Generations of Political Evolution: A Personal History of Jewish Identity, Shifting Party Alliances, and Conversations with Arlen Specter

When I sat down with Senator Arlen Specter at the gym in 2007, I expected a typical conversation about fitness, medicine and health. Instead, what unfolded was a deeply philosophical discussion about political identities, generational shifts in ideology, and the shared history of our families. Our conversation covered three critical issues that shaped the evolution of Jewish political identity in America: the influence of early Marxism and unionism on Jewish-Americans, the ideological shift within the Democratic Party during the New Deal era and its eventual splintering, and the dramatic transformation of Jewish political alignment following the rise of conservatism and unwavering support for Israel.

Arlen, who had been appointed to his first political position by my great-grandfather Emmanuel and later switched parties to become a Republican, was in a unique position to offer insights into these transformations. His journey from a New Deal Democrat to a moderate Republican mirrored my family’s own trajectory—a trajectory that begins with union activism and Marxism in the 1920s and evolves into a commitment to conservatism by the end of the 20th century.

1. The Marxist Roots: Unionism and Early Jewish Political Identity

Jewish involvement in American politics has always been intertwined with the struggle for social and economic justice. In the 1920s, Jewish-Americans, many of whom were recent immigrants, found themselves at the forefront of labor movements and union activism. My own family’s early political roots can be traced back to this period, when unionism was not just a means to secure fair wages and working conditions, but a platform for advocating broader social reforms. These movements were often influenced by Marxist thought, which emphasized the exploitation of workers and the need for collective action to achieve social equality.

My relative, Maxwell Weinberg, became head of the Communist Party in New York during this time. He represented a generation of Jewish intellectuals and activists who saw in Marxism a framework for understanding and combating the injustices faced by the working class. It was a period when the lines between political ideology and social responsibility blurred, and when advocating for labor rights meant advocating for human dignity.

Maxwell’s interactions with figures like J. Robert Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein further illustrate how deeply ingrained these philosophies were in the Jewish intellectual tradition. Oppenheimer and Einstein were themselves grappling with questions of ethics and responsibility in the context of scientific progress and political power. These were discussions that transcended mere political affiliation; they were about the very nature of what it meant to build a just society.

For my great-grandfather Emmanuel, who was deeply involved in these movements, the goal was always to ensure that the immigrant experience in America did not lead to subjugation or marginalization. His commitment to unionism was a commitment to the idea that all people, regardless of their background, deserved the opportunity to live with dignity and security. This early embrace of Marxism was not about ideology for ideology’s sake—it was about using every available tool to fight for justice and equality.

2. The Shift to New Deal Liberalism and Disillusionment

As the Great Depression ravaged the American economy, many Jewish-Americans who had once supported Marxism began to see the Democratic Party’s New Deal as a more viable solution to the country’s economic woes. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s policies promised relief, recovery, and reform—three tenets that resonated deeply with Jewish families like mine, who were looking for a way to protect workers’ rights within the existing political system.

The shift from Marxism to New Deal liberalism was not a rejection of earlier beliefs but a pragmatic adaptation. Figures like my grandfather, who had grown up in the world of union activism, saw in the New Deal a chance to implement reforms that would benefit the working class without resorting to the radicalism of Marxist revolution. For many Jewish-Americans, FDR became a hero—a symbol of hope during one of the darkest periods in American history.

However, this alignment with the Democratic Party was not without its complexities. One of the most painful moments for my family, and for many Jews at the time, was FDR’s decision to turn away Jewish refugees during the Holocaust. The refusal to allow the SS St. Louis to dock, sending over 900 Jewish refugees back to Europe, where many would perish, was a betrayal that could not be easily forgiven. My great-grandfather Emmanuel, who had invested so much faith in Roosevelt’s vision of America, was left deeply disillusioned.

When I discussed this with Arlen Specter, he echoed that sense of betrayal. He recounted how Emmanuel, despite his support for the New Deal’s economic policies, could never reconcile with FDR’s abandonment of the Jewish people during their time of greatest need. This event became a turning point, creating a fissure between Jewish-Americans and the Democratic Party that would widen in the years to come.

3. The Conservative Turn: Goldwater, Nixon, and the Realignment of Jewish Political Identity

By the 1960s, the Democratic Party was undergoing a transformation. The focus shifted from labor and economic issues to cultural and social changes, driven by the Civil Rights Movement and the counterculture. For many Jewish-Americans, including members of my family, this shift created a sense of alienation. The issues that had once united them with the Democratic Party—economic stability, labor rights, and national security—were being overshadowed by debates over identity politics and social reform.

Enter Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon, two figures who would play pivotal roles in reshaping the Republican Party and attracting disaffected Democrats. Goldwater’s staunch anti-communism and emphasis on individual liberty resonated with Jewish voters who were growing increasingly concerned about the Soviet Union’s stance on Israel and its treatment of Jewish dissidents. Nixon’s appeal to law and order further solidified this shift, as did his vocal support for Israel, which had become a cornerstone issue for Jewish-Americans after its founding in 1948.

Arlen Specter’s switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party in 1965 was emblematic of this broader shift. When I asked him about it, he spoke candidly about how the Democratic Party’s changing priorities left many Jews, including himself, feeling politically homeless. The Republican Party’s commitment to national security, economic conservatism, and support for Israel offered a new home—a place where they could continue to advocate for the values they had always held.

Jewish Politics and the Republican Party Today:

Arlen and I also discussed how the Republican Party’s alignment with Israel has continued to shape Jewish political identity. For my great-grandfather Emmanuel and for Arlen, support for Israel was not just a political stance—it was a moral imperative. As Arlen put it, “Any decent Jewish person would recognize the importance of Israel’s survival and the need to support its right to exist.”

This sentiment, which was once shared across party lines, has become increasingly polarized in today’s political climate. The Republican Party’s staunch support for Israel has made it the natural choice for many Jewish-Americans who see in it a continuation of the commitment to Jewish survival and prosperity. While I identify as a capitalist and libertarian, I understand this allegiance. The party’s shift toward conservatism on economic and foreign policy issues has made it a new haven for those who once championed labor rights and social justice under the Democratic banner.

Senator Arlen Specter

Conclusion: Political Legacies Across Generations

The evolution of Jewish political identity—from early Marxism to New Deal liberalism and finally to conservatism—reflects not just a change in party affiliation but a deeper philosophical journey. It is a journey shaped by historical events like the Holocaust, by the personal betrayals felt by leaders like FDR, and by the broader realignments within American politics that figures like Goldwater and Nixon facilitated.

Through my conversations with Arlen Specter, I have come to see this evolution as part of a larger narrative about values and beliefs that transcend party lines. My family’s story is one of ideological shifts, but it is also a story of continuity—the continuity of a commitment to justice, to the survival of Israel, and to the idea that public service is about more than policies and party platforms. It is about upholding the moral principles that define who we are, regardless of where we fall on the political spectrum.

These values, passed down through generations, remain a guiding light as we navigate the complexities of modern politics. They remind us that parties may change, but the essence of what we believe in—the commitment to community, the fight for dignity, and the belief in justice—endures, connecting us across decades and leaving a legacy that shapes the future. It also shows that there are large parts shifts, where the views and ideologies of a party can be polar opposite in a century to what they originally stood for.