Jack Ross, a frequent guest blogger on this site, is a 23-year-old Jew living in Brooklyn who shares my view that Jews need to get past religious nationalism. He is preparing a biography of the late anti-Zionist rabbi Elmer Berger and sent me the following note this a.m., on my post that neoconservatism has deeply infiltrated Jewish life:
I agree, it will be much more difficult than Levy at Huffington Post thinks to dislodge the cancer of neo-conservatism from American Jewish
life. But what is more likely in my view than a long twilight struggle
is that events, both at home and abroad, will force a disastrous
upheaval for the Jews.
I must also take issue with your characterization of the “dovish” American Jewish community. Not for nothing did Phil Ochs [Weiss's distant cousin] write the lines “I’ve memorized Lerner and Golden/I feel like I’m
almost a Jew/But when it comes to times like Korea/There’s no one more
red, white, and blue” – so love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal.”
It was nothing less than a nationalist fervor that swept over the Jews of America with World War II, the Holocaust, and the founding of the State of Israel. At least two of the leaders of the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism, Lessing Rosenwald [of Sears, Roebuck] and Irving Reichert, had been prominent America Firsters. The latter’s
ignominious removal from his pulpit probably had as much as anything to
do with his daring to say in addressing a CCAR meeting in 1946 [the Central Conference of American Rabbis, body of the Reform movement] that we
should remember the parable of God upbraiding the Israelites for rejoicing at the drowning of the Egyptians in forming postwar policy toward Germany.
As for more recent history, yes there were Jewish liberal hypocrites against Vietnam and even Iraq,
but neo-conservatism was easily the more important phenomenon in Jewish
life coming out of Vietnam, and in the case of Iraq, well, trying to do
something about that is what this blog and both our endeavors are all
about.
I challenged Jack on a few points. Being against the Vietnam war was central to my political formation, more than Zionism or Jewish religion. Tons of Jews led that movement.
Hypocrisy may not have been the best or most exact word, but I’m referring to double standards on foreign policy not relating to Israel
Then I asked him about the America Firsters. Rosenwald and Berger weren’t pro-Nazi.
“Please! The significance being that they were a more genuine
progressive conscience, that a larger liberal outlook (old right
according to some, Bill Kauffman calls it “retroprogressive”) animated their opposition to Zionism
and its impact on American Jewish life. This, in opposition to the
raging nationalist fervor which stemmed in part from the craven New Deal liberalism of Stephen Wise et al.”
Not sure there. I’m a New Deal liberal. Then I asked Ross about his apocalyptic opening statment:
“I’m not talking about pogroms or anything like that (but if we attack Iran,
all bets are off). Wasn’t it your father who you say has always said
when the Jews lose their status in America it will be not with a bang
but with a whimper? [Yes] Starting with that premise, what I meant was a
very sudden turmoil overtaking the politics of the community, similar
too, and very possibly greater than, that which followed the great
disappointment of Shabtai Tzvi.”
Completely agree there. The Shabtai Tzvi was a messianic movement in Jewish life in the 1600s led by a false and mystical prophet who ended up converting to Islam. Quite a shock to the Jewish system.
"Jews need to get past religious nationalism".
And, what exactly do you mean by that phrase?
Jewish religion is about community. It is NOT about individual prayer-life, ethics, etc. Those are means to the end and components of a healthy community.
There is no Jewish religion without that. As there is no Islamic religion without community.
Yes, the characterization "dovish" and "liberal" is some sort of camoflage. When it comes to Israel where do those Jewish values go? Everything I thought about Jews before I woke up is now changed 180 degrees.
And what about the propaganda that is sent out to every Jew? I haven't seen a lot of it but the stuff I have seen is toxic. The rabbis, the community organizers, yes, deeply embedded this infection.
This blog has been heating up. Phil, the posters, have been brilliant. The feeling I have is of the scorching heat of people who want our country back. And the ones who are zionist are angry that that could be so. The koolaid isn't working. If we don't want to save Israel then it automatically means we are anti-semitic. I don't think it's an act. They really believe that.
“Nationalist fervor” of American Jews? What nation? The nation-within-a-nation of Zion. US Jewish Zionists may be physically located in America, but they see themselves as citizens of Zion first, and behave accordingly.
But how could their liberalism possibly be consistent with nationalism? What is modern left-liberalism but identity politics? We are all not Americans, but rather a patchwork of tribes, and permanent members of this tribe or that. The Jews set the precedent, and other tribal entities are following their lead. Black nationalists, Muslims, La Raza, feminists, homosexuals, and I’m am seeing growing evidence of an emergent white-nationalist movement. All of them see themselves, or at least portray themselves, as victims, too.
