rabbi Professor David Hartman called the Auschwitz framework of mind, we will be writing a story and we will be writing a history and we will be writing a future of constant fear, of constant defensiveness, and of becoming a much lonelier country and people.

On the other side, if we lean into the story of Israel as Rabbi Hartman called it the story of Sinai and the framework of Sinai, if we lean into the story of Israel and the Jewish people being a people committed to taking care of each other, committed to mutual help, committed to solidarity, committed to hope and committed to moral values, then we will be able to not only survive, but also really flourish. So, this is a moment where we’re not only fighting for our existence. We’re fighting for the question of who will we be and what will we be. What will be the nature of the State of Israel and what will be the nature of the Jewish People?

Sruli Fruchter:
What has been Israel’s greatest success and greatest mistake in the current war against Hamas?

Ronit Heyd:
Asking what is Israel’s biggest success is a big question, and I would like to break it down because there’s a difference between Israel and the Israeli government and the Israeli people and Israeli governmental institutions and Israeli civil society.

I think the greatest success that we saw in Israel and the greatest source of pride for me personally and inspiration is the way that civil society, NGOs, groups of people who were never working together in the past joined forces from the very first day, from October 7th, really at noon already, before noon, to create the platforms and infrastructure and operations that will enable them to provide assistance to anyone in need.

Whether it was people who ran down to the south to help rescue and to fight in the south and to fight in the kibbutzim in the towns that were attacked on October 7th and whether it was groups of young people who on October 7th organized and opened these operation rooms where they could provide assistance to families whose one parent or even both parents had to leave and go to the army just like in the hour and provide homes for families who were evacuated and provide assistance, mental and emotional assistance to people who were affected. So, the way that civil society operated, the way that people joined forces, the amount of creativity, the amount of commitment that we saw happening in Israel was phenomenal and beyond belief.

I believe it was also the greatest success of Israel after October 7th because this is the foundation for building really a new society. This is the foundation for us being what we call the exemplary society of Israel. On the other hand, the greatest failure was the lack of the government and the lack of formal leadership that was needed, the fact that there was no one from the government and this continues to be the case where both from government institutions and within the government itself, the lack of response, the lack of responsiveness to the needs of people on the very first days after October 7th.

The fact those civil society organizations and those volunteer groups organized laundry machines for the families who were evacuated, yes, I know that the municipalities in the end managed to step up and to find the way to provide laundry for families who are living in hotels, but it is still very lacking. It is still not the needed answer that those families need.

So, we’re seeing basically on the one hand, as we see many cases, the leadership failures of formal leadership and the formal authority not being there, and on the other hand, the informal authority, people who are exercising leadership where they’re using the source of informal authority and being creative and seeing the need and being able to identify the gap and to be able to diagnose the situation and work in order to address the needs. I think that’s the combination of success and failure at the same time.

Sruli Fruchter:
What do you look for in deciding which Knesset party to vote for?

Ronit Heyd:
That’s a great question. First of all, I look for values and topics that the party is committed to working on, obviously the actual platform. Although in recent elections and unfortunately as you know, we had many elections in the last few years. There were those terrible two years where we had five elections in a timeframe of two years. So, in the recent elections, the platforms weren’t really written or published. Unfortunately, there is a disregard or I would say lack of enough focus on what the party is actually saying they will do.

Beyond that, also looking at what kind of values the party and the leaders in that party, not necessarily just of the leader of the party, but the leading figures in that party demonstrate how much there are mentioned, how their personality comes out in whether they’re being condescending, whether they’re talking only about the outrageous.

I am someone who sees the radical need for change on the one hand, but at the same time, I don’t believe that radical talk is effective in politics, because the art of politics is being able to be very clear on your values, very clear on your priorities, but at the same time, be able to understand, “What are the other points of views and how do I work to build both the coalitions, the political coalitions that are needed, but also the human coalitions that are needed?” So I’m looking for people who can do and hold both of these abilities and also be in the way that they know that they need to have questions, they know that they need to have doubts.

Of course, a politician needs to present being sure of his or her point of view and his or her position, but I want a politician to have doubts as well. I want them to have the ability to look at what is happening and to connect the people in a way that creates trust. I think that’s the most important thing at the end of the day. You need to have a sense that there is someone you can trust there, unfortunately, a very rare characteristic in politics nowadays.

Sruli Fruchter:
Which is more important for Israel, Judaism or democracy?

