At last, integrationists have won the great ideological struggle inside Jewish life

Israel/Palestine
on 27 Comments

In summertime my wife’s family goes to an exclusive community in the mountains where families occupy traditional camps with the owners’ names painted on an oar nailed to a tree out where their driveways meet the dirt road that circles the lake. Under this oar, the family then hooks shingles to advertise the various branches of the family who’ve shown up that weekend. 

I’ve been going to the place for 22 years and after about ten years my name showed up when my father-in-law painted it on a pine sliver. Then a year or so back my shingle got painted over– they needed it for someone else. I didn’t say a word. I’ve always been a little socially apprehensive, felt myself to be an outsider as a Jew in this fern-and-pines community. What’s my place here?

And then this weekend on the back porch, I saw Julie, as I’ll call her, a friend of my wife’s niece, painting a new one for me. It was her first time visiting, but she said that she planned to do one for herself before long, “so two Jewish names can hang right next to one another.”

It was a generational moment.

Julie and I had just met. We’d not shared the fact that we’re both Jewish. And here she brought it up effortlessly; because Julie has none of my hangups. She comes out of a privileged world in which Jews and non-Jews freely mingle. It seems like most of her friends are half-Jewish, she told me, their parents intermarried. And that is true for much of privileged coastal America. Why just look at the New York Times Magazine lying on the adirondack chair nearby Julie’s painting project– the cover features Miranda July, film director, the product of intermarriage.

Later it struck me that my old narrative, of social apprehension of the in-laws, perceived exclusion, was as Yesterday as my parents’ marriage stories with their whiff of Sholom Aleichem– about Jewish families that didn’t cough up dowries or about legendary upward Jewish marriages– Hank Greenberg married Gimbel’s daughter!

Julie’s narrative is one of Jewish inclusion, of Jewish integration into the establishment.

I say this all the time, of course. But I think we’ve reached a new stage. Why just look at the Murdoch scandal.

Yesterday Murdoch was backed at the Parliamentary hearing by Joel Klein, the former New York Schools Chancellor, who sat next to Murdoch’s wife Wendy. Murdoch has lately hired the p.r. firm Edelman, founded by Daniel Edelman, said to be the largest p.r. firm in the world. He is also said to have gotten advice from his son-in-law Matthew Freud, the communications genius who of course is the great-grandson of you know who.

You say Murdoch is a philo-Semite; but you can play this game with anyone. Murdoch was vigorously questioned yesterday by Conservative M.P. Louise Mensch, a blonde who is famous as an author of chicklit under her maiden name Bagshawe. She got her new last name from American Peter Mensch, the manager of Metallica and the Red Hot Chili Peppers. (Mensch went to Brandeis and his partner is Burnstein, so I’m assuming he’s Jewish.) Damian Collins was another Conservative questioner; he said his wife works at Edelman…

For more than a century now, the great ideological antagonism in Jewish life has been between Integrationists and Zionists. Integrationists said that the Jewish future lay with integrating into western societies, as Jews fully participating in western democracies.

Integrationists said we would be secure that way. Zionists said that Jews needed a nation of their own. And the Holocaust dealt a sharp reversal to the Integrationists. It said that we would never be safe. And in the 80s and 90s, I came of professional age with privileged American journalists who may have acted like Integrationists but who said stuff to me like, Will your in-laws hide you when the pogroms come? or How can we even talk about Jewish power; my wife just visited her ancestral village in Eastern Europe and even the Jewish graveyard is gone…

On the basis of such questions, Zionism thrived. We need a Jewish state because of the threat of anti-Semitism in the west.

I kept pointing out that I was happily making my way in a mixed Jewish-Christian world. The late Tony Judt– who was as stunned by this social integration as I was– said that Jewish nationalism was a 19th century anachronism. 

And still we lost the argument. Fears of assimilationism played into this. For years the Jewish community was rocked by the National Jewish Population Survey of 1990, showing that more than half of young Jews were marrying outside the faith. The Jewish community fought the truth of that survey for years. With the Jewish day school movement, with Zionism, with elevating such race-men as Jeffrey Goldberg to be the spokesmen for the community.