Who pioneered this corrosive, country-destroying paradigm? Who else.
Anti-War: 1960s versus 2000s proposes that opposition to the Vietnam War in the 1960s and support for aggression against Iraq in the 2000s both can relate to an overriding Zionist consciousness that makes political choices on the basis of benefit to Israel.
Peter,
Don't get confused by what you see here.
There is no uprising.
The population that you are basing that on, talk to themselves.
I think Jack Ross is right to argue that the much vaunted liberalism of the American Jewish community is overplayed. This was made perfectly clear by their (not AIPAC's, not ADL's, but the grassroots community's) behavior during Israel's 2006 war on Lebanon. It seemed they couldn't get enough of the blood.
(Of course another excellent data point would be our own "liberal Zionist": Richard Witty.)
Witty: "Don't get confused by what you see here. There is no uprising."
Thinking it, imagining it, is the first step to making it real, Witty. Why, you should know that. Isn't that how you Judeofascists were able to claw out your noxious place in the Levant, and in America?
But at this point, anti-Judeofascism is more than imagination, it is reality. The internet is aflame with just recrimination, and the nation will one day be as well.
But you self-dazzled Judeofacists think if it doesn't happen within the parameters of your sick and twisted mainstream media, or in the halls of a corrupt and bought-off Washington, it doesn't exist. I'm sure the smug British Empire believed it had control of the American colonies as well, just as the Israelis thought they had control of the Gazans.
Pride goeth before a fall.
Please somebody read Chomsky's chapter on the left and Israel from the 1973 book Peace in the Middle East?, which is now included in Middle East Illusions. There was little opposition from any Jewish quarter following the 1967, except for Chomsky and I.F. Stone. Liberals and the Old Left were more concerned with countering the New Left's alleged ascendancy as opponents of the Vietnam War. Israel became part of an internecine Jewish struggle that wasn't really about Israel, mostly stereotyping the new left as spoiled naive brats regarding communism, national liberation, etc. It was about the threat of old Jews to new Jews in this country, not really about Israel.
So when did Israel become genuinely important to Jews? Perhaps not until after 1973, when oil geopolitics became more real. When the Israel hobby horse could be ridden by liberals, cons, neocons without implications of leftism, socialism, etc. When the issue of Israel became part of a more general debate about how many Arabs we should kill to get our oil. But especially after the Iranian revolution of 1979, which assured that Camp David I would have no effect on Palestine.
"So when did Israel become genuinely important to Jews?"
I think it is part of a long-term process. Exactly in proportion as Judaism has shrunk in importance to Jews, Israel and the holocaust has emerged as the center of Jewish identity.
(Your Jewish friends spend a lot of time worrying about American access to oil sources? Have they considered not making enemies of the people who are selling it?)
"There is no uprising.
The population that you are basing that on, talk to themselves."
Sounds like it is leaking out. Joe Klein and Jeffery Goldberg certainly don't belong to my club.
And, they're not saying the same things that you are.
They are saying that reform is the message of the day, not uprising.
Of course they're not saying the same thing. As admitted Jewish Zionists, they are part of the problem. They are attempting to triangulate by setting up controlled burns, as is Levy. It's not working. The word is out, and the fire is quickly burning out of control. People are sick to death of you politically correct fascists and your humanitarian posing, all concocted to conceal your innate malice, greed and corruption.
…and I include the entirety of the Washington Establishment in the category of politically correct fascists posing as humanitarians. The goy Establishment learned it from the experts, and have joined them in elitist usury, treachery and parasitism.
The problem is a little deeper than just Jews setting their community straight on the issues of Zionism and neoconservatism. Maybe soul-searching will set the rest of the nation on the right path, but the damage done by Zionism and neoconservatism is an issue of justice that reaches beyond the Jewish community.
Serious question Todd. Are there any other countries that you deem worthy of extinction or is it just Israel?
"the damage done by Zionism and neoconservatism is an issue of justice that reaches beyond the Jewish community."
Who was it who said, "We're all Jews now"? There's definitely something to it, at least in the sense that the paranoid creed of "They all want to kill us, so let's kill them first" is now all around us.
Maybe it started with all those letters AIPAC put in front of our congressmen, praising Israeli assassinations, commending Israeli torture, approving collective punishment; every atrocity would be immediately followed by a letter from the U.S. Congress claiming to be all for it. After so many years of that, on what grounds were our politicians ever going to stand up against our own programs of torture and assassination?
" But what is more likely in my view than a long twilight struggle is that events, both at home and abroad, will force a disastrous upheaval for the Jews."
without a doubt, the pendulum is a fickled friend and momentum swings take place without much notice unless one is monitoring events and even then surprises happen.
