Gary Farber has this gem from renowned scholar Simon Sebag Montefiore, writing in The New Statesman (of all places) about the fact that it is increasingly dangerous to be a Jew in Europe. I really liked this passage - it isn't directly relevant to the subject, but it's a classic example of the Jewish mindset turned into humour:
"When I was 16, I went to toil in a kibbutz in Israel for a few months, imagining myself as a Hebraic warrior, sweatily harvesting oranges with fecund Israeli girls in groves blossoming with Jewish ingenuity amid the once-sterile Negev Desert. I actually found myself making plastic toilets. This was not good for my Jewish self-image. David Ben-Gurion, Israel's founder, foresaw that statehood meant Jewish intellectuals, but also truck drivers and criminals. But he never mentioned loo-makers. From the shtetls of Lodz to Starbucks in Manhattan, even our comic geniuses - Sholom Aleichem, Woody Allen or Jerry Seinfeld, had not invented the Jewish toilet-maker. So here I was: a new character in our ancient canon of self-mockery, the humour that makes our tragedies bearable, our successes ridiculous. My favourite example: my witty great-uncle being asked his age at a funeral. "Ninety-two," he said. "Hardly worth going home, is it?"
From funny, to frightening... on a much less humourous note, there are also passages like these:
"Yet something has changed about the European attitude to Jewishness. One feels it everywhere: we have moved, as it were, from the world of Howard Jacobson back to Franz Kafka. This is connected to Israel, America, 9/11 and Iraq. For more than a decade now, Israel has been the fashionable bete noire of the chattering classes. The response to Israel in the European media, particularly the BBC and the Guardian, has long been prejudiced, disproportionate, vicious, often fictitious....
...Yet, in the British media, every Israeli sin is amplified, while those of the Arab world are ignored. The million dead of the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein's 300,000 victims, thousands more massacred in Chechnya, the Arab militias killing black Sudanese, the torturing Middle Eastern tyrannies are ignored - but in Britain, every Palestinian death is reported like a sacred rite. Our media conceal the venom directed at Israel by Arab clerics, television and the internet, presenting Israeli complaints as propaganda. The Middle East commentator Tom Gross revealed in the National Review that when the "moderate" Saudi cleric Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais visited Britain this month, the BBC hailed him as a brave worker for "community cohesion". Yet his Friday sermons call for Jews - "scum of the human race, rats of the world" - to be "annihilated".
It is not anti-Semitic to criticise Israel. Many of its policies are clumsy, self-defeating, wrong. I am against most of the settlements, against the razing of Palestinian houses. Israel will lose its soul if it uses citizen-soldiers to skirmish through Rafah or Hebron for much longer. I want a Palestinian state; I care deeply about the humiliation and deaths of Palestinians. If criticisms against Israel were based purely on its political faults, no one could complain. Yet, since the first intifada, Israel's critics use hysteria and unreality, holding Israel to standards to which Britain, for one, could never aspire...."
See my good-natured debates with Iain Dale a couple years back for a very concrete example of this last point.
What is happening in Europe is not trivial. It's serious, it's pathological, it's connected to Anti-Americanism as well as older hatreds, and it's becoming more and more widespread. Montefiore doesn't see this as something to ignore or shrug off - and neither do I:
"Until 9/11, Anglo-Jewry had become accustomed to prejudiced coverage of Israel. But if you were not a Zionist, as many Jews are not, you did not need to worry. Since 9/11, and particularly post-Iraq, we have witnessed a sea change. It is as if, in the mythical scale of 9/11, al-Qaeda had unlocked a forgotten cultural capsule of anti-Semitic myths, sealed and forgotten since the Nazis, the Black Hundreds and the medieval blood libels. Just words? But words matter in a violent world. This weird and scary nonsense is an international phenomenon, not a British one. Despite it, Britain retains the easygoing tolerance and pragmatism, the sources of her greatness. It is still better to be a Jew in England than anywhere else."
Let's hope it stays that way. Personally, I doubt it. Gary Farber has more excerpts and a link if you're interested.
