Jeff Blankfort points out that my pickup on "Obama's Iran braintrust" last night was wrong. Oh my. Shouldn't blog late at night when I should be having connubial bliss. Then he joins in the conversation with Jack Ross on whether Zionism and Judaism can be disentangled.
A closer reading of the NY Times story does not indicate that Obama has
any relation to this group that met on Iran and that it is an ad hoc
group that hopes to influence him. The sad truth is that if he decided,
at least publicly, to follow their advice,it is quite likely that
Israel would launch an attack on Iran before the inauguration. Israel
is afraid that whoever succeeds Ahmadinejad, who has become
increasingly unpopular, will present a more palatable image to the
West, and as Trina Parsi has written, Israel is very concerned about
anything resembling an American reprochement with Tehran.
Re Jack Ross, I tend to agree with you. It is very difficult to draw a line between Judaism and Zionism as a reading of Deuteronomy and Numbers should make evident. But there is this Jewish cultural existence which tends to be secular and can reject both Judaism as a religion and Zionism as an ideology while remaining Jewish. The notion of being "chosen" exists more subtly in the non-religious Jewish secular world as much as it does the religious.
Re Jack Ross, I tend to agree with you. It is very difficult to draw a line between Judaism and Zionism as a reading of Deuteronomy and Numbers should make evident. But there is this Jewish cultural existence which tends to be secular and can reject both Judaism as a religion and Zionism as an ideology while remaining Jewish. The notion of being "chosen" exists more subtly in the non-religious Jewish secular world as much as it does the religious.
RE being chosen.
Repairing the world, building a better world. Heaven on earth. With the world as your patient, consider the
Hippocratic Oath: "First, do no wrong."
Or is it better to break a few eggs for the omelet?
Ends and means–how often have the means used to what is believed to be the good end resulted in a bad end?
Time does tell.
Dostoievsky shows this in action in much of his literature. I'd bet not
one American president or government leader has ever read any of
FD's great books or stories.
Phil,
Your post was oblique.
so what is "chosenness" in the the secular jewish world? if you strip out the religious sense of obligation to god's laws, then what do you have? this is a question. i am not being rhetorical.
so what is "chosenness" in the the secular jewish world?
To give a glib answer to a hard question: I think it merges with the notion of separatness/apartness/in-but-not-of-ness/keeping-my-bags-packed-ness, that is a universal characteristic of all Jewish identity, both secular and religious.
Perhaps that would have been easier to understand if I had said that choseness without the religious sense of obligation "shrinks" to the notion of separateness.
"so what is "chosenness" in the secular jewish world? if you strip out the religious sense of obligation to god's laws, then what do you have?"
Elitist nihilism, ie contemporary left-liberalism and neoliberalism, but with less emphasis on Zionism.
You don't have it, if you strip out the substantive obligation to self, family, community, nature, God.
It is a human urge, a better choice than anger.
So what's unique about it?
I thought Phil's post was clear as a bell in the context of his referenced earlier post, as well as some other recent posts by Phil.
Ross: “It is hard to think of a greater asset in Zionism's ideological arsenal than the concept of the "secular Jew", i.e., that you are still a Jew even if you reject the Jewish religion.”
For recruiting purposes. Zionists don’t want diaspora Jews to think they have to be religious in order to betray their native countries for Zionism.
Blankfort: “there is this Jewish cultural existence which tends to be secular and can reject both Judaism as a religion and Zionism as an ideology while remaining Jewish. The notion of being "chosen" exists more subtly in the non-religious Jewish secular world as much as it does the religious.”
Ross: “The idea that there is some meaning to being a "secular Jew" if you reject Jewish nationalism (Zionism) is little more than a pitiful old left conceit.”
If a Jew rejects both religious Judaism and Jewish nationalism, is one still a Jew by merit of being “culturally chosen“? In my mind, this mix indeed produces the Jewish Bolshevik type, or, more contemporarily, truly loathsome, full of themselves Left-liberal jerks like Bill Maher.
What’s wrong with being an “ethnic Jew” who rejects religious Judaism, Zionism and “choseness”? Particularly given that contemporary Judaism has turned its back on Old Testament cosmic justice and has instead embraced Talmudic supremacism.
Recall Reagan: “I never left the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me.” Ethnic Jews might just be in a holding pattern until organized Jewry and conceited secular Jews with delusions choseness regain their sanity.
Bill Maher sure is exactly as Ed describes. I watch his shows on HBO.
I keep waiting for him to be actually objective across the board–it's never there. I guess it's sort of like how Obama toss his white caretakers over the rail, so Maher tossed off his Irish half.
What is more disappointing than an acute killer of sacred cows having his own sacred cows?
Woody Allen fucking his legal daughter?