We can't reform U.S. policy in the Middle East without reforming Jewish identity--because Jews are simply too important in American society, that's why. And reforming Jewish identity means challenging 1, Jewish parochialism--Is it good for the Jews?--and 2, Jewish exceptionalism--"We have a special role, we care about justice and healing the world" (as a relative of mine put it the other day). Yes, that and denying the destruction of the dreams of Palestinians.
Parochialism and exceptionalism bedevil Jeffrey Goldberg's discussion with Joe Klein. With notable exception, and Joe Klein is now a fine counter-example, Jewish reporters don't interrogate their Zionism publicly (even as they interrogate the Christian right every step it takes in the public square) and don't really want gentiles to weigh in on Middle East policy. Here's a passage from The Israel Lobby (order the paperback now), which reflects the same parochialism that Goldberg expressed, and Klein went along with:
In August 2003...writer Ian Buruma wrote an article in the New York Times Magazine entitled “How to Talk About Israel.” He made the obvious point that it is sometimes difficult to talk “critically and dispassionately” about Israel in the United States, and pointed out that “even legitimate criticism of Israel, or of Zionism, is often quickly denounced as anti-Semitism by various watchdogs.” In response, Bret Stephens, then the editor of the Jerusalem Post and now a columnist and editorial board member at the Wall Street Journal, published a vitriolic open letter in the Post that began by asking Buruma: “Are you a Jew?” Two paragraphs later, Stephens declared “What matters to me is that you say, ‘I am a Jew’.” Why did this matter? Because in Stephens’ view, “One must be at least a Jew to tell the goyim how they may or may not talk about Israel.” The message of this remarkable letter, in short, was that non-Jews should only talk about this subject in ways that Jews deem acceptable. Sensitivity on this point may also explain why an editor at the New York Times asked historian Tony Judt to identify himself as Jewish in an op-ed he had written defending our original London Review of Books article.
What is a parochialist like Stephens doing at the Wall Street Journal? Go back to the beginning: Jews are important in American society.
There is significance to what Phil calls "exceptionalism". It is a jewel of Jewish identity, to acknowledge responsibility for the world, and of the collective commitment of that responsibility.
It is NOT something to be renounced, but something to more and more enthusiastically endorsed.
It is NOT a value that conotes elitism in the slightest, in fact the oppossite. To the extent that it is NOT adopted by Jews, instead regarding the association rather than the responsibility as primary (or only thing known), is the mistake.
Also, asking "Is it good for the Jews?" is also an EXCELLENT question, a question that should be asked by every Jew that comments on events that affect individual Jews, or Jews as a community.
Again, the inference is that by asking "is it good for Jews?" that that implies "fuck others", which is NOT the norm of Jewish deliberation.
Phil sometimes demonstrates a fear of offending Goyim, analagous to the invocation of fear of offending Jews that he condemns.
I sense an inner dialog with his parents nearly constantly, and with imaginations of his wife's parents.
It is right to dialog about family issues within the family.
It is insensitive or much worse, to address intra-family concerns in public. Phil willingly occassionally condemns his parents' worldview, as example.
Its a wrong. They are not here to clarify, to confirm or revise. They are not hear to illuminate how their experience plays in the world.
Phil Weiss wrote: 'reforming Jewish identity means challenging 1, Jewish parochialism–Is it good for the Jews?–and 2, Jewish exceptionalism–"We have a special role, we care about justice and healing the world" '
This starts going to Jewish religious tenets and indoctrination that informs Jewish character and communal atmosphere — ie Tikkun Olam (heal the world, repair the world) or the concept of “choseness.” Good for Phil, because one can’t address the problem of Jewish Zionism and the larger problem of Jewish contemptuous and usurious treatment of non-Jews without addressing Jewish religious tenets and delusions.
Because Jews existed as a tiny minority in a diaspora for millennia, Judaism evolved sophisticated and complex control mechanisms to keep Jews in the fold. This involved racial and social indoctrination, but it also needed a good P.R. cover to keep the more idealistic young from rejecting the Jews as just another tribe of parochial bigots, and to point non-Jews towards as a red-herring. Hence it came up with phony feel-good concepts like Tikkun Olam that ostensibly “proved” Jews were a more moral, enlightened and evolved people, (and were on a sacred mission) but it’s all illusion and spin, as demonstrated by the facts on the ground that anyone with even one eye open can plainly see by observing collective Jewish behavior and its manifestations.
That’s another highly evolved characteristic of organized Jewry: the ability to lie to itself and everyone else with a strait face. It’s also characteristic of functioning sociopaths.
Fascinated by this track. Extraordinary how"religion" has returned as basic fact of life after a few centuries of being of "no account." Jews must declare Jewishness in order to speak of Jewish issues, as the wsj guy claims? But how about Christians, of which I am one? No rights in re Jewish issues? Not bloody likely. We are joined at the hip, willy nilly. High time Christians let fly on "Jewish issues" altho we mostly won't out of ghastly, misplaced politesse and, of course, money fear. This is my first post. Thou shalt hear herald more (I daresay). tomwhite
Every American must always ask, "Is it good for the Jews?"