Ronit Heyd:
That’s not a fair question. I will say why it’s not a fair question or maybe it’s not a question of fairness. It’s the wrong question if I may say. I know we’re in 18 questions, but this is a question that I would suggest to reframe. If the country is less democratic, it will be less Jewish. You cannot separate the two. Israel being a Jewish democratic state means that our Judaism is defined as a Judaism that has within it the core and basic foundations of a democracy, of the ideas of freedom and equality, the liberal ideas of freedom and equality and justice and the care for the other. As you know, as we know, Judaism can be many different things. There are many forms and interpretations in and of Judaism. So, I believe that if Israel is less democratic, it will be less Jewish.

For example, the notion of disagreement. In Hebrew, it’s called machloket. The notion of disagreement is in essence both in Judaism and in democracy. If there’s no room for disagreement, there will be no room for interpretations. If there was no room for interpretations, we would not have the Gemara, the Talmud. What would Judaism look like if we didn’t have all the arguments? If all the sages will just say, “Oh, well, the leading sage or the leader says X, so therefore there’s nothing to talk about, there’s nothing to disagree about,” we wouldn’t have all the rich tradition, history, and literature within Judaism.

Therefore, I see it as an essence of democracy and an essence of Judaism. So, there is no and between Jewish and democratic. It’s Jewish democratic. That’s characteristic of the State of Israel, and that’s how it should be.

Sruli Fruchter:
Should Israel treat its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens the same?

Ronit Heyd:
We’ve been asking ourselves here at the Hartman Institute, “What does the Jewish mean when we say that Israel is Jewish democratic? In particular, what does it mean when we talk about the non-Jewish citizens of Israel?” I mean, there’s a lot to talk about the Judaism of the state in terms of religion and state for example. But when it comes to the non-Jewish citizens, I think that’s where it’s the most complicated, difficult, and painful question. First and foremost, Israel is the state of all its citizens. By being a state, it is the state of everyone.

Everyone should feel at home here. Everyone should have the same sense of ownership and the same sense of belonging and the same sense that they have a voice and that they have a role and that they have the place for this to be their state, to be their country. I believe even though it’s hard, and I do not have the formula yet, that Israel can and should be both the homeland of the Jewish people and at the same time the state of all its citizens. What does that mean? As I said, I don’t have the full formula, but I think first of all, it means that the sense of belonging to the tradition and the culture and the way that Israel celebrates its Jewish history should always be there.

But at the same time, it should not negate the fact that there are citizens in the state of Israel that have a different identity and belong to a different identity group and belong to a different national group. Therefore, in technical terms, you can talk about recognizing Israeli citizens who are not Jewish and many define themselves as Palestinians who are citizens of Israel, recognize them as a national minority within a state where they are citizens. So, it means they have all the rights that a citizen should have, but beyond that, they should also have the recognition that their identity is a different identity from the identity of the state. It’s a different identity from the identity that, for example, is demonstrated in the flag.

I do not expect an Israeli non-Jewish or Israeli-Palestinian citizen to identify with the Israeli flag in the same way that a Jewish person identifies with the flag. Maybe some do, but I don’t expect all of them to do that as in the same way I don’t expect them to be Zionist in the same way that I feel Zionist and many others see Zionism. So, the short answer is yes, there should be equality and there should be equal rights for all the citizens of Israel because they’re the citizens of the state. That is a definition of the relationship between being a citizen and being a state.

Sruli Fruchter:
Now that Israel already exists, what’s the purpose of Zionism?

Ronit Heyd:
That’s a great question. I think there’s a mistake in, especially now after October 7th, that people see Zionism as a notion that only looks for settling the land. I think that’s wrong. I think it’s wrong in many ways. First of all, as a Zionist myself, I think there are efforts to settle land or lands that work against the values of Zionism. I personally believe that part of the Zionist idea should be enabling the Palestinian people to have recognition of their own national identity and to be able to have their own independent land as well or independent state. I know that by settling some of the lands that are outside of the Green Line, it’s working against that Zionist goal.

I believe that there are many values in Zionism of fulfillment, of mutual respect and mutual care, of solidarity, of building this exemplary society that are not just about settling a land or not just about coming and building settlements or towns or houses in land. I also believe that there is a way of loving a land and loving a country and seeing it as your homeland without necessarily having ownership of it, being the landlords of the place. I think all these concepts are only damaging Zionism. I believe that the idea that if I may quote Tal Becker who has been a senior faculty here at the Institute and is now these days entering a new job of also being vice president of the Institute, he says it beautifully.

