My wife and I went to a party last night. Cocktails–a foreign concept to me, growing up. It was called for 6 and as we drove we listened to All Things Considered. Robert Siegel was discussing political developments with David Brooks and, filling in for E.J. Dionne, Harold Meyerson of the American Prospect and Washington Post. As I listened, I thought, Boy these guys are smart. How do they know so much about so many different areas?
We came to a red light and the segmented ended. I was stuck in thought. My wife said, "What are you thinking?"
"Well I feel guilty about this, but you asked, and this is what I was thinking. They just had their political roundtable and I just thought, Why are there three Jews on there? A very important task, explaining events, and there's no diversity. Then I reflected that when I had the opportunity to expand my blog, I chose another Jew, Adam Horowitz. Obviously I feel some comfort with Jews. And just this week I made recommendations of young journalists to editors I know. Both of them were Jewish. I know there are really good young non-Jewish journalists but it's not as if I don't have prejudice in favor of my own tribe. This book I'm reading speaks of professional kinship networks, and I realize I'm in one myself, have been since college."
My wife said, "I do the opposite. Sometimes I think that working with X, it would be a lot easier. She's a WASP and we understand all the cues and manners, and it makes working with her easier. But I realize I clubbed that out of myself. Though you could say that M and I (the latest person she's working with, half-Jewish) are in the same tribe, of flakey arty types."
I said, "I think this is why I'm for intermarriage, without pushing it on people. I think it's a good thing, it breaks up some of these networks. Because when the networks are associated with social power, they're much more problematic."
Then we went to the party.
{ 42 comments }
"I thought, Boy these guys are smart. How do they know so much about so many different areas?" mostly these "smart" guys lie. each supports the other's lies, reference each other as legitimate sources.
"Why are there three Jews on there? A very important task, explaining events, and there's no diversity. " the jewish point of view is the point that is permitted. the non jews allowed also give the jewish point of view. all these points of views are lies. brainwashing. liars telling lies.
I made a few points about this on the Rae Abileah thread. To summarise: under the current system of mutual exclusion of faiths, a couple only one of whom is Jewish cannot marry unless one or other changes their religion, or they settle for a purely secular, which is to say, anti-religious, ceremony. I would prefer an 'Abrahamic' shared faith, with social, multi–generational support. I actually believe in God — the God of Abraham, if not necessarily of Isaac & Jacob — and I consider it important that God bless the unions of their descendants. It creates, or provides a supernatural sanction for, inter-generational support. This is sort of an anthropological point. I should add, though, that this is ruled out a priori by Phil's pointed insistence on 'the Jews' being and remaining 'a tribe.' Please tell us, Phil: will your children (if you have any) 'belong to the tribe'? If your answer is that they will belong to a secular, Jewish ethnicity which you consider sufficiently distinct to be called 'a tribe' but necessarily lacking in any supernatural sanction, then I ask, by what right do you impose your atheism on them? Do you imagine that a purely private solution, such as the personal practice of some system of 'meditation,' will substitute for a religious communal identity? Does it not strike you that the common anomie of secular Jews is due precisely to this imposition of a negative religious identity by assimilationist but secularly Jewish parents on their children?
Philip Weiss is the Jewish-American Rip Van Winkle. He went to sleep in about 1950 or so and just woke up. But "for" intermarriage? Isn't that a little extreme? You got something against Jewish girls, except for the fact that they can see right through you? Sure, for Gentile girls we can put on a big show, come off as a real exotic prince. Also, a big attraction for Gentile girls is the fact that Jewish men abhor cunnilingus, so that's one less thing she has to worry about. (Oh, please! Are you trying to tell me it's Kosher? I really, really doubt it!) A Jewish girl will talk to your Mom too. And take up right where she left off. Which is, maritally, no more than you deserve! Somebody has got to make you a mensch! And think about it: Can't you just see a Jewish girl in Family Court; "Your honor, I can't go on in this marriage since I found out my husband is an anti-Zionist!!" Boom! She gets the house, the kids, the dog, all the assets, and you get bupkis.