I'll leave the final words to Simon Sebag Montefiore:
"In blaming Jewish-American neo-cons and in longing to appease the terrorists, the bien-pensants purveyors of these conspiracies will not heal Islamist grievances. For such grievances are about western power, modernity and freedom. Islamist terrorists visualise "Jews" as perhaps a weak link in our western civilisation, but an essential part of our society. Those who swallow conspiracy theories miss the point. For al-Qaeda maniacs, we are all Jews."
".. Israel's critics use hysteria and unreality .."
This comment would be so much more effective if it wasn't such a hysterical [1] piece, with hyperbolic [2] claims which verge on unreality.
[1] "It is as if, in the mythical scale of 9/11, al-Qaeda had unlocked a forgotten cultural capsule of anti-Semitic myths, sealed and forgotten since the Nazis, the Black Hundreds and the medieval blood libels"
2 "Yet, in the British media, every Israeli sin is amplified, while those of the Arab world are ignored."
Factory (12:04pm) provided a cryptic link #2 to show the hyperbole of "every Israeli sin is amplified, while those of the Arab world are ignored." Okay, easy enough to tone it down to "most Israeli sins are amplified, while most of those of the Arab world are downplayed." It's hard for some of us to see how such an obvious point can be open to debate--links abound to Jeningrad, the 2 Brit reporters at the Fence, etc. etc.
In interpreting atrocious events, the 'mainstream' seems most alert to the identity of the perpetrators. The scale and extent of the victims' suffering is often a sideshow. Compare the ethos of the coverage of "collateral" civilian casualties of American bombing in Iraq with that of Saddam's victims, or coverage of Jenin to that of Darfur.
Clearly, the wealth of readily accessible information on the Internet hasn't lead towards a consensus on fact-checkable issues, but the opposite. Some days it feels like life in Bearded Spock Universe. As presumably it does to the people on the other side of this divide.
Factory, Montefiore uses a number of examples and illustrations, he does not simply throw things out there. This rings true to me, in no small part due to the content of the various links in the piece. The sharp rise in physical attacks aimed at Jews adds gravitas to the whole.
He sees European anti-Semitism rising again, and all the indicators point to him being right. Many Jews had thought that phenomenon dead and buried in the wake of the Holocaust and (on a more positive note) Vatican II. To their shock, they are finding that may of the tactics, tropes, and attitudes had simply lain dormant.
I'm sorry that you don't find this piece convenient, but you have not grappled with any of its substance.
We need not go to Europe to find virulent anti-semitism. A simple trip to Quebec will suffice.
You know those paper placemats with the jokes? Well they have them in Quebec, too, unsurprisingly, in French. In a rest-stop restaurant along the main autoroute from Montreal to Quebec City, less than fifteen years ago, one of those placemats had two viscious anti-semitic 'jokes' (repeated from memory, below, in French only) prominently featured.
Lest you think this was a phenomenon of the past, just four years ago provincial police removed all kosher foods from Jewish stores in the middle of Passover. Montreal is home to about 100,000 orthodox and hassid'im, plus many more Jews of various persuasions.
For the entire 13 years I lived in Quebec, plus on every return trip since, I have heard anti-semitic commentary on the radio and amongst the French-speaking populace.
There is an element of Frenchness that is extraordinarily inimical to democracy and basic human rights, especially when Jews are involved.
[the 'jokes' both seen as recently as 1991: "Pourquoi Hitler s'est suicide? Il vennait de recevoir sa facture de gaz." C'est quoi la difference entre un pizza et un juif? Le pizza ne cri pas quand on le met dans le four."]
J'ai envie de vomir. It makes me want to puke.
Bart, it isn't a French thing in Quebec. It's a pre Vatican II Catholic culture thing, mixed in with the traditional European notion of "a people by blood" rather than "a people by citizenship".
The attitudes taught by the old time church have survived the transition to a much less religious society, in no small part because Quebec society's new basis includes a healthy dose of xenophobia generally and so kept sympatico cultural elements. A society that speaks publicly and seriously about pur Laine Quebecois is likely to be, alas, exactly what you described. Adding a shot of "mean green" leftism influenced by worldwide anti-Semitic currents doesn't help either.