In the end the nationalists will lose. They will lose because young Jews believe in integrationism, and more than believe in it, they live it. They are our living history, they are following Rabbi Hillel’s great commandment, to Be Here Now (If not now, when, as he put it). They will change American and Jewish tradition, and in time too, the oars on the lake.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

27 Responses

  1. Richard Witty
    July 20, 2011, 10:37 am

    You are again arguing about your experience in America. You are married to a woman that loves you and you love (I presume). More power to you. Wonderful. Many blessings in your days.

    There are ever and new reasons for Jews to remain Jews coherently.

    The existential question of what Judaism is has changed since there is Israel. It changed from how to survive and make the best of resented or accepted (sometimes) minority status, to participant or even having one’s own relations in one’s own name.

    The holocaust gave near-global sympathy to the Jewish world for the first historical time. The establishment of Israel as existing and then as a power firmed that change from contempt to acceptance (sometimes).

    The questions for Jews now, in diaspora and in Israel, are of choice, not of necessity.

    In modern Judaism there are “new age” themes exploring of the four levels of Torah inquiry emphacizing the ethical and the deep spiritual meanings over the narrative and instructional. We are asking about the balance between our rights and our responsibilities. On the rights side, is the assertion that God promised the literal land (or figurative land/life) unconditionally to the Jewish people. It was predicated on fulfilling the commandments, but was stated as a “when they fulfill the commandments, I will give them rain in its time” rather than “if”.

    On the responsibility side, we ask the question of “why were we promised?” Answered “You are to be a nation of priests, a light to the nations”, further explained as ‘you are to make things whole’ (unification of yud to vuv in the codified name of God, completing the circle).

    So, us diaspora new age Jews meditate, daven, eat together, do service projects, garden, attempt to make peace for those of us that are attracted to politics. To make things whole.

    In Israel, the real question is of what Israel lives as, as a community. So, the inquiry into “how do you behave as a collective, how do you treat others” is a critical question, but oriented towards reform, towards doing one’s best.

    It differs from the theme of “disappear”, as in assimilationism as an ism.

    You gotta find a consistent place that is not on the extreme. Otherwise you will make only “holes” not “wholes”.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2011, 12:13 pm

      “Otherwise you will make only “holes” not “wholes”.”

      You actually repeated this? You thought it was so damned clever it needed repeating (God only knows what the Whole-Earth-hippy-dippy source is) Now I’ve seen everything.
      Wait, let me guess, Witty, this little bon sequiter is drawn from a little homily which concerns doughnuts, right?

      • eljay
        July 20, 2011, 12:28 pm

        >> The holocaust gave near-global sympathy to the Jewish world for the first historical time.

        And the Zionists have managed to f*ck that up nicely.

        >> On the responsibility side, we ask the question of “why were we promised?”

        You weren’t promised anything. It’s surprising, three thousand years later, that you still haven’t figured that out.

        >> Answered “You are to be a nation of priests, a light to the nations” …

        Of course that’s the answer. Those who create religions are not apt to assign themselves the role of “nation of imbeciles, target of all abuses”. Anyway, the Zionists have managed to f*ck up the whole “light to the nations” thing, too.

      • Mooser
        July 20, 2011, 12:36 pm

        “Otherwise you will make only “holes” not “wholes”.”

        If you prefer biallys to bagels, just come out and say it, man!

        • LeaNder
          July 21, 2011, 12:53 pm

          “(God only knows what the Whole-Earth-hippy-dippy source is) ”

          I am still waiting for an independent Witticism. But the above is a rather good description of Richard’s New Age Judaism.

          Thanks for the introduction: Bialy, Bialy …

          I have to try that, should work with salad.

          Phil Weiss: I didn’t say a word. I’ve always been a little socially apprehensive, felt myself to be an outsider as a Jew in this fern-and-pines community.

          If this would be a purely Jewish experience, how could some of us deeply understand, what you mean, Phil? But yes, Julie does the right thing. It took some time to discover. Why didn’t you do just that: “Look people, if I am here, and if this is the custom, I want a shingle too.” Inside and outside works both ways.

          I do love your “the Assimilationist” stories, don’t give up the project.

    • Citizen
      July 20, 2011, 8:54 pm

      Witty says, “So, the inquiry into “how do you behave as a collective, how do you treat others” is a critical question, but oriented towards reform, towards doing one’s best.”

      What the heck is distinctively Jewish about this statement by Witty?

