One of my closest friends in this life and the hereafter is Tony Schmitz, a writer I met in 1976 in Minnesota. At the time, he was my first German-Catholic.
From a very small town in the German-American zone, surely a hotbed of isolationism. It blew my mind that a German Catholic could be as evolved and intelligent, more, than most anyone I knew. And maybe it blew Tony’s mind to meet a Jew so up close and see he didn’t have horns. Gosh, I’ve never asked. We’ve both grown a lot since. Right now he’s in Bolivia working for a public health project (and designing a cool website to register people’s great regrets).
Do I have a point? Yes. Schmitz read David Samuels’s statement about American culture yesterday–
Americans believe, very deeply, in the value and necessity of abolishing the past and living in the future. Americans believe that each individual has the capacity for finding God’s grace within him or herself, and can only find it by being born again — independent of family history and ties. While you don’t have to be a Christian to accept historically peculiar American ideas about the
individual, the past and the future, it is hard to ignore the fact that these ideas are Christian in their history and, I would argue, in their essence.
and found it, well, not very Christian:
It struck
me as standard issue American Studies claptrap, and deeply wrong, if
the intent is what this guy seems to be saying — that everyone in
America except for Jews is living in the Now or the future, and has no
particular connection to the past. Our native brothers? What are they
doing at pow-wows? Why do the ancestors of slaves want reparations?
American Catholics (trust me on this) feel a connection to the martyred
saints, to the thousands of years of New Testament tradition, and to its basis in the Old Testament,
and to a global spiritual family. Which is to say nothing of all the
nuts running around doing family histories, which is itself a cottage
industry for the many historical societies scattered across the
country. Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but it seems to me this guy is
driving an argument that doesn’t have wheels.
My old friend’s comment reminds me that this blog comes out of my interactions with many other kinds of people than the kind I grew up with, out of how much I’ve learned from them and my own tradition about what it is to be human. Kumbayah meets luftmensch, that’s the spirit here… Anyway, I don’t think Jews can talk about the issues surrounding Jewish identity right now completely on our/their own. The next great Jewish Question is really about what it means to be an elite in western society: what are the implications for Jewish history, continuity, and of course for militant Zionism. Many other Americans will have helpful things to say…
"Americans believe that each individual has the capacity for finding God's grace within him or herself, and can only find it by being born again — independent of family history and ties … these ideas are Christian in their history and, I would argue, in their essence." — David Samuels
"Blessed are the airheads, for they shall be like gods in their own minds." Or something like that. Sounds like a self-esteem recipe so that the defectively educated can feel good about themselves, despite lacking any knowledge of history or logic.
As an apposite example, consider these incongruous excerpts from an article by David Carr in today's Slimes, pertaining to the sharp dropoff in Iraq War coverage since last September:
————
“Ironically, the success of the surge and a reduction in violence has led to a reduction in coverage,” said Mark Jurkowitz of the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
But the tactical success of the surge should not be misconstrued as making Iraq a safer place for American soldiers. Last year was the bloodiest in the five-year history of the conflict, with more than 900 dead, and last month, 52 perished, making it the bloodiest month of the year so far. So far in May, 18 have died.
“There is a cold and sad calculation that readers/viewers aren’t that interested in the war,” [Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times] wrote in an e-mail message, adding that The Times stays on the story as part of an implied contract with its readers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/26/business/media/26carr.html?ref=worldspecial
————
Do the born-again perceive any non sequitur in calling the surge a "success" — twice — when it coincided with the deadliest year ever? Do they chafe at the Slimes patting itself on the back for delivering this CIA-sponsored claptrap as part of "an implied contract with its readers"?
Sorry, Mr. Keller. Your contract, I believe, is not with me. It's with the government agencies who pay you handsomely to publish full-page ads for the Partnership for a Drug-Free America, advertorials calling the surge a "success," and to hold off on publishing other articles which might embarrass the powers that be, such as this one about telecoms spying which you delayed for a year, and then censored:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html
Unmentioned in David Carr's article is that organized religion has followed in the footsteps of the Media, when it comes to Iraq war coverage. Several religious leaders and denominations offered statements against the Iraq war in early 2003, just before and after it started. Now they have virtually gone silent, some retreating to the mealy-mouthed fallback position of "it's up to you to decide whether it's a just war or not."