The fact that many Jews in Quebec are prominent federalists simply adds fuel, and the expressions follow the old cultural templates. I should also note that a very significant percentage of Quebec's Jewish community has moved to my city of Toronto over the past 40 years - we're talking six figure numbers of people.
I'll close by noting that Quebec is not the worst place in the world, and has a lot of fine people. But I don't see them really fixing the problem Bart describes, either, because so many of their socio-cultural patterns and trends are working against it.
As an aside: "Why did Hitler commit suicide... because he received his gas bill." That one's actually kind of funny - if only it had been delivered sooner! Not so the one about "...the pizza doesn't yell when you put it in the oven." Or the other comments you hear on a regular basis.
"Yet, in the British media, every Israeli sin is amplified, while those of the Arab world are ignored."
This statement isn't close to unreality or hysteria. The British media even make things up when there aren't Israeli sins to tut-tut about.
Perhaps the most sickening one is the longest running: the implication that Israel is trying to provoke the murder of their civilians.
Colt might know, Factory, being located in Britian and all.
And since we're speaking of Britain, try this link
With the mean green left joining hands with the mean green Wahhabi Islamists, the reception given to people like Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais can only be expected to improve.
This discussion points to why I have taken to referring to our enemies as "Corecive Utopians". Google on this phrase for a lot of background, but in brief: Jihadists, Greens, and much of the left in the EU and US all fit the same cloth: they know what is needed to make a perfect society, and they will be happy to kill you in an effort to achieve it. Also, their grasp of history is risable, since either they think thier solution has never been tried (socialists/communists etc.) or they pine for a past that never was (Wahhabis). I wonder if the disease is genetic. The scifi writer Gordon Dickson has suggested in some of his novels that in small doses humanity needs these True Believers, but I for one have not been persuaded: it seems maladaptive in the long run.
Joe:
With the mean green left joining hands with the mean green Wahhabi Islamists, the reception given to people like Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais can only be expected to improve.
The British press and "moderate" Muslim Council of Britain joined to welcome Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, too. I wish it were just the far-left.
---------------------
I'm aware, by the way, that the British media aren't the only ones guilty of implying not-so-subtley that Israel wants suicide bombers to blow up Jerusalem cafes.
Thanks for the post. I am new to your site, but may just stick around!
I have been noticing with great alarm the worldwide growth in antisemitism for almost a decade now. Much worse in the las few years.
But I have NO idea what to do about it. I joined honestreporting's mailing list once, and dutifully sent off protest letters. But it felt like shouting into the wind. And besides, hr has its own honesty problems, they cry wolf alot.
Do you have any ideas? Maybe we need synagogue door-to-door outreach programs for teenagers, like the Mormons have, not to convert but just to let people know who we are. G-d help us, it looks like ordinary folks need a reminder that we're human again.
I wonder if 60 Minutes would be interested in doing a piece about French riots, Berkeley Jew-bashing, or British boycott efforts.
"it isn't a French thing in Quebec. It's a pre Vatican II Catholic culture thing, mixed in with the traditional European notion of "a people by blood" rather than "a people by citizenship".
I disagree. I have spent a great deal of time in several South and Central American countries, all of which were deeply imbued with the 'pre-Vatican II Catholic culture thing.' Not a trace of anti-semitism there, unless you want to include the Iranian government bomb in Buenos Aires.
I might have missed it, but in both Quebec and France it is absolutely unavoidable.
"Jihadists, Greens, and much of the left in the EU and US all fit the same cloth; they know what is needed to make a perfect society, and they will be happy to kill you in an effort to achieve it."
Oh, for god's sake! Very few "leftists" or "Greens" in Western society are "happy to kill you"! This is insanely absurd.
Gordy Dickson, incidentally, has, sadly, been in the past tense for some years now.
Oscar,
The purpose of the "True Belief" syndrome is to create opponents for the ruling alpha male.
It wouldn't matter how aligned our beliefs were compared to today. Disputes would then be just as fierce over trivialities.