      Witty says, “It differs from the theme of “disappear”, as in assimilationism as an ism.”

      What exactly does Witty think will disappear if anyone or a group does his/her best or their best–to treat others well, to treat them as one would like to be treated as well?

      What’s Witty really worried about? Culture isn’t lost when an assimilated family is born. It’s an opportunity to partake in the best of both worlds, so to speak.

      I find Witty’s abstractions here decidedly unAmerican, and not humanistic at all either.
      Nobody’s asking him to get recircumcized–he’s fully entitle to what he does not enjoy.

  2. Richard Witty
    July 20, 2011, 10:41 am

    I wanted to take the opportunity to link to my most recent blog post. Forgive the self-promotion.

    link to liberalzionism.wordpress.com

    Into the Mythic

    Its a play on words on the Van Morrison song, “Into the Mystic”.

    • Mooser
      July 20, 2011, 12:15 pm

      “Its a play on words on the Van Morrison song, “Into the Mystic”.”

      Oh wow, you’re in fine form today, Richard! Are you sure you’re getting adequate cerebral flow? Not feeling dizzy?
      I sure as hell am.

      • nmi
        July 20, 2011, 5:41 pm

        Van Morrison. How apt!

        The only guy on earth who can sing even more out of tune than Richard Witty!

        • tree
          July 21, 2011, 1:34 pm

          The only guy on earth who can sing even more out of tune than Richard Witty!

          You’ve obviously never heard Leonard Cohen or Burt Bachrach sing. Good songwriters, but you never want to hear them perform their own songs.

    • annie
      July 20, 2011, 11:55 pm

      wrt your ‘myth’ blogpost:

      So, we are in the period in which we can’t hear of the reality of the period first hand, but only second and third hand in story, and repetition of story

      richard, you must know this is not true. that 19 year old you mentioned in your post , storming into israel from lebanon, didn’t hear the story 2nd or third hand. he probably heard it from his grandfather, first hand. and it is not a myth what happened, nor a ‘gamble’ as you assert, the nakba was and is very very real and present. he grew up with that story from first hand witnesses and the nakba is ongoing, he experiences it. people are still dying.

      plus, the eyes of a human being facing him was not willingly smiling or potentially smiling, that is not what was ‘present’. the people facing them were shooting at them and killed quite a few. i think it is you living in a myth.

      furthermore you say “We are in the land of mythology already, in the land of Balkan like invocations of events that occurred 30 generations before we were born.”

      it has not been 30 generations in the least. this is wishful thinking on your part because you wish the conflict we are in now was all in the past, it is not. you say “struggle is past. Conditions have changed. Possibilities have changed. The world has changed.”

      obviously the struggle is not past. it is very very present. and all of this leading up to some statement on the boycott. nothing in your post even remotely justifies not boycotting. you are operating in a myth richard. pretending this struggle is not real and present. this is non violent action and it is more powerful than your fantasies about the conflict being in the form of a myth.

      good luck w/your blog. try harder.

      • annie
        July 21, 2011, 12:09 am

        and while you are at it, to back up your ‘theory’, are you going to plead what teenagers hear from their relatives of the holocaust is a myth?

        i didn’t think so. sometimes you sound very unhinged. re the part about “30 generations before we were born” being in the “land of mythology”, simple math dictates 3000 years is over 150 generations. and yet you still say:

        On the rights side, is the assertion that God promised the literal land (or figurative land/life) unconditionally to the Jewish people. It was predicated on fulfilling the commandments, but was stated as a “when they fulfill the commandments, I will give them rain in its time” rather than “if”.

        On the responsibility side, we ask the question of “why were we promised?” Answered “You are to be a nation of priests, a light to the nations”

        so come clean richard. are you saying ““You are to be a nation of priests, a light to the nations” is a myth? because then maybe we could agree on something.

        • richb
          July 21, 2011, 12:52 am

          Does this sound like an unconditional promise? I see a lot of conditions.

          Leviticus 26

          “‘If you follow my decrees and are careful to obey my commands, 4 I will send you rain in its season, and the ground will yield its crops and the trees their fruit. 5 Your threshing will continue until grape harvest and the grape harvest will continue until planting, and you will eat all the food you want and live in safety in your land.