Several weeks ago — I sh*t you not — I heard the 19th-century potboiler "Onward Christian Soldiers" sung in a religious service, without a trace of irony. There's born-again for you, huh? Jesus, I just about puked on the crimson-velour pew cushion.
Really, if the anachronistic pomposities of organized religion have nothing to say about this stinking war, or even more sharply-etched evils such as state-directed torture, then why do they exist? Only to conduct weddings and funerals with appropriate pomp and circumstance? (Some Japanese have admitted to me that this is the only purpose they see for religion; to marry and bury them in good style.) If that's the case, then let's just close down those houses of worship and turn 'em into shopping malls, or chicken coops, or charnel houses.
Then we can all rebirth ourselves and become our own wise, benevolent, personal gods. Behold, I'm decreeing myself a cold beer. "Let there be fermentation," declared Jim-god. And it was so. And Jim saw that it was good.
"Many other Americans will have helpful things to say…"
Now there's a sentence you'll look hard to find on any J-blog.
so many "religious" leaders sometimes mouth the name "jesus" but they follow the state, money, a false idol(israel),their egos.
maybe 9 christians in usa. one was crushed to death march 16, 2003: rachel corrie.
evil still persecutes, defames her memory.
I keep saying this old saw over and over again: The test of virtue is power. Nietzsche called Christianity a slave religion, noting where and with whom it took root. Then, as we all know, he declared God is dead, ushering in the 20th Century while finally going insane. We also came into the 20th Century with Doiestoievsky's Ivan and the Grand Inquisitor–all the way to Jeffrey Dahmer. How many children one day found out they were
the parent they once hated?
President Truman once wrote to Mrs. Roosevelt ,whom he had made a delegate to the United Nations, " The action of some of our United States Zionists will eventually prejudice everyone against what they are trying to get done. I fear very much that the Jews are like all underdogs. When they get on top they are just as intolerant and as cruel as the people were to them when they were underneath. I regret this situation very much because my sympathy has always been on their side."
Truman also said, " I am not a New Yorker. All these people are pleading a special interest. I am an American."
And: " Jesus Christ couldn't please them when he was on earth, so how could anyone expect that I would have any luck."
Hello, Jim, I haven't finished reading, but I am pleased to still see you around.
"slime" must be of course you, very meditative tone today. ;) We missed you, maybe I even missed your presence???? Hope you are well.
Haygood is back! Yee-ha!
“Ironically, the success of the surge and a reduction in violence has led to a reduction in coverage,” said Mark Jurkowitz of the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
Man, now that right there is a GRAF!!!
George Orwell, eat your heart out!
Re: " I just about puked on the crimson-velour pew cushion."
Yep. And so I went to a local synogue. I grabbed a head dish plate, so I wouldn't be noticed.
I puked again.
I need some more vodka.
difficult, what is more important the mother or the priest. … In my case it was the mother. She told me I had *not* to confess that my best girl friend was a Protestant. The prayerbook listed as confess worthy: Did I have contacts with people of other faith? No joke. At nine I was furious, they couldn't demand that I confess that my best girl friend was a Protestant1 No, that was none of their business, my mother said, and told me carefully parts of a not so long passed German story. That somehow contained a higher rule to follow. that's when my alienation from the institution church started.
Admittedly I was horrified at my first Holy Communion and when the priest put the housel on my tongue. I will never forget the strange feelings of the child ghastly aware, it was meant to eat the body of Christ. What to do with the teeth, you couldn't chew it? And wasn't this cannibalism?
The story of Christ, the quintessential brother, the rebel sinks deeper, it feels, but it has not much to do with the institution Church and its – sorry, empty – rituals.
But concerning burials, one of my favorite profs, the Shakespearian then, here in Cologne, once made me think. He said that burial rituals contain century old wisdom of mankind in how to deal with dead. He told me he would like to be buried at Melaten.
http://www.melatenfriedhof.de/html/meta/index.html
In the Middle Ages it was Cologne's place for executions, and it will be were I will would be buried if I don't move. It's not too far.
But strictly I would prefer to be turned into ashes and simply spread somewhere. There is something strange happening to corpses here in Germany. There are places were the corpses decay very, very slowly or don't decay at all, but turn into something called: Wachsleichen, wax corpses.