This will continue as long as we are men. Some day in the future we may be something else but for today we are stuck with us.
Uh Gary,
There is a very wide swath of the enviro movement that thinks there are too many people on the planet.
Most of them are nice people who think that we should use starvation and disese to solve the problem. So in that sense they do not want to be guilty of selecting the victims. Quite honorable.
However, murder by proxy is not a problem.
I'm a free market enviro myself and I notice these things. Look into the DDT vs malaria question if you want to see a practcal implimentation of this policy. Not that it was designed to do what it has done. But the fact that the policy is not changed....
Gary, Simon,
I was actually using "mean green left" in a non-environmental sense. The term actually refers to a concept called the mean green meme - its applications sometimes coincide with but at their core have no connection to environmentalism per se.
Steven does get one thing wrong, and it skews his analysis... the structure described may not be a pure ladder, and a jump to the next level may be possible from either green or orange. Which undermines his whole analysis. So pay attention to the letter, and set Den Beste's stuff aside, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Damn. I'm really going to have to start a series on Wilbur and Graves, and Spiral Dynamics.
Gary:
Very few "leftists" or "Greens" in Western society are "happy to kill you"!
In the jihadist sense, no. But utopian socialists are some of the most murderous people in history. If you stand in the way of "progress", you are standing in the way of the welfare of humanity. Thus, your life is forfeit.
There is an even wider swathe of opinion willing to justify Islamism along post-modern lines.
Aside:
Am I the only one who wants to hear M. Simon's complete Alpha Male theory?
Will you WoCers give him a forum to elaborate on his often refered to philosophy?
On Topic:
And I agree, with Colt, M. Simon, etc... that the hard environleft has no problem with indirect murder. Violence with clean hands. It soooo convenient. And noble. For that higher purpose, you know. Not unlike their utopian philosophical forefathers.
I'd even take this further to those AIDs "champions" that eschew abstinance education for African populations. Even when its been shown to work.
Lunacy
"But utopian socialists are some of the most murderous people in history. If you stand in the way of 'progress', you are standing in the way of the welfare of humanity. Thus, your life is forfeit."
Yes, to be sure, some have been. And so have some utopian fascists. And so have some utopian anarchists.
But, strangely, most socialists, and most anarchists, and even most passive fascists, have not been murderous. Even today, there isn't a lot of murderousness going on in Sweden, nor was there under Clement Atlee's government, nor among the followers of Eugene Debs.
It's one thing to criticize the philosophical, economic, and social flaws of socialism, or any other political philosophy. But vague sweeping declarations such as the above and the preceding are so wildly sloppy in their light-years-spanning generalizing as to be gross distortions of the truth, leading to completely misleading analyses of contemporary politics.
It would be the same if someone declare that "capitalism is murderous; look at how indifferent capitalists in history have been to people's suffering, and how many hundreds of thousands have died due to rapacious, unfettered, capitalism," which is equally perfectly true, and perfectly nonsensical in terms of understanding what are reasonable capitalistic ideas today. It would not be useful to discuss where, precisely, say, a capital gains tax level should be, in these sort of crazedly sloppy accusatory generalizations.
There's lots to be learned from, say, Hayekian philosophy; but, meanwhile, FDR's New Deal was not "murderous," and there's something to be learned from consideration of its pros and cons, as well.
"The left is based upon murderous ideas" may be very stirring rhetoric for some, but as a tool for analysis, it is a tool for shutting down thinking. It's no different than "Bush=Hitler."
Gary, I don't think it's the "socialist" label that characterizes the indifference or even preference for fewer humans on the planet. Rather it is the utopian fantasy, regardless of the driving philosophy. The "if only [insert extreme philosophy here whereby fewer people who disagree or who are simply in the way would be quite convenient] things would be soooo much better" folks of a number of philosphies, including communism, islamism, driveisraelintotheseaism, extremegreenism, anarchocapitalism, extremeculturalrelativism, etc... "Viva la revolucion, bebe."
Lunacy
M. Simon... invitation open re: your Alpha Male theory. Note that you now have a column archive of all your posts here, too.