The Jews railed against the WASP network; now, they replaced it with their own–as Phil often points out on this blog; this took place in business first, then, once so capitalized, it took place in American culture and power slots generally. They piggy-backed off the plight of the blacks and women, trumpeting the song of the melting pot, then the diverse mosaic, etc, etc. PC rhetoric and compartmentalization has been their game. The 1965 Immigration Act sealed the deal. "My wife said, "I do the opposite. Sometimes I think that working with X, it would be a lot easier. She's a WASP and we understand all the cues and manners, and it makes working with her easier. But I realize I clubbed that out of myself. Though you could say that M and I (the latest person she's working with, half-Jewish) are in the same tribe, of flakey arty types." " The difference here is that calling "flakey arty types" a tribe is merely a shallow metaphor. Phil's wife is atomized; her POV lacks any racial, tribal, or religious group think. She has bought into the advertised first principle of being an "American" first. Phil has not, but he feels a tad guilty about it. Phil, why don't you bring on a third partner, a full Gentile who's views you don't always agree with, but linger in your mind? That would honor your wife's relative American purity.
Fire Adam and stop using Jewish sources would be the logical solution for your dilemma.
Were does one start with Mooser's personal projections here? Is Phil the first Jewish American writer to write about his own negative experiences with Jewish women, or Jewish mothers? He does not not even write about such, but of course one can make deductions from what he does say. I suggest Mooser read some Jewish American literature, starting with Portnoy's Complaint. Interesting what Mooser says about all shikas. And goy male POV on "cunnilingus." AND WHAT ON EARTH is Mooser talking about with his droplets on how to make Phil a mensch? And, is he implying American family court judges are all zionists? All I can say is my experiences are nothing like Mooser's. But then, I'm a goy married to a jewish woman.
No. Just add the third person I describe. That would make the combined POV at best 1/3 actual Gentile. Is that too much to ask, considering this blog is constantly involved in American culture and foreign policy–and Gentiles make up 97% of All Americans? Even given the bias, ignorance, stupidity of the goys, Phil should be able to find one, no?
Phil's wife seems to me to have bought into Phil's weaselingly ambiguous use of the word 'tribe' to mean whatever he wants it to mean to escape the question of communal religious identity. One can hardly blame her. What else can she do? But one must ask: if he takes pleasure in the idea of a 'tribal' sense of Jewish identity on the part of those descended from persons of the Jewish faith, simply because of their descent — then what could be more racist than that? If they marry out, while retaining this 'tribal' sense of apartness, then all that this guarantees is an unhappy marriage, and children blocked from all communal religious life whatsoever. Ahad Ha'am was more consistent.
That's very cute, Mooser. A tad generalized, but cute. I can see where Phil is coming from though. There's something very challenging for a jew (or jewess) in a wasp. Like their simple "straight to the point" approach to matters both public and private. Like their refusal to engage in endless intellectualisms, rationalizations and belly button gazing. To the wasp, such exercises are both self-indulgent and pointless. That's why I think jews have invented the word "tachles" (translates as kind of "getting to the point of the matter" ?). Which is to be invoked at all times in lieu of practicing. Which oftentimes is a kind of a false purposefullness. The simplicity of the wasp forces the jew in an interrelationship to figure a few things out, such as what they really believe in – and why – instead of exalting in the ability to argue all points from all directions . It's about emotional honesty, I think, which is ever so good for jewish people (ie, the ones so raised) to get the hang thereof. As Phil noted several times during ruminations on "party behavior", the surest way to ruin a good time is to push for "engagement" when others are there to just kick back and hang out. What might pass as intenseness and/or closeness for the mediteranian (or southern, or jew from europe), appears as exceedingly bad manners to the wasp. Another way to put it is that if the wasp may be guilty of too much consideration, the jew displays (at times) too little. A lot of this difference has to do, IMO, with the experience of living on the land that jews in America did not have a chance to partake in. When they arrived in waves in America they took to the cities where they flourished and became part and parcvel of the urban landscape. But the other early immigrants from Europe went to the west – or the south – where land could be acquired cheap in return for working it. The jews – who were mostly forbidden from owning land in Europe for, like, centuries, did not acquire this fascination with earthly things and the very simple joys that come from doing just what needs doing (say,on a farm). Which makes for about the ten degrees of separatrion between humility and hubris. naturally, this should not be taken to mean that wasps are off the hook, Farmers after all, have a reputation for being a bit dense when it comes to erudition. All of the above proving that you have nothing on me when it comes to generalizations. Wanna raise me a ten?