He says, “There is the notion where peace will come when both Palestinians and Israelis and people around the world will understand that it’s not that Israel belongs to the Jewish people or the land of Israel or Palestine belongs to the Palestinians. It’s the other way around. The Jews belong to the land of Israel. The Palestinians belong to the land of Israel or Palestine,” whatever you would call it. So, it’s recognizing that we can belong to a place without necessarily having it belong to us. It’s a sense of identity. It’s a sense of being at home, not necessarily from owning and controlling and having the “it’s only ours” point of view.

Sruli Fruchter:
What role should Zionism have in Israeli and diaspora Jewish identity? So Jewish identity for Israelis and Jewish identity for diaspora Jews.

Ronit Heyd:
First of all, for Jewish Israelis, Zionism is the embodiment of what it means to be a Jew who lives in Israel and what it means to be part of building this society and part of building this state and part of having my own values reflected or constantly struggling in order to make sure that my values are reflected in the public sphere, in policies, in the government. That’s what it means for me as a Jewish Israeli. In many ways, I always joke about the fact that Judaism for Jewish Israelis is a little bit like the water for the fish, where one fish meets another fish and asks the other fish, “How’s the water today?” That fish says to the first one, “What is water?”

Okay, because that’s what Jewish Israelis feel many times that Judaism is in our environment in a way that we don’t even think about it, but I think Zionism should be the constant question, how do we implement the values that were at the foundation of those who were working to build the State of Israel? I’ll give you an example. There’s a beautiful text. It was actually a speech that was given by Berl Katznelson, one of the fathers of Zionism and of the State of Israel. He gives a speech about the idea of not being sure and feeling that you have doubts.

Sruli Fruchter:
The uncertainty.

Ronit Heyd:
The uncertainty, yes, it’s the uncomfortable or embarrassed uncertainty and not constantly being committed to an idea that you don’t always ask yourself and you don’t question, “Why am I committed to these values?” I think this is a beautiful example of a question that I know that those who were busy building the Land and State of Israel and establishing all the mechanisms of governance here in Israel were asking themselves. I have a lot of criticism, by the way, some of the questions that they were avoiding because I think there was a lot of work that they were avoiding. For example, what would be the relationship between the Jewish and non-Jewish, Arab, Palestinian citizens of Israel? They had some fantasy of okay, we’ll work out somehow.

Maybe not a fantasy or maybe they were disillusioned and worried, but they just couldn’t handle it. But I think they left some unanswered questions. But the value of doubting and the value of asking and being committed to this not being completely confident is a beautiful value that I want people to constantly ask themselves, “What is my role as an Israeli Jewish person? What is my Zionism? What does it mean for me to be committed to ensuring that all people from all walks of lives, from all religions, from all national backgrounds, from all genders feel comfortable in this place?” So that is Zionism for Israeli Jews.

For diaspora Jews, I think the question is, what does it mean for me to be connected to a nation, to a people where I know that there is a land that is the homeland of that nation, and I have my commitment to it and I have my relationship to it? It doesn’t define necessarily who I am and the way I relate to it doesn’t mean if I’m, for example, supportive of that state and of its moves, it means I’m a good person. If I’m not, I’m not a good person.
But rather that it enables me to ask questions of how does the sovereignty of Jewish people implies in my own identity? What does it mean for me the fact that Israel has power and that Jewish people have the power as a sovereign state? What are the values and what are the commitments that I want us to hold? So this is what I think Zionism would mean for Jews outside of Israel.

Sruli Fruchter:
If you were making the case for Israel, where would you begin?

Ronit Heyd:
There is no place in the world where people are as true and committed and fired up and sometimes too intense, but very emotionally committed to ensuring that our lives are good here at the end of the day. I think the example I always think of is when my kids were babies, the countless number of times where people will come up to me and suggest something. Oh, maybe the baby’s too cold. Maybe it’s too warm for the baby. I would wear them in the baby carrier. Aren’t they suffocating in there? Are they okay? All these people are always caring and asking. People were always wanting to help.

The level of solidarity, the level of commitment to each other is like nowhere else. That goes across different groups and different cultural backgrounds. I think that’s also one of the biggest hopes for me or one of the biggest sources of hope for me in optimism for Israel is knowing that even though there are huge challenges and polarization has never been so high in Israel, the level of commitment of a person to a person at the end of the day is like nowhere else in the world.

