This is not an Onion article. I repeat. This is not an Onion satire piece. The Park Slope Food Coop in Brooklyn has voted to remove Israeli products from its shelves after years of pressure from BDS activists. What this means is that Israeli tahini, snacks, olive oil and frozen herbs were pulled almost immediately after the vote passed. The co-op has about 16000 members and of those that voted, more than half voted to boycott Israeli-sourced products. The co-op buys in bulk and offers members discounts to members with purchasing power and in exchange you need to work there for several hours a month. It’s been operating for about 50 years.
But the moral math here, as usual when it comes to Israel feels strangely selective. And when you read on you will see they boycotted an Israeli product once boycotted by Muslims for being “gay”. You can read that story here because we covered it.
The Coop still stocks products from countries such as Vietnam and Mexico, routinely accused of labor exploitation, child labor, environmental destruction and political repression. Where are the emergency votes over dragon fruit imported from Vietnam that use child labor? Where is the outrage over avocados or produce tied to cartel-controlled regions in Mexico? Goods linked to forced labor allegations in China? Why is the Israeli pepper suddenly the ethical breaking point in Brooklyn?
And what exactly is being boycotted here? Israelis? Zionists? Jews? Because one of the products reportedly targeted is tahini from Al Arz, an Israeli Arab-owned company. This is the same Israeli Arab-made tehini that was also boycotted by Muslims in Israel in 2020, for being “gay”, showing the hypocrisy of liberal activism eating itself. Al Arz is actually a minority-run business in Israel and the founder is Christian.
Related: tehini is a natual medicine, learn to make it here
The progressive movement once prided itself on nuance. On coexistence and on supporting minorities, workers and bridge-builders. Now even Arab Israelis making sesame paste can become collateral damage in ideological warfare.
The Park Slope Coop says this is about human rights. Supporters compare it to past boycotts against apartheid South Africa and Pinochet-era Chile. But many Jewish and Israeli members inside the Coop say the atmosphere surrounding the campaign has become hostile, radicalized and frightening. Reports describe accusations of “Jewish supremacism,” intimidation claims, heavy security and members fearing retaliation for speaking openly.
When I spoke years ago with an Israeli in Brooklyn — then a member of the Coop and one of Israel’s and New York’s most respected jazz musicians (he lives in Brooklyn and owned a club there) — he described the Coop as a great place for all. His business, a nightclub, was later targeted with buckets of red paint because he is Israeli. New York has become increasingly hostile to Jews, and the Brooklyn Coop story is just another example of the hypocrisy.
This is the irony that liberals refuse to confront: the movement increasingly resembles the kind of purity politics it once warned against. Homes and businesses vandalized with red paint. Businesses singled out because they are Israeli. Public shaming campaigns and loyalty tests.
Some activists insist criticism of Israel is not antisemitism. Fair enough. Governments should be criticized but if so, then ALL governments.
But when the world’s only Jewish state is treated differently from every other nation on earth — when Israeli peppers are morally radioactive while products tied to far worse labor systems pass unnoticed through organic checkout lines, people must ask uncomfortable questions, especially when Jewish members say they no longer feel safe inside a liberal institution they helped build.
Interestingly, one reader pointed out, the Coop changed the rules of numbers required for voting the day before the boycott was sealed. He sent us this:
On May 26 the group decided to repeal the need for a supermajority of 75% to pass a vote, similar to quorum. The very next day the boycott was passed without a supermajority.
The tragedy is that this kind of activism rarely builds peace. It builds tribes instead of humanity. It rewards outrage over dialogue. Once an enlightenment group starts deciding which nationalities are acceptable to boycott publicly, history suggests the line rarely stops where activists think it will.
According to its mission statement, “We are committed to diversity and equality. We oppose discrimination in any form. We strive to make the Coop welcoming and accessible to all and to respect the opinions, needs and concerns of every member.”