"Serious question Todd. Are there any other countries that you deem worthy of extinction or is it just Israel?"
Nah, Sword, I think Tonga would be a good candidate for extinction. Sometimes I get angry at Andorra, but I'm not sure that I deem it worthy of extinction. I'll talk to myself about the issue, and I'll let you know what I decide.
Samuel Burke, when discussing "extinction", can you think of a better candidate than Israel?
I personally would not mind if their "secret" nuke arsenal was accidentally triggered during another of their infamous false flag ops turning the filthy place into an instant car park for the rest of the world to use when negotiating new oil contracts with the REAL semites who are the REAL indigenes of Palestine and Judea.
The entire planet would heave a huge sigh of relief!
Richard, your denial is no more based on fact than the opposite assertion.
I am a textbook example of someone who should be sympathetic to the Jews based on upbringing, education, socialization. Yet as a group I have come to the conclusion they are the most dangerous threat to every nation in the world.
How did this happen? A good example can be found in David Brooks' column today. He is so smart yet so unaware. He bemoans the lack of internationalist hegemony over "global problems" like Darfur, Zimbabwe, failure of trade talks, global warming, you name it.
He seems to think that a return to the good old days, when Dean Acheson and Truman – and Harry Dexter White and Morgenthau – ruled the roost would solve all of our problems.
The point is that, in his own words, "the Atlantic alliance" was an agreement between Europe and European America, more or less, and was based on their needs. The template, as Phil said about Darfur and the "holocaust" does not apply. Especially not to China, Brazil and India. But the cosmopolitans will still try to convince us that it does.
The Jews are moving further and further out into their own orbit, while most Americans are feeling deeply concerned. Sooner or later the levee will give. And the Jews will have another excuse to strengthen their innocent victimhood myth.
By the way SOG, I nobody wants to see a lot of people die. Your attitude is in the vein of "the Arabs have 20-something Islamic countries, why can't we have one?" We do not give life support to those countries, to Israel we do. Get off our backs.
'But what is more likely in my view than a long twilight struggle is that events, both at home and abroad, will force a disastrous upheaval for the Jews.'
I agree.
'There is no uprising. The population that you are basing that on, talk to themselves.'
Keep those fingers in your lugholes Rich. That way you won't hear the posse coming, and can pretend til the end.
I have to say Ed is right in this statement:
"They are attempting to triangulate by setting up controlled burns, as is Levy. It's not working."
I have noticed that effort for some time now, more so lately.
It comes from liberal Jews mostly who are afraid that the public will indeed regard all Jews as they do the zio-neo Jews and will become hostile to Jews at large.
Its time for my monkey story, a true story btw.
When I was young my father did business with a man who had a pet monkey. He had rescued him from some animal show or circus because he was being abused. This man loved that monkey and treated him like a favored child. He took him everwhere he went, into resturants, stores, business offices. People didn't mind and made allowances where they wouldn't have for other animals or pets because they were entranced by the story of the cute monkey and how he was saved from a cruel situtation. At home the monkey had his own room and ate at the table with the man and his wife and anything the monkey pointed to and chattered for he got.
Then one day my father remarked to me that he thought the monkey was becoming dangerous. The man had brought him to my father's office and the monkey was wild, jumping on the desk and on the office staff and generally out of hand and not paying attention to the man's efforts to make him behave.
Sometime after that we learned that the man and his wife were both taken to the hospital because the monkey had attacked them. Both bitten and cut badly and the man almost lost an eye.
It seems that the monkey had been taught and allowed to fetch things for himself and the man, like cokes out of the fridge. So one day the man told the monkey to go get them a coke from the kitchen. The monkey went and got the cokes, but then he didn't want to give over one of the cokes to the man, he wanted to keep both of them. The man tried to take one from him and the monkey attacked him with the coke bottle and then attacked his wife when she came to help her husband.
I don't remember hearing what happened to the monkey, whether he was put down or returned to some animal shelter but they didn't keep him after that.
That mans'experience with the monkey he rescued and was so fond of reminds me of Israel and the Jews and the US.
From the abuse of the holocaust to being indulged, excused and favored, no where more so than in America. And because no limits were set or behavior demands made that others would be reasonably asked to follow, they are now like the formerly abused, then pampered and loved to death monkey now out of control.
And no I am not calling Jews monkeys I am just saying this true story illustrates the same pitfall and unintended consquences Jews and Israel have fallen into.
Another comment on Ed's comment of:
""They are attempting to triangulate by setting up controlled burns, as is Levy. It's not working."