"There's something very challenging for a jew (or jewess) in a wasp. Like their simple "straight to the point" approach to matters both public and private. Like their refusal to engage in endless intellectualisms, rationalizations and belly button gazing. " Exactly.
Jewess? What's that, the female of the species? Both Mooser and Phil are classic khokhmologs – they can sound like intellectuals although they really aren't fully up to the task. But then, it's likely that neither are their wives, which is probably why they married them. But that's their problem, isn't it. As for your generalizations, Dana, well I've got news for you. At the same time that the majority Jews arrived, so did a bunch of immigrants from Italy, Poland and Ireland. Ever been to New York or any other large city? Ever notice that all these have large neighborhoods that used to be home to these other ethnic groups as well as to Jews.
What exactly is cute about Mooser's particular ethnic jibes and/or kudos?
maybe that's why Phil has no children? He never said how he and his wife came to that agreement. Did he?
I would say that Mooser has a problem with both his mother and his wife.
Well, I didn't know he had said either that they had none, or that they wanted none, actually. For those who don't know, Ahad Ha'am forbade his son from marrying out.
jewish sources are all that there are on tv at least, a whole lot of breeding into different cultural backround with the converstion to judism making them ..well jewish both in mind and in deception to the public for which they serve…Oh thats right they only serve the other zionist and their takeover in every media and news based programming to let the lies be told either in the facts that are shown to be true( for which the hate crimes bill is being passed for ) but there are people that are not as stupid no matter how many times or how many jewish zionist would like you to believe. Just as the man from lebanon whom covered his butt when the land deal with rockefeller and rothchild happened..leaving all the details in, he is an honest trader, it was the plot of land used to bring in more and more whom also said we are exspanding and deserve more land. well does that make genocide legal after 50 + years? NO.
examples of how they lie and teach more and more to cover the tracks ( though it rarely does) the human shields, rockets being fired into settlements, the right to commit genocide. These are obserdities, just as the nwo in which they hope will curtail any more people against the genocidal wackos. They even teach the very young to write on bombs that are being used for the genocidal attacks, which is line with adolf hitler and only him. By the way he was a jew too. which leave a lingering question: was he involved with the plan of the elders or was he just another wacko whom brainwashed so many people for so long leaving other people to wonder why was he doing this …really. could he have been plagued by the very people whom had the plans or with the verysame it is a very thin line between reality of what is fact and heresay. I can see the obidient evangelics towing the line for now, but even they are starting to realize there is more to it than meets the eye and they have been sold a false bill of goods is starting to take hold.
the fact the new law being passed to stop the questioning of the occupation and the methods and hiden members whom commit and support the genocide of the innocent people "not just in palestine" but where the diamonds are and gold, they are in the welfare and tax exempt status but steal the taxes and control the money flow as always have in recent memory. While all the rest suffer with no health care or the fair credit control. which they also control. they are in control of alot of basics that people need everyday. But must not have given too much thought to the reprecussions that will obviously follow. Backlash and even bring martin luther king awards for the black people to coax them as well. these will be amongst the things remembered after the facts some time from now when the usa is no longer te usa and the revolution rises up to crush.
I don't think Hitler was a Jew — this story is one of those old psyop routines that never got defused at the end of the war. There are many psychological warfare memes of this sort lying around, or echoing across the web, because although they originate in Military Intelligence, like many other weapons, no thought was ever given to defusing them after they were no longer relevant. Another one that comes to mind — which actually goes back to WW1 — is the claim that the Tavistock Centre is a world communist hub. This arose because the generals at the British war office were livid at the tavvy being 'soft on malingerers and shirkers'.