This means, the Jews all over the world. And always let the self-identified Jews decide. Not only who is a Jew, but what's in their best interest.
The analogy is: "Is it in the best interest of the child?"
It's a policy rule imbedded in USA current law.
It means, you never have to grow up.
It means, others will pay for your ego and life style.
It is emotional, fiscal, monetary, and intellectual slavery.
It is the Sermon On The Mount written only for Jews.
How many gentiles have died for it to date?
Gentiles don't matter.
That's the whole point.
USA, Awake!
Science fiction and literature in general show evidence of a similar Gramscian hegemony over discourse: Learning to Love Zionist Imperialism.
Love the Nazi slogan Keating, very subtle.
Did Stephens really use the derogatory term, goyim, (“One must be at least a Jew to tell the goyim how they may or may not talk about Israel.”) in his response? If so, why was he not fired immediately from the WSJ, given that, regardless of how many Jews work in finance, the majority of its readers are still "goyim"?
Are the goyim that beaten down that they don't even object to such slurs?
I wish I could find the original letter to see if he really did use that term. Somehow, I can't believe that he would be published, even in the JPost. (The letter Phil linked to is incomplete). Anyone know how to find a version of the complete original?
@ ED (a commenter above)
Didn't ED say it perfectly!
Absolutely as it is.
He's probably paid in pain for the insight.
And yes Phil raised the right issues.
The elders must be watching the errant! Thinking of tricks to keep everyone in the fold.
talk heard on various sitcoms and the local street:
"i am spanish. are you? no. i am jewish. i am italian. are you? no. i am jewish. i am dutch. are you? no. i am jewish. i am an american. are you? no. i am jewish."
heard on miami talk radio wiod:
"those dirty, filthy, murdering, lying arabs". the speaker was a little old jewish lady transplanted from ny. the host(jewish) told her to calm herself so to not trouble her old heart. the next caller, a young, jamaican woman tried to make a comment that maybe the palestinians have some amount of rights. the host cut her off and said that "antisemitism is alive and well."
wiod might've been larry "totally pointless" king's station when he was a radio talker.
All humans must be rational to determine what is in the best interest of the humane species. To be a totally jewish human Is obvious. It leaves something out.
Tell me again about your Jewish wife, and your supposed half Jewish kid. What makes him half a Jew, why did your wife marry you except to piss off her parents. How exactly are they Jewish Keating.
Rather than hear about Mrs. Keating, who is not a party to these discussions, we'd all be much more interested in reading why the exceedingly lame SOG doesn't make aliyah. Is it because he's too chicken to actually go serve in his beloved IDF?
What a interesting question. SOG, Pearlman, why don't you make aliyah?
There are some parallels here with a psychological diagnosis. One could say that he grandiosity of narcissism leads to the belief in their superior moral character, at the same time forgetting the very dirty underside of Israel's existance. ( And I hate to say it but the psychopathic attitude to gentiles) The splitting of conciousness into two discreet packages, " I am so good and nice" ,and " if you don't agree with me or support my aims I'll hurt you", is a narcissistic trait. And of course, don't forget the inability to tolerate criticism, another symptom of narcissistic wounding, that reactions to small slights turn into rage.
I am inclined to tolerate the half-assed-ness of Klein's analysis. We need to accept that he needs a fig leaf of sorts, to cushion the full weight of guilt of the Jewish community for the Iraq disaster. We need to encourage and support small steps. Of course the Jewish community at large supported the neocon agenda. Even if they didn't quite know that they were abetting the invasion of Iraq by being silent, they do know that they support Israel right or wrong. They knew that the neocons were Jewish. They knew the press is Jewish, the pundits are Jewish. They went along with the media reaction to Jimmy Carter. They went along with the press noncoverage of the Lebanon war. I believe Jews in general know there had been a Jewish takeover in the US. Yet Jews don't want to know what is really going on in Israel because they want the Palestinians to be evil. If they are evil they can be exterminated and Jews can achieve Eretz Israel.
This is harsh. But we shouldn't forget the best work on this is being done by Jews, Phil,Finkelstein, Judt, Atzmon. Just like it was Einstein that wrote a letter to the Times in 1948 about the massacres in Israel.
Murray Brewster, THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA – A deal, possibly worth $100 million, to lease of a flight of uninhabited aerial vehicles – or UAVs – from MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. and Israeli Air Industries Ltd. was expected to be approved this week by the federal cabinet [for use in Afghanistan]. …. Doesn't it say it all? And it's hard to imagine voting could change anything.
The jews are the light to the world. What do you see in this light?
I'm so sick of hearing about the jews, I actually heard one of their spoiled brats say " hell yeah, we own everything" You tell me, what do we owe them?