          6 “‘I will grant peace in the land, and you will lie down and no one will make you afraid. I will remove wild beasts from the land, and the sword will not pass through your country. 7 You will pursue your enemies, and they will fall by the sword before you. 8 Five of you will chase a hundred, and a hundred of you will chase ten thousand, and your enemies will fall by the sword before you.

          9 “‘I will look on you with favor and make you fruitful and increase your numbers, and I will keep my covenant with you. 10 You will still be eating last year’s harvest when you will have to move it out to make room for the new. 11 I will put my dwelling place[a] among you, and I will not abhor you. 12 I will walk among you and be your God, and you will be my people. 13 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt so that you would no longer be slaves to the Egyptians; I broke the bars of your yoke and enabled you to walk with heads held high.

          14 “‘But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant, 16 then I will do this to you: I will bring on you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and sap your strength. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.
          18 “‘If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over. 19 I will break down your stubborn pride and make the sky above you like iron and the ground beneath you like bronze. 20 Your strength will be spent in vain, because your soil will not yield its crops, nor will the trees of your land yield their fruit.

          21 “‘If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.

          23 “‘If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me, 24 I myself will be hostile toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over. 25 And I will bring the sword on you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands. 26 When I cut off your supply of bread, ten women will be able to bake your bread in one oven, and they will dole out the bread by weight. You will eat, but you will not be satisfied.

          27 “‘If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters. 30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies[b] on the lifeless forms of your idols, and I will abhor you. 31 I will turn your cities into ruins and lay waste your sanctuaries, and I will take no delight in the pleasing aroma of your offerings. 32 I myself will lay waste the land, so that your enemies who live there will be appalled. 33 I will scatter you among the nations and will draw out my sword and pursue you. Your land will be laid waste, and your cities will lie in ruins. 34 Then the land will enjoy its sabbath years all the time that it lies desolate and you are in the country of your enemies; then the land will rest and enjoy its sabbaths. 35 All the time that it lies desolate, the land will have the rest it did not have during the sabbaths you lived in it.

          36 “‘As for those of you who are left, I will make their hearts so fearful in the lands of their enemies that the sound of a windblown leaf will put them to flight. They will run as though fleeing from the sword, and they will fall, even though no one is pursuing them. 37 They will stumble over one another as though fleeing from the sword, even though no one is pursuing them. So you will not be able to stand before your enemies. 38 You will perish among the nations; the land of your enemies will devour you. 39 Those of you who are left will waste away in the lands of their enemies because of their sins; also because of their ancestors’ sins they will waste away.

          40 “‘But if they will confess their sins and the sins of their ancestors—their unfaithfulness and their hostility toward me, 41 which made me hostile toward them so that I sent them into the land of their enemies—then when their uncircumcised hearts are humbled and they pay for their sin, 42 I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land. 43 For the land will be deserted by them and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them. They will pay for their sins because they rejected my laws and abhorred my decrees. 44 Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the LORD their God. 45 But for their sake I will remember the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God. I am the LORD.’”

        • annie
          July 21, 2011, 1:20 am

          oh my

        • Richard Witty
          July 21, 2011, 4:42 am

          Read the post again Annie.

          All of your objections to the post, were addressed within the post prior.

          It is a theme of Phil’s that we are all working on story more than reality now.

          There are two ways to apply that, vociferously (I am right, they are wrong) or humbly (we are both working from story rather than from our real experience and goals).

          “Myth” does not mean “untrue”. Myth means story rather than personal experience or study. Story is not knowable is all, always a gamble at that point.

        • Richard Witty
          July 21, 2011, 4:45 am

          Good post Rich. That is the “if” statement that I emphasize “if you keep my commandments, I will give you the rain in its time”.

          I don’t know the scriptural authority for the shift religiously to the understanding that the promise was unconditional a “when” rather than an if.

          I’ll research that.

        • Citizen
          July 21, 2011, 6:22 am

          What’s the practical point, or difference, Witty, if U say to Rover, “If you obey me I will give you [& your puppies] a treat, and if you don’t I will punish you [& your puppies],” and, “When you obey me I will give you [& your puppies] a treat, and when you don’t I will punish you [& your puppies]“?

          If not now, when?

        • Mooser
          July 22, 2011, 12:03 pm

          “I don’t know the scriptural authority for the shift religiously to the understanding that the promise was unconditional a “when” rather than an if.”