The zionist neos tried the same control burn after it was apparent Iraq was FUBAR. Double dozens of op eds and articles were churned out by them blaming Bush "solely" for the idea of and invasion of Iraq.
I have to say one thing though, none of these guys, neither the zio neos or the good guy jews are too smart.
Here is what the good guys are saying…" "it's the bad zio-jews, not the good jews."
BUT…then they say …BUT.."we jews, because we are jews, have a right to lobby and to use the US and it's non jewish citizens for the benefit of our other and true homeland which is the foreign country of Israel."
They just don't GET IT.
Americans can understand freaks and criminals like Bush,Cheney&Co. and the neos, gentile or jewish and chalk it up and move on. We appreciate those who point out these criminals and their motivations so we say thank you for speaking truth.
But then the good guy jews go and ruin themselves and everything they just said by expressing the exact same loyalty to Israel and desire for the US government to put Israel ahead of the US which is exactly what the zios operate on. The only difference being the good jews want it done a bit less violently.
Will they ever get it? Do they not realize the public has moved beyond a few nutcase zios to the real issue of a larger community of Jews with political power in our government whose first duty and loyalty is not to the country they are politically active in and living in.
I don't know how many Jews think they are entitled to use the US for Israel. Maybe a small fraction, maybe half their population. If even the liberal jews and majority of jewish writers are an indication it's a considerable number. But then again maybe they aren't speaking for all the jews either, who knows. Among the jews I know none of them is particulary fond of Israel so the whole jewish movement brought to light has been a revelation for me.
But when we have candidates for President of the United States pandering to jews, no matter what the numbers, on the benefits of what "THEY ARE GOING TO DO FOR A FOREIGN COUNTRY,Israel" and how they are going to use their elected US office to do it with US citizens blood and treasure….well Houston we have a problem.
I don't know the solution but the anti semitism I keep saying isn't as rampant as as claimed will be back in spades if this isn't changed. And anyone who thinks the average American isn't looking at the jewish community factor in our current chaos hasn't been listening to the call-ins on C-span by people form Lizard Lick to LA every time Israel is part of the subject.
As Glen Greenwald said, the jewish-israel-palestine-US issue and poll results showing 71% of Americans want the US policy on Israel changed illustrates like no other issue except Iraq a congress that is totally ignoring the majority will of the nation.
Phil should get together with Greenwald on his project to target and take out some of the most guilty on this and other issues like FISA and Iran.
I don't konw what kind of upheaval or turmoil is in store for the Jewish community, but keeping a lower profile could help them.
Every day when driving to and from work, the Jewish interest stories ranging from holocaust reminders to pieces favorable to Israel, or cutesy bits on Jewish individuals or life are on local or national Public Radio.
This morning I turned on the local television news, and alan Dershowitz and some lefty Rabbi from L.A. whose purpose, according to his website, is to defend against the Christian right, were sound bite debating Jimmy Carter's use of the term Apartheid in regards to Israel.
Neither man said anything of importance.
Dershowitz amazingly attacked the finances of the Carter Center, and called Jimmy Carter "bought and sold" by Arabs. Of course the opposition didn't question Zionist finances, or Dershowitz's integrity-at least that sound bite wasn't chosen.
The thing that got me about this is that it appeared on a local news show in Atlanta-the home of the Carter Center. I understand that Jimmy Carter isn't going to take to the local airwaves to defend himself against Alan Dershowitz, but why does it always have to be two Jews of opposing extremes tightly managing the Israel debate-if there is debate at all? And that's leaving out the obvious question of why Israel should even be an issue to Americans at all.
If Jews are as powerful as Phil makes them out to be, wouldn't it make far more sense to be silent and unseen tyrants given their extremely small numbers? Does it really make sense to pepper our news and entertainment with Yiddish and Jewish customs, and to personalize our politics, culture and institutions to suit their own needs and tastes? It's hard to deny that those things are going on, and it's hard to seen the intelligence in doing so.
The Jew as macho-man, with an American-paid sling-shot, and against a puny foe: link to nybooks.com
RE:" And, they're not saying the same things that you are.
They are saying that reform is the message of the day, not uprising." –Richard Witty
So, Richard, you agree with Phil?
Klein has officially announced the blood truth of the neocon "conspiracy." He did it in the name of truth, justice, and the American way–as in a Superman comic book.
"Jewish religion is about community. It is NOT about individual prayer-life, ethics, etc. Those are means to the end and components of a healthy community."–Witty
Cf: What George Carlin said about groups.
What's the point of a community that's not about individual ethics?
Why, survival of course.
Ask Hitler.