Sruli Fruchter:
Which question do you think we’re up to?

Ronit Heyd:
I have no idea.

Sruli Fruchter:
We’re a little lower halfway through.

Ronit Heyd:
Okay.

Sruli Fruchter:
It’s coming to a close, 50%. Can questioning the actions of Israel’s government and army, even in the context of this war, be considered a valid form of love and patriotism to Israel?

Ronit Heyd:
Of course, it is a way of showing support and love and care for Israel. It is a commitment. It is a must. There is no way that people can let the government of Israel, the army, and the people of Israel go unquestioned. It must be constantly questioned. I’m a big believer in loving Israel and criticizing it. I’m a big believer that my role as a citizen and as a Jew is to ensure that I constantly ask questions and that I constantly not just criticize for the sake of criticizing, but that I’m there to make sure that the government is doing what it needs to be doing in a way that represents the values. So, the question is not can it be regarded as. Of course, it must be regarded as a core commitment. It’s a mitzvah to be doing that.

Sruli Fruchter:
What do you think is the most legitimate criticism leveled against Israel today?

Ronit Heyd:
My biggest criticism, which is of course, I therefore think it’s legitimate, it’s my criticism, is that the Israeli government, and again, I’m making this distinction between the Israeli government and the Israeli people and Israel as an entity. The Israeli government is not only taking actions, but letting statements take place, letting statements be said and heard in ways that are violating the norms of Judaism, humanity. Even if none of these statements will actually be translated to action or to decisions, they should not be said. They should not be said not only because it sheds a bad light on Israel. It is immoral to say them. I think it’s immoral to talk now about resettling Gaza. It’s immoral definitely to talk about settling a new settlement in South Lebanon.

It violates not just the norms of our society, but I think the norms of being a person. It is letting messianic, very extremist agendas, even if they don’t shape what the government is doing. I still want to believe that it’s definitely not what the army is doing, and I know that the army is working and doing everything they can based on strong moral foundations. But the fact that there are extreme right-wing voices and extreme messianic agendas in the government means that in terms of portraying Israel and portraying it, it’s like talking about intentions. So, even if you don’t then go ahead and do something about these intentions, just by saying it creates a reality or creates an imagination. So, I think the problem is in what is happening with a political imagination.

It is going way too wild into very dangerous places, and that should be stopped. That is my greatest criticism of what Israel is now doing. Maybe I will add to that, that there is no positive political imagination that is happening and the fact that Israel is not taking any steps in order to strengthen the regional alliances that could help us reach peace, even if it’s not warm peace, even if it’s not everyone now loving each other and living completely in quiet like in Sweden or wherever. I don’t know in which country we can really talk about peace.

But even if it’s just lowering the level of heat and lowering the level of conflict and moving from being in high intense, very, very dangerous conflict to much lower needs of holding security, but also building new ties, the fact that Israel is not working towards building that positive political imagination or taking the necessary steps to actually create these alliances and create these partnerships, I think that is a very, very, very dangerous and unfortunate mistake.

Sruli Fruchter:
What do you think the world misunderstands about Israelis?

Ronit Heyd:
I think the world, especially I’m seeing it, well, now, it’s in many places around the world. I think the world has fallen into the dichotomy of the oppressors and oppressed in a way that completely misses the situation in Israel. Yes, of course, our mind needs simple divisions in order to process a lot of information, and therefore that’s why our mind uses stereotypes and patterns. But the fact that we are in a conflict and Israel’s security was not only violated in the most awful way and horrific way in October 7th, but also Israel’s security has continued to be jeopardized. The fact that the world is only interpreting the situation in this dichotomy of oppressor and oppressed doesn’t mean that we’re not oppressing in some of the places.

I know and I’m very critical and I’m very angry with what Israel is doing definitely in the West Bank and also with some of the actions that took place in Gaza. I think that there were things that were done and actions that should have been done differently. But only viewing things in this dichotomy means that the world doesn’t understand what’s really going on here, doesn’t understand that first of all, not all of Israel is represented in what now seems to be our government. I think the world knows that there’s a lot of criticism towards Netanyahu and the government, even during the war, but that’s, I think, something that the world doesn’t see. I wish I could say that I think that the world doesn’t understand how traumatized we are.