Great post, Dana. Of course, you and Mooser are only referring to the European or Ashkenazi Jews who showed up mainly in the 20th C. The Sephardic Jews have been in the US for 368 years. The oldest US synagogue (Manhattan) is 355 years old. The Sephardim not only farmed, they owned vast tracts of land, plantations, and ran the slave business with fresh product supplied by the Dutch in endless ships from Amsterdam. This is the longtime tie-in with the Dutch South Africans and apartheid.
The chance that Hitler was a quarter Jewish on his father's side are nearly nill: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/797/was-... Further, the wiki data says the same, and adds additional reasons why it's extremely doubtful Hitler was part Jewish, including DNA from the Hitler family tree.
Personally, every Jewish girl I ever had a relationship with loved having her undercarriage licked–I only obliged one of them because I was drunk in that single instance. Not my thing. They still flock to me more than my own kind (shiksas). I think I know why, but I won't generalize.
I guess, if WASPs are one side of the emotional decorum line, and Jews on the other, Catholic Irish, for example, would be standing on the line? Or, what say Dana?
"Israeli society is replete with racism and violence regardless of Israeli neo-Nazi groups. In Israel, neo-Nazi groups of the type uncovered now have no chance of becoming a "trend," not only because in Israel and among Jews there is particular revulsion in the face of Nazi associations, but also because Israeli racism already has another broad and popular target – the Arab population, whether in the occupied territories or in Israel proper…. Isn't the attitude of Israeli society to ethnic Jewish origins, that is, Jewish ethnocentricity and racism, an indirect or direct reason for the scary phenomenon we're discussing now?" Moshe Zimmerman's words hardly need be restricted to Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs. You can just read some of the comments here to see that you can extend them to some non-Israeli Jews and their views of gentiles generally. Sorry, not gentiles, goyim. It's pretty scary listening to some Jews as they harp on about their Jewishness. They sound like White supremacists.
In such cases of a mixed gentile-jewish couple getting married by a civil municipal clerk, say, in my experience it tends to make the kids more likely to identify with their jewish side, which sticks out as a minority as it is constantly identified as such, while in contrast their gentile heritage is vague "white American." You know Americans, they like to view themselves as identifying with the underdog. The kids don't think much about Jews being oppressors, but they all know the usual about Jews being the victims throughout history. This doesn't change if, for example, their Jewish side were slum landlords and sleazy merchants, while their Gentile side is composed of lower middle class whites who never exploited anyone, and absorbed much of the expense of American Enterprise writ on a large map. They never heard of the Stern Gang, but they all know the KKK. Bernie Madoff is seen in isolation. Old white men are seen as generally evil. There's the typical model I've seen over and over.
He was being ironic, clem. Relax.
Wow, "able" goes into an anti-Semitic rant reminiscent of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and all you can do is respond by arguing that it was very unlikely that Hitler was a Jew. Should we take this as an indication that you agree with everything else he says?
MRW, do you think that you could provide some scholarly proof that the Spharadi Jews ran the slave business in the US? (That is, proof that does not eminate from Louis Farakhan or his followers.) Also, let's say, just for argument's sake, that you are correct – that the Jews were supplied by "fresh product" by the Dutch via Amsterdam. Well, who do you think was "harvesting" that fresh product in Africa? BTW, I would love for you to explain the "longtime tie-in with the Dutch South Africans".
Why would anyone be for or against intermarriage? That makes no sense! I see no reason to be for or against what strangers do with their personal lives. Being for intermarriage is just the leftist way of perverting family values by making personal choices political. I'm for mature, compatible persons getting married for the right reasons.
I agree with your point, Rowan. I've been very dismayed at the decline of rational faith. There is so much intellectual depth in Jewish theology, and that is a legacy I consider incomparably more worthy of being passed on to future generations than either secular liberalism or the bleak idololatry of suffering and paranoid ethnic survivalism.