"I don't think it's the 'socialist' label that characterizes the indifference or even preference for fewer humans on the planet. Rather it is the utopian fantasy, regardless of the driving philosophy."
In that case, if we specify that we're talking about the small fringe of extremists (save in the occasional historical case where such people take advantage of circumstances to work themselves into power -- 1917, 1933, and so on), I'm in solid agreement with you.
I think I have the whole European anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism thing figured out.
The Europeans are combative and divisive. The are aware of their increasing weaknesses (economic, military, human). Their societies are under a lot of stress. Massive immigration is making this situation worse. What to do?
To confront these problems would tear their societies apart. So, they avoid the real problem and all involved can turn their venom on scapegoats. In this case the Jews and Americans. This is basic human psychology and has happened before. This is the basis for nationalism.
This is in evidence in the Palestinian controlled areas. It is no coincidence that the building of the barrier has been followed by increased intra-Palestinian aggression. Because the Jews are not available as an outlet for the violence that permeates Palestinian society, they turn their hatreds against each other.
This is hardly an original thesis but it is obviously true. As an American, who has read a great deal of European history, I can just shake my head sadly. I feel sorry for the European Jews.
"It is no coincidence that the building of the barrier has been followed by increased intra-Palestinian aggression. Because the Jews are not available as an outlet for the violence that permeates Palestinian society, they turn their hatreds against each other."
How would this theory explain what's been going on in Jenin, which is not behind the Gaza barrier, then?
I do agree, actually, that there's some truth to what you say; on the other hand, it's also simply part of the breakdown of the PA, which has multiple causes, from corruption, lack of effective leadership from Arafat or anyone else, inability to deliver success with the intifada, inability to deliver any sort of success by any measure, destruction of the infrastructure by Israel, endless sort of internal conflicts, and so on and so on.
It seems to me that Sharon has quite deliberately engineered the breakdown of PA unity. Look at the moves:
Isolate Arafat (literally and figuratively).
Infuriate the Palestinian man on the street and strike at their economy via the fence, helicopter attacks, the latest Gaza campaign, curfews, etc. (yes, they all had legitimate military purposes. But that is kind of the point, Sharon has been treating this as a slo-mo military campaign.)
De-legitimize each new leader by (a) refusing to negotiate with him, and (b) timing assasination rocket attacks to disrupt any move towards rapprochement with Israel.
Announce a pullout from Gaza
Stall it indefinitely while stepping up the attacks.
I.e., he systematically penned them in and took away their leaders, money, pride, and hopes, then dangled a prize in front of them. Sooner or later, they were bound to turn on one another. The only surprising thing is that it has taken this long.
The whole thing is very typical of Sharon. Remember, what catapulted him to the PM spot was his trip to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which prompted riots (altho it almost certainly did not prompt the intifada). This was Sharon's way of proving the point that the Palestinians were not committed to peace. He likes to manuever the enemy into losing the moral high ground.
>>The whole thing is very typical of Sharon.
Indeed. Sharon is the most dangerous of adversaries: intelligent, experienced, ruthless, and very, very evil. I may despise him, but that doesn't mean that I don't respect him, or his capabilities.
Why is Sharon a "very, very evil" man? I keep hearing this from mainly crazies so I'm always like what are you talking about?
Sabra, Shatilla ...
Gary Farber:
Lunacy said far more eloquently what I was getting at. That they (greens, far-leftists) tend to be socialist is by the by.
-----------------------
Sabra, Shatilla ...
Interesting that the Phalangists who actually did the killing are basically unknown in the West. The Gemayels are similarly unknown.
Typical selective morality.
Interesting that the Israelis knew full well what the Phalangists were going to do, were in sight of the camps, etc.
People have won Pulitzers for reporting about this.
Interesting.
This is why puppets are so much fun. Against people who don't pay too much attention, it gets you plausible deniability.
Another entertaining example involved the torture camps being run by the Phalangists in S. Lebanon. Not all of the prisoners noticed the Israeli agents who came by periodically to check on how things were going.
Yes the Phalangists were scum. And their Israeli masters were scum too.