Unfortunately, I will say that I think the world understands how traumatized we are, but the world is working in… To say the world is all encompassing, but a lot of people hold a zero-sum game in their head and I understand it, but it’s hard for me to see the fact that people outside of Israel, and it’s the same problem here in Israel, that if you hold the pain of one side in your heart, you cannot see the pain of the other. I think that’s the biggest failure of all of us now here in Israel and now outside of Israel, not being able to understand that there is pain on all sides and that pain is pain is pain. It’s a problem within Israeli society that it cannot see the pain unfortunately of the people who are suffering in Gaza, innocent people who are not Hamas fighters and are not terrorists.

It’s very, very hard for people to understand and see the pain. At the same time, I think the world who is seeing very understandably the pain that is happening in Gaza cannot understand and see the pain that is still happening and still very, very, very present in Israeli society.

Sruli Fruchter:
Is opposing Zionism inherently anti-Semitic?

Ronit Heyd:
No. Do you want the longer answer than the no?

Sruli Fruchter:
Yeah, if you could briefly elaborate, that’d be great.

Ronit Heyd:
Well, it’s not just anti-Zionist. Criticizing the government is not being anti-Israel. Being anti-Israel doesn’t mean you’re anti-Zionist. First of all, if I’ll go with the first one, criticizing the government obviously is not anti-Israel because the government changes, let’s hope. But a government can make different decisions and there are different political forces that are working and operating. Being against Israel and what Israel as an entity, as a state is doing is not necessarily against the very notion that the Jewish people do not have a right for self-determination. It could be criticizing the way that the Jewish people are exercising their self-determination. It could be a criticism of what Donniel Hartman calls our coming home cannot be at the expense of others.

So, our coming home and building the Jewish homeland is at the expense of others, and we need to be facing that expense and understanding what we’re doing with it. We need to see what it means and what is the price. But anti-Israel doesn’t mean anti-Zionist and then going from being anti-Zionist doesn’t mean being necessarily antisemitic. I do think and maybe I’ll say first why I think because there is a difference between saying the Zionism project, there is no way that it can work… I think there are people who are saying that. There is no way that it can work without violating the rights of other people.

I think it’s a very simplistic, and as I said earlier, a very dichotomous zero-sum game view, which is not the real world, but I can see why people would be saying it, even if I strongly disagree with it. But it doesn’t mean the Jews don’t have their rights to exist or to flourish or to do anything, whether it’s in the society or economy in other countries. I do feel and I do see however that there is a spillover, a very strong spillover where there are some cases where people are being anti-Zionist and actually there are masking antisemitism, where people are being critical of Israel but it’s really sitting on this historical notion that the Jews are the source of all evil and the Jews should be blamed for everything that is bad in the world, whether it was the crucification of Jesus, whether it was everything else that has happened in history.

So, I can see there are traces and there are spillover effects. I think part of what the world needs to be and see is to be courageous enough to actually decipher when is it really anti-Zionism where there are actually antisemitic, truly racist sentiments that are hiding under this anti-Zionism or anti-Israel.

Sruli Fruchter:
What role should the Israeli government have in religious matters of Israeli society?

Ronit Heyd:
A government, not the current government and ideal, I don’t know even if ideal, but Judaism and public sphere in Israel should be in values and culture, not in religious practice. Religious practice, Jewish practice, and I come from a secular home. So, I’m saying it based on my own experience, but also based on what I see around me. Religious Jewish practices is a personal matter. It’s a personal or family or sometimes community matter. The role of the state is to enable the different manifestations and the different ways of practicing one’s Judaism to be carried out in the public sphere, whether it is in the way that a community wants to handle its public life on Shabbat.

So, there could be a community where they would want to ensure that there’s no public transportation on Shabbat, because for most people, public transportation would violate the way they want to keep Shabbat, Shabbat. There could be a community it is going to the beach. Because Shabbat is the time where you do something for yourself or your family, when you care for your own soul, and different communities can enable that to happen in different ways. The role of the government would be to enable the different communities, different localities to shape the Jewish life and the public in the public sphere in ways that are the most compatible with the characteristic of the people who live there.

What the government should definitely not have is a very narrow understanding of what Judaism is and what Judaism means and hold it in different mechanisms that the Rabbanut, the rabbinic establishment, which has nothing to do with Judaism. It is a political system that I would say uses Jewish ideas and Jewish values for political reasons, not political necessarily of the government and political parties, but for power, for questions of power and control and resources and money.