Yesterday I wrote that this guy Samuels is just flat wrong. But no one has picked up on the the other idea – what do you think about being defined by these Jewish intellectuals who are ignorant as hell of American culture and history? I still think he is grasping at straws in order to justify is own sense of separteness, THAT
HE WANTS
TO NURTURE. That's the un-American part. This Jewish elite is dangerous. They don't want to see themselves as a part of America and as he admitted quite franky, pray for the IDF and another country's head of state. It's a hostile elite . It could not be clearer that the welfare of America is inferior to the welfare of Israel, and our two countries' agendas are NOT IDENTICAL.
I was also struck by the disgust at a pretty innocent American custom that is entirely pagan,i.e christmas trees. Apparently this disgust is taught and passed down from Jew to Jew. In India I noticed, Hindus and Muslims took part in each others holidays, even praying at each other's holy sites. One festival was about throwing paint at people in the street and everyone joined in.
Yesterday I wrote that this guy Samuels is just flat wrong. But no one has picked up on the the other idea – what do you think about being defined by these Jewish intellectuals who are ignorant as hell of American culture and history? I still think he is grasping at straws in order to justify is own sense of separteness, THAT
HE WANTS
TO NURTURE. That's the un-American part. This Jewish elite is dangerous. They don't want to see themselves as a part of America and as he admitted quite franky, pray for the IDF and another country's head of state. It's a hostile elite . It could not be clearer that the welfare of America is inferior to the welfare of Israel, and our two countries' agendas are NOT IDENTICAL.
I was also struck by the disgust at a pretty innocent American custom that is entirely pagan,i.e christmas trees. Apparently this disgust is taught and passed down from Jew to Jew. In India I noticed, Hindus and Muslims took part in each others holidays, even praying at each other's holy sites. One festival was about throwing paint at people in the street and everyone joined in.
"Mysticism keeps men sane. As long as you have mystery you have health; when you destroy mystery you create morbidity. The ORDINARY MAN has always been sane because the ordinary man has always been a mystic. He has permitted the twilight. He has always had one foot in earth and the other in fairyland. He has always left himself free to doubt his gods; but (unlike the agnostic of to-day) free also to believe in them. He has always cared more for truth than for consistency. If he saw two truths that seemed to contradict each other, he would take the two truths and the contradiction along with them. HIS SPIRITUAL SIGHT IS STEREOSCOPIC, like his physical sight: he sees two different pictures at once and yet sees all the better for that. Thus he has always believed that there was such a thing as fate, but such a thing as free will also. Thus he believed that children were indeed the kingdom of heaven, but nevertheless ought to be obedient to the kingdom of earth. He admired youth because it was young and age because it was not. It is exactly this balance of apparent contradictions that has been the whole buoyancy of the healthy man. The whole secret of mysticism is this: that man can understand everything by the help of what he does not understand."
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/130
link to librivox.org
I have on more than one occasion asked my Australian students what they think Max Weber meant with that anecdote about American christianity which has the patient of a dentist saying before he submits to the drill: 'Doctor I want you to know that I am a baptist'. Not one of them ever guessed that it had something to do with the man claiming that he was good for the bill.
Correct me when I am wrong but it has always seemed to me that in the US church mebership is mainly about sharing in social respectability. Is it a coincidence that the intellectually most substantial theologians come from comparatively dechristianized Europe or are US-German migrants or the children of those (eg. Tillich, Niebuhr)?
As far as Australia is concerned: it was settled post-Enlightenment and many of its first inhabitants met 'religion' mainly in the form of the 'flogging parson' (of which Samuel Marsden was the prototype). When the first universities were formed theology was deliberately kept out of them.
"Correct me when I am wrong but it has always seemed to me that in the US church mebership is mainly about sharing in social respectability. Is it a coincidence that the intellectually most substantial theologians come from comparatively dechristianized Europe or are US-German migrants or the children of those (eg. Tillich, Niebuhr)?"
I don't know if I agree that U.S. church membership is mainly about respectability. Throughout most of the history of the nation, Protestants have taken their faith very seriously.
As far as serious theologians go, you may have something of a point. There was no real need for serious theologians on the frontiers of the colonies, or the later U.S., and traditional theological training was often purposely limited. The colonists rebelled against more than taxation. I think in some ways that many American Protestants never stopped reforming.
"Truman also said, " I am not a New Yorker. All these people are pleading a special interest. I am an American.""
Charles, do you know much about Truman's business partner Eddie Jacobson? He had an interesting role to play in the decision to recognize Israel.