Excellent points, Dana. I'd add, though, that the New York Jewish intellectual qualities you describe have become so normative that any gentile in academic or East Coast intellectual circles is likely to think and speak the same way. Personally, I can't stand NPR, and felt intellectually alienated in college for precisely the reasons you describe. The discourse seems disconnected from reality, and the participants score points by showing how clever they are without actually coming to any clear point. David Brooks, for example, is smart enough to give illusory insight to profound stupidity. I'd never be able to do the good Phil does because I simply don't understand the culture of this world. Phil gushes over the intelligence of these talking heads, and doesn't need to mention if what they say is logical or based on faulty information. I could care less about their intelligence; I'm only interested in the substance. Part of the job of talking heads is to avoid substance. Phil wasn't satisfied with fluff, which is why he's a blogger and not on NPR. I don't know if this is simply a cultural shift in the intellectual culture, or if it is an old-line WASP-New York Jewish disconnect. Perhaps it is both.
Since you are just asking, I'll be just answering (and generalizing, of course). based on what I've been able to observe (and read about), the Jew/catholic irish union is somewhat of a rarity (personally I haven't met one). Strangely enough, in conversations at least, the two make surprising alliances. Sometimes perhaps because of a shared cynical, near-jaded view of the world and the many failings of humans in it. More likely, it's the sense of humor. The two groups seem to get each other's jokes. Why is that for people who came about from such different parts of the world and had such different experiences? my theory is that they both disdain the Brits, and their stiff-necked, eyes wide shut ways of doing business (ignoring calamitous histories for a moment). maybe thats' why so many Israelis (+ zionist friends near and far) were – and are stung – by the identification IRA expresses with the palestinian cause. On a fundamental emotional level they would have liked that rebel rousing bunch to be on their side. What's a few terrorists between friends? And, as an aside, I can better answer (I think) why Jews and catholics (especially of jesuit background) find so much in common. It's the learnedness and the familiarity with old history. Not to mention the shared affinity for spiritual navel gazing. So what if the details differ? at least they agree on process (unlike those darned "tomorrow is another day" protestant types!)
But you are right of course, dear watson. And who is "he"?
Thanks MRW. Would you be able to share some good account of the Sephardic history in the US? I'll be needing that if I am to continue to generalize*. Still, that's an interesting bit you bring up. * not to worry. The apt generalizer is always at the ready to sub-divide groups upon challenge. That's the beauty of generalizations – the size of the group matters little. It's the catch all you can along the way that's the real fun (ie the exceptions that cause actual learning)
MRW, that's two requests now for some references. One in earnest (yes, that's mine). The other, oh well….but that still makes two!
JES49 – alas, your news are hardly news – at least in some quarters. At the rate you are going, you'll never become a good generalizer. I mean, there does have to be some minimal common thread….time of arrival in the US certainly wasn't mine. As for your critique of Phil/mooser as khokhmologs, alas, that's one of those ever so colorful words invented precisely to avoid throwing up one's hands in exasperation upon losing an argument. Of course, a wasp would simply say "what the heck does that mean", followed by "maybe it's time for a drink?"
Huh Dana, I thought that my request was made in earnest!
Has anyone else noticed that Phil goes to a hell of a lot of parties? What's up with that? I don't think I have gone to as many parties in the past 5 years as Phil has in the past month? Is this a Jew thing? Does it pass the time for the idly rich Jews?
Oooooooo. I guess you really told me!
That makes no sense. If you cannot differentiate between pride in your people/desire to continue your people and the inability to be comfortable with others, that is your own problem. The answer to your inability to accept other people is most certainly not the destruction of your own people.
I prefer black people. You know—like Don King and Idi Amin and Miles Davis and Obama and the Hutu interhamwe and Martin Luther King and the NAACP and the Sudanese janjaweed. oh–and I like JEWS. Like Osip Mandelstam and Bernie Madoff and Myron Cohen and Walter Benjamin and Avigdor Leiberman and Ali G. Christ. It's absurd. Jews. What are Jews? Just more people, more faces, more thoughts and opinions–another human forest composed of mostly rotting timbers with a few exotic hardwoods mixed in. I like Jews. I like black people. What is this, kindergarten?
Comments on this entry are closed.