Sruli Fruchter:
Do you think peace between Israelis and Palestinians will happen within your lifetime?

Ronit Heyd:
That’s a very painful question. I want to believe very much that yes. I’m a very stubborn optimist and I will say that even though my optimism is now as Ernst Bloch said that hope is optimism with the scarf of mourning, of grief. So, my hope, which is my optimism with the scarf of grief, is that very much yes, it will happen because I still very much believe in humanity. I still very much believe that at the end of the day, people want to live well.
I very much believe that people on all sides, because it’s not just two sides here, there are many sides to this conflict, want to live and want that other people will live. I’m a big believer in humanity. So, if it will happen in my lifetime, I do hope to live long enough in order not only to see it happen, but to see it evolve in ways that will be really beneficial for this region and for our people.

Sruli Fruchter:
Where do you identify on Israel’s political and religious spectrum? Do you have friends on the “other side”?

Ronit Heyd:
As I mentioned, I’m secular and I am in the liberal. I think Israel is in such a mess now that even defining right or left is not the right thing. I think the whole definition of what is right and what is left, it has been already like that for years in Israel, but after the judicial overhaul/reform of the past year before October 7th, it was very clear that we’re in a different state and there are the people who believe that Israel should be a liberal Jewish democracy and people who thought that maybe Israel shouldn’t be not necessarily liberal. So, I’m very much ensuring and wanting to ensure that Israel will be a Jewish liberal democracy.

Sruli Fruchter:
Do you have friends on the other side of the religious and political spectrum?

Ronit Heyd:
Not only do I have friends, I’m married to a family where several of the people in that family, and God bless them, they are eight siblings. My husband is one of eight.

Sruli Fruchter:
Oh, I am as well.

Ronit Heyd:
I’m great. It’s a lot of fun and a lot of different opinions around the Shabbat dinner table. So, yes, I have many connections with people and not only from my husband’s family, but very close friends who have different political views than I do. I am very curious. I am committed to practicing curiosity. When I talk with them, it doesn’t always work. Sometimes it’s very hard. Sometimes I really need to hold steady because they say something that I find outrageous and I find insulting my moral values. How can you say something like that? But I think I gain a lot and I learn a lot when I hear them say to me how what I think or what I say or what my positions reflect and what they make them feel. I have a lot of really good conversations with them.

With one of them after the recent elections, we met a couple of weeks afterwards. He lives in a settlement. I said to him, “How could your people let that happen? How could you let Ben-Gvir be elected into the government like that?” He told me, “No, don’t worry. You’ll see. He will be more mild.”

He personally didn’t vote for him, but he said, “A lot of people that I know voted for him partially because there weren’t other options of someone from the National Religious sections from those factions.” Then a few months ago, he came up to me and he said, “Ronit, I’m sorry. You are right.”

I think part of our responsibility is now to be not only cautious, but to be very attentive and to notice these shifts. They’re very, very interesting and important shifts in loyalties that are happening in Israel. If I was loyal to certain identity groups, sometimes things, and especially after October 7th, change and shift. So, these shifting loyalties will create these cracks for new partnerships, new ideologies that can grow. So, I’m a big believer in having friends from a very different political view.

Sruli Fruchter:
What’s a book you think everyone should read about Israel?

Ronit Heyd:
Now I’m saying it as a mother to almost 16-year-old who will be going to the army in a couple of years, I think it’s called To the End of the Land. I think, any person who wants to understand Israel now in these moments should read David Grossman’s To the End of the Land, which is about a woman who leaves her house and goes on a huge trip around the northern part of Israel because she doesn’t want the army to come and knock on her door and tell her that her son was killed in the war.

She has this beautiful quote, David Grossman wrote it, and she says there, “For this announcement, there need to be two sides, the one that announces and the one that receives the announcement. If the one that is supposed to receive the announcement is not present, is absent, then the announcement cannot happen,” which is why she runs away. In Hebrew, literally, the name means running away from the announcement. As a mother and as an Israeli who is experiencing the pain and the grief and the worry and the sorrow because of the acoustics of Jerusalem Hills, I hear from my bedroom window the funerals on Mount Herzl in the military cemetery there.

I think in order to understand Israeli’s emotional state and psyche at the moment, it means understanding what it feels like to be in the constant fear that those officers will come and knock on your door, God forbid, or the door of someone who is close to you or your neighbors. It is very present in this moment for us. I really hope it won’t be the case when this podcast airs. I’m afraid it’ll still may be the case, but I hope that this recommendation will not be relevant in the near future.

