I always thought that socialism was a political expression of Jewish ghetto culture. i.e. Jewish culture made into law.

Actually, M. Simon, the reason socialism resonated so much among Jews has a lot to do with the writings of the Prophets, a connection strengthened given the oppressive conditions so many of them were living under at the time.

There is a whole lot of literature from the early 20th century which shows how scholars at the time favorably viewed the continuity between certain themes found in the Prophets, social justice, charity, care for the orphans and the widows, and socialism.

The difference, though, and here's the sticking point, is the motivation to act that way. The bible provides an excellent motivation - God - that transcends the self. Whereas progressivism often ends up as a form of narcisissm, particularly for the extremely well to do, for whom it often looks like it is a hobby.

I think Landes makes some excellent points.

Gagdad Bob in the second of his trilogy last week
The Arc of Salvation, Phase I: Ridding Mankind of its Default Religion says:
Again, this just emphasizes how much more unblinking wisdom there is in Genesis than liberal academia.
The biggest hurdle was that humans had to learn to somehow get along in larger groups without killing each other. In order to do this, they had to develop a more abstract way than kinship to forge a unity.

Now we just have to define Liberal.

There are indeed some very strong "liberal" strains in Jewish tradition.

But Modern American Jewish liberalism is different in an important respect. In the Tanach, you're required to act with "liberal" values toward your own community (which is self-regulated under Jewish law) and toward non-Jewish visitors in your community. But Modern American Jewish liberals think that even when we live outside the Jewish community, we can force the remaining 98% of us who are not Jewish to follow the liberal values of Judaism, whatever the cost.

An example: A few years ago, a Conservative responsum started from the halachic proposition that Jewish doctors can't refuse care to the poor within their Jewish communities and ended up endorsing nationalized Hillarycare in the United States.

And even the Torah recognized that some "liberal" values were so contrary to human nature that they had to be directly ordered by God. For example, the release of loans in the seventh year meant that no one would lend money or property as the seventh year approached. In Deuteronomy 15:9-10, the Torah offers a threat and a promise to make people help the needy: "9 Beware lest you harbor the base thought, 'The seventh year, the year of remission, is approaching,' so that you are mean to your needy kinsman and give him nothing. He will cry out to the LORD against you, and you will incur guilt. 10 Give to him readily and have no regrets when you do so, for in return the LORD your God will bless you in all your undertakings." Only God can offer that deal, that threat and promise -- unless perhaps you're in a secular socialist dictatorship.

And after all that, Hillel still had to devise the "prosbul," a device that evaded the release of debts by assigning them to the court.

Which may be a lesson for all of us. Live up to the "liberal" values of Judaism in your personal life, but recognize that in society at large -- especially in a society in which we are a tiny minority -- our "liberal" values need to be leavened with common sense.

I do not believe that there is a cultural explanation for the political inclinations of American Jews. I am very skeptical about claims of prophetic sanction for this policy or that, and I have yet to see much connection between the Talmud and the ravings of the Democrat party.

My own belief is that there are two major historical factors at work.

First, the Jews who emigrated to the US came from Eastern Europe. Their first encounters with the larger political culture occurred in aftermath of the French Revolution and Napoleon's rearrangement of the European map. Liberalism, as it was known in Western Europe and North America did not exist, save for some very rarefied intellectual circles.

The political contest in that part of Europe was between radicals and reactionaries. By the second half of the 19th century, the radicals were socialists and communists. The reactionaries were anti-Semitic and not a political home for Jews. Further, the radicalized Jews were more likely to emigrate than the ones who tightly bound into traditional communities.

When they arrived in the US they landed in the large industrial cities of the Northeast and Midwest. The immigrant populations they landed among were Democrats, and the gentry, who were anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic, were Republicans, so they joined the big city Democrat machines. True to their socialist roots and because they were starting out at the bottom of the ladder in the US, they joined the nascent labor movement.

When the Roosevelt revolution arrived the Jews gained a great deal of recognition and a lot of opportunity for government jobs. With the arrival of Nazism and WWII, Jews had all the more reason to back the interventionist Roosevelt. Truman, over the objection of his State Department, backed the creation of Israel, while Eisenhower sided with the Russians to support Nasser against Britain, France and Israel. My father hated Eisenhower.

By now support of the Democrat party is a not a thing that requires thought. The order that the Democrats created is the existing order. Jews have thrived mightily in it and they have every reason to support it. You might say that the impulse is really quite conservative.

Another check on the cultural theories are the politics of the orthodox community and of the post 1990 immigrants from the FSU. You would think that if modern American liberalism had anything to do with Judaism that the orthodox would be at least somewhat sympathetic to it. The "Russians" are also not liberals. They stayed in Eastern Europe and they do not romanticize the Soviet Union. If they had any socialism, it has been cured.