This is what really happened, written by a man who was there. I fully understand you disregarding this next comment, but a friend of mine who was also in Lebanon corroborates what he says.
Another entertaining example involved the torture camps being run by the Phalangists in S. Lebanon. Not all of the prisoners noticed the Israeli agents who came by periodically to check on how things were going.
The U.S. has used regional intelligence services to do dirty work for a long time now. Everyone does it, so you're going to have to call more countries than Israel scum.
>>Everyone does it, so you're going to have to call more countries than Israel scum.
Cheerfully: The Syrian, Egyptian, Saudi, Turkish, Iranian, Libyan, Pakistani, Uzbek, Sudanese, French, and Russian governments are all run by scum.
The other governments operating in the region are likely run by scum too. Scum rises to the top.
"It was the same mechanism that destroyed the courageous Israeli Government’s plan to save Lebanon and restore peace through a solid and strong Christian state."
Colt: Cobra is delusional. Christian state? Um, why was there a Lebanese Civil War going on, exactly?
T.J. Madison:
Huh, so Israel is scum for using proxies to torture terrorists, but only the proxies America uses are scum. Riiight.
praktike:
The Israelis were going to put the Gemayels in charge, which would mean a Christian state. Where is the delusion?
The delusion is that the Lebanese civil war was the product of a artificial governmental system out of step with changing demographics. The only reason relative peace has happened is because the system was changed via the Taif Agreement.
There was no way in hell the Christians were going to be able to maintain their lock on power, and Israel was foolish to think so. They read the situation quite wrong.
There was no way in hell the Christians were going to be able to maintain their lock on power
Israel's mistake was trusting Hobieka and Gemayel when they'd already started working for the Syrians.
If you mean the possibility of a minority ruling a majority, look at Jordan or Syria. There's ample precedent.
>>Huh, so Israel is scum for using proxies to torture terrorists, but only the proxies America uses are scum. Riiight.
What are you talking about? Soviet and Chinese proxies were scum too. Are the North Korean leaders scum? As Gene Thug puts it, "anyone in North Korea who enjoys being there likely deserves to be killed." There's no shortage of scum.
The Israeli government happens to be the gang of scum that's using my tax dollars the most right now. That's why I'm giving them a hard time. I give the Egyptians a hard time too: given what their state press does, the notion that the USG gives them $1 much less $2 billion really hacks me off.
T.J. Madison:
Your contention was that Israel was scum for using proxies to torture people. You've yet to condemn the United States for using proxies to torture people.
You'll be less than pleased to hear that this year the Egyptians are getting extra ($300 million, IIRC) to compensate for tourism lost due to the Iraq war.
The only reason relative peace has happened is because the system was changed via the Taif Agreement.
I shouldn't have let that slide. Lebanon is ruled by the Syrians, and every Lebanese politician of note is a Syrian stooge. Syria won the Lebanese civil war. If you want to call that peace, that's your business.
I think the extent to which Syrians "rule" Lebanon is overstated. Obviously, there is an affinity between Lebanese Shi'ites and Syria's ruling elite, and a military and intelligence presence. But I doubt Lebanon would have been able to rebuild as successfully as it has if the situation were as simple as you suggest. The Lebanese economy certainly isn't being centrally planned from Damascus. And I think the extent of Hariri's stoogeness is up for debate as well.
Hariri was certainly a stooge of Hafez Assad, though admittedly less so than Bashir. Which means up until 2000, Lebanon was ruled by a Syrian proxy. Have a look here for more on the state of the Lebanese economy, and Hariri's alleigances.
The Lebanese economy certainly isn't being centrally planned from Damascus.
No, but the Syrians are making a lot out of the improving Lebanese economy. According to Gary Gambill, the Syrians make $3 billion directly, plus the closed market for Syrian products, and the cash made by rich Syrians who've invested in Lebanon.
There are, what, 20,000 Syrian troops in Lebanon? Never mind Hezbollah and the rest.
Yes, I've read Gambill's stuff. It's good, but I'm not sure if I trust all it, given his agenda.
Educate me :-)