Sruli Fruchter:
This is our second to last question, then we’ll be wrapping up. Where’s a spot in Israel that you find comfort and peace?

Ronit Heyd:
So it’s my local valley. It’s like the local valley in my neighborhood of Ein Karem. Nature in general in Israel is where I find the peace. I think all the nature in Israel is beautiful from the Jerusalem Hills and the pine trees and the forests around Jerusalem, we call it forest because for us, four trees is a forest, everything is little here. The desert, the Judean Desert, of course, is a place of peacefulness and calmness. I don’t know if that’s what you were looking for, but I find a lot of hope in the big demonstrations, especially those that took place last year before October 7th.
Even now, although they’re very difficult and they’re also unfortunately becoming very violent with quite a lot of police violence as well towards some of the demonstrators, but those are the moments and the places where it is getting a boost of hope and energy and knowing that there are so many people with you who are committed to really making Israel the best place and really making it live up to the ideas and the values of the foundation of the state of Israel to really make Zionism be what it is and should be of the ideas of equality and freedom and justice and the care for all human beings. So, it’s not very peaceful. These demonstrations are very, very, very loud and very noisy, but it’s a very strong place of hope.

Sruli Fruchter:
So that leads us to the last question. Do you have more hope or fear for Israel and the Jewish people?

Ronit Heyd:
So as I said, I’m a very stubborn optimist. So, I definitely have more hope. I think it’s part of the personality. I think it’s part of the personality of a lot of people who believe in the future of Israel and who believe that there will be peace and that Israel really can be a liberal Jewish democracy. So, I have a lot of hope. I know and I believe that Judaism and Jewish ideas and Jewish culture and the Jewish people have the courage and the capacity and the stubbornness. I think being stubborn is very, very helpful on that matter to work through a lot of challenges. Because we’re in a situation of very high temperature, everything is boiling around us, and we can’t avoid these challenges anymore. We can’t avoid the question of, “What does it mean to be here as a state?”

I still very much believe that the very marginal extremist voices are still marginal, even though they’re now taking a two front row seat in leading and navigating this ship that is called Israel, I think they’re very marginal. I think that within both what was traditionally called the left and the right in Israel, most people believe in humanity. Most people believe that the nature of the human being is good in its essence, and most people believe that there could and should be compromises in order for us to be able to live here, both in safety but also in prosperity.

Sruli Fruchter:
Okay. Ronit, thank you so much for 18 questions. This is very, very nice. How was this for you?

Ronit Heyd:
Fun.

Sruli Fruchter:
Were there any questions I didn’t ask that you think I should?

Ronit Heyd:
There were any questions that you didn’t ask. You didn’t ask me what I was most angry about, but you asked me what I think was the most legitimate criticism. So, I used my anger there. So, you didn’t ask negative questions of what I don’t have tolerance for or what are the limits of my tolerance?

Sruli Fruchter:
Can I ask you now, what are the limits of your tolerance with criticism of Israel?

Ronit Heyd:
The limits of my tolerance is the level of simplicity and intentional disinformation and intellectual laziness. Anywhere and anytime I see or hear or feel or read that someone is writing something in order to either promote themselves and make a point or to create a provocation or even if they believe in it, I cannot tolerate when people are being dishonest and not even having the integrity of checking their sources before they use information that they send on WhatsApp or quote or anything like that, especially when it comes from people who are supposed to be very intelligent.

Sruli Fruchter:
Okay, great. That’s great to know. I guess that’s a wrap.

Ronit Heyd:
Yeah. Great. Thank you.

Sruli Fruchter:
Thank you so much. I had a lovely time speaking with Ronit. As with all the interviews and all the guests who I meet and who we bring on to the podcast, to see that for her, this is not an abstract issue, this does not work, but this is her life and this is very much where the center of gravity shifts in terms of Israel, it was really an absolute pleasure. So, I encourage everyone who’s listening, who’s interested to look into Ronit’s work, look into Hartman’s work, and to bring the curiosity to the things that she was speaking about that you disagreed with, that you agreed with, that you want to learn more about.

Very much what is guiding the podcast and what we hope is one of the strongest takeaways that people have from every single episode is, did this make me think? What else can I be asking and what else can I be learning? So on that note, stay tuned for more 18 Questions with 40 Israeli Thinkers. Keep questioning and keep thinking.