          You are completely bug-fuck nuts, Witty. Absolutely out of your mind!
          But you go ahead and “research that”, and get back to us when you determine exactly which Bible verse gives us the right, if not the obligation, to reduce the Palestinians.

  3. Krauss
    July 20, 2011, 12:08 pm

    What a beautiful peace.

    I’ve long thought about this split in the Jewish psyche too. If you think about it, a lot of Jews are primarily understanding the world out of fear. Fear of assimilation, fear of destruction and fear of not being able to fit in.

    We constantly barrage others to be more open and let down their prejudices and fears(whether it’s immigration, muslims or something else) but we’re more trapped by fear than most other communities, are we projecting our own psyche onto others and badgering them for it?

    Yet at the same time, we are integrating and in many ways leading the world towards less nationalism, fear and prejudice in the diaspora. While in Israel, the other side of our psyche comes through, that of deep, anguished fear.

    What I enjoy with your writings is that you’re very human and open with your weaknesses, you deal with your fear, your bigotry, sexism and even remnants of racism. You deal with them every day and you do a great job trying to set things right. You might not always get there, but you’ve already gotten farther than many Jews(or non-Jews for that matter) will in their lifetime.

    I very much enjoy your writings on the Jewish community/psyche, and I hope you continue to do that.

    • Mooser
      July 22, 2011, 12:05 pm

      “You might not always get there, but you’ve already gotten farther than many Jews(or non-Jews for that matter) will in their lifetime.”

      Especially if time stopped about , oh, 1955 or so.

  4. Danaa
    July 20, 2011, 1:38 pm

    Phil, I tend to agree with you that it is existential fear that drives so much of the zionist narrative. And as you point out, the fear that “they are coming to get us” is bolstered by another age -old fear – that of assimilation. Either way the twin fears work their way – - Jews can disappear- through too much hate or too much love.

    This dichotomy lies at the heart of the neurosis that plagues the liberal zionist – The jeffrey Goldbergs of this world. Because of the monstrous Golem that Israel has turned out to be, a fundamental neurosis has been turned into an outright pathology, causing many young Jewish people to react with a “heck with it all…” attitude, even as others turn into BDS and pro-palestinian activists. And still others turn to worshipping the Golem as a flase god.

    But that is the nature of the Golem – it may start with an inspiration, a creative act, but its nature is based on twin fears of both too much and too little exclusivity. A fear of doomsday underlies the zionist project, and since the fear is set up – preversely – between these two poles – so is the country. No wonder it is torn apart – dragging in its wake all who support the venture into an abyss where souls turn into stones. Israel, far from becoming a harmony of multitudes became an atonal cacophony, in which only the truly deaf can perceive a melody.

    You are also right Phil in what you intimate – though perhaps it was more between the lines: ultimately – for the jewish people to live happily and healthily – anywhere – they’ll have to jettison the edifice of the fear and its two headed hydra apparition. First they need to learn to trust those amongst whom they live – the non Jews – be they christian in the US or Palestinians in Israel (what you call integration). But then they also need to overcome – or come to terms with – the fears of assimilation. They need to accept that to be “a light unto the nations” does not have to be carried out through lectures delivered from an imaginary podium, raised above the multitudes, but from being one within the family of nations – equally a student of light as anyone else on the planet.

    The young people of whom you speak may be the harbingers of this change. Alas, before the “integrationists” and “universalists” can triumph, there’s that Golem to contend with. In the legends and stories, the Golem is eventually overcome, though not before great harm is done. What we don’t know is how much harm would it take before we see Frankenstein for what it is – a creature made of two parts fear and one part greed – a bringer of darkness in its pursuit of power (and land) – propelled by and torn by schizophrenic existential fear. A very dangerous and volatile combination.

  5. Shunra
    July 20, 2011, 11:17 pm

    Matthew Freud’s religion means nothing

    The fact that he has a PR firm – and that one of his other famous relatives is Edward Bernays, father of the “science” of propaganda and inveterate liar-for-gain – *that* matters.

    Religion??? I couldn’t care less. Bernays is directly liable for my mother’s death (smoking-induced lung cancer; Bernays was instrumental in making women’s smoking socially acceptable in the U.S., using Freud’s insights to lie people into submission), and was involved in lying nations into war more than once. If a Freud touches it, whatