AP says Peter Beinart is influential. Evidence says he isn’t.

AP has a long, glowing article about Peter Beinart this weekend, as Beinart continues his publicity drive for teaching Americans that Israel is an evil, immoral state.


Is Peter Beinart influential among Jews in America?

It’s pretty easy to prove that the answer is no.

Earlier this year the American Zionist Movement held its elections for delegates to the World Zionist Organization. Before the voting started, Beinart was part of a major push for the “progressive” Hatikvah slate to gain as many seats as possible, and Beinart hmself was on that slate which included the leaders of J-Street, T’ruah, the New Israel fund and more. He received lots of publicity.




Beinart even made a video urging progressive Jews to vote for Hatikvah (which, interestingly, does not mention a two-state solution, meaning that Beinart was already moving away from the basic tenets of Hatikvah even as he was running to be part of its slate.)

How did Hatikvah do after this massive publicity push by Beinart, J-Street and others?

Hatikvah received a mere 6.4% of the American vote – seventh place – and Beinart did not make the cut to be a delegate.

Even among leftist Jews, Hatikvah did not gain much interest. The Reform slate received about four times the votes of Hatikvah.

These are the most motivated people concerning Israel, and Beinart did not ignite their interest or imagination.  And it is telling that even though Beinart publicly campaigned for Hatikvah as was promoted as their rock star, he was placed in the 14th slot on their slate.

That does not scream “influential” even within Hatikvah.

This is not the first time that Beinart has been characterized as having more influence than he actually does. His “Crisis of Zionism” book was a flop, estimated to have only sold several thousand copies total. 

Controversial? Sure, Beinart thrives on that. Influential? Not at all.