George Marshall was against recognizing and supporting Israel, and had deep suspicions about the Zionists. Ironically, I saw the founder of Fedex on Charlie Rose comparing John McCain to George Marshall this afternoon. Between that and his views on immigration and China, he needs to shut his piehole and stick to sending packages from one place to another.
"Which is to say nothing of all the nuts running around doing family histories, which is itself a cottage industry for the many historical societies scattered across the country."
What's nutty about a family history? Just last weekend, I found an old family graveyard with legible toombstones dating back to the 1700s, and was told by a local about slave cemeteries in the surrounding woods that are at least as old. Should these things be ignored and forgotten?
Todd: "What's nutty about a family history?"
I had the same reaction to that remark. I think family histories are pretty darn useful. Henry David Thoreau said everyone owes himself an honest accounting of his own life. I wish more in my family had. I went to see my great aunt 30 years ago to ask about our family. She couldn't bring herself to speak frankly though. I was asking about people who had been dead for 50 years and she still gilding the lily. Maddening.
Zionist Morality, from axis of logic
By Robert Thompson
May 26, 2008, 12:27
A dear Swiss friend sent to me, and to many others, an article written by Yehezkel Dror and published on Forward.com. Dror is described as being "the founding president of the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute" and "professor emeritus of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem". This article is entitled "When Survival of the Jewish People Is at Stake, There's No Place for Morals", and it argues that to ensure the "survival of the Jewish people" any and every evil action is fully justified.
While I was well aware of similar views having been expressed by the Polish terrorist David Gruen (who called himself Ben Gurion), I have never before read anything so crudely and openly racist from a Zionist source. Mr Dror classifies all non-Jews as being of lesser value than "Jews", without clearly defining this word. It is not clear, for example, how he would classify the said David Gruen, who did not practise Judaism, since Mr Dror also attacks assimilation by "Jews" as happens in many countries around the world.
Curiously, Mr Dror insists, without explaining why, that it is necessary to have a "Jewish state" to ensure the survival of those whom he classifies as "Jews". This leads me to presume that he believes in a "Jewish race", as did Wilhelm Marr, Theodor Herzl, Adolf Hitler, and the Zionists. When I personally use the word "Jewish", I think of followers of Judaism, and fully understand that they are not all of one race, but that they share highly honourable beliefs and traditions received from men and women who have valued and passed them on over centuries. Similarly, I think of Christians as being followers of Christian beliefs and traditions, and I do not see why they should need to live in a supposedly "Christian" state to live as Christians. In any case, most of those who think of themselves as Jews live in many countries spread around the world and have not all gone to live in Palestine.
This brings us to the nonsensical question of whether a "Jewish atheist" (an oxymoron if ever there was one) is different from a "Christian atheist" or a "Muslim atheist", since by definition no genuine atheist can belong to any religious group. If one reads the so-called "Laws" of the Aliyah, enacted by the Zionists in Palestine, it is clear that for the founding fathers of the Zionist "state" a Jew is a member of a privileged racial group; religion has little to do with the said "Laws", except where they exclude anyone who has specifically joined another religion than Judaism.
Mr Dror's amorality is extreme, and he does not hesitate to justify any action to protect the racial "purity" of his chosen people, who are mostly not biologically descended from Abraham but from Caucasian tribes which adopted Judaism (generally known as Ashkenazim) to distinguish themselves from Christian and Muslim neighbours, later moving into eastern Europe. It would be interesting to ascertain Mr Dror's definition of "Jew" and "Jewish". But this is less horrifying than his clear statements that, in order for the "Jewish People" to survive, they are entitled to do anything, and need to have a "Jewish state". He particularly states that this is more important than "liberal and humanitarian values, support for human rights and democratization".
One point where I seem to agree with Mr Dror is that the Nazi killing of those whom they qualified as "Jews" should be condemned absolutely. But I doubt whether, as he suggests, there occurred a "killing only a few decades ago of a third of the Jewish people". On the other hand, the numbers killed are not as important as the sheer evil of the Nazi murders, and Mr Dror should bear this in mind. I also support the "never again" reaction to the Nazi horrors, since they can only be justified by the kind of evil argument put forward by Mr Dror and other believers in racial superiority.
His arguments put him, quite simply, on a par with Hitler and Stalin, who shared his lack of concern about morality. I recommend that everyone who wishes to understand Zionism should read this article dated 15 May 2008. The article does at least serve the useful purpose of revealing the true horror of Zionist beliefs, and explains why such people persecute the innocent indigenous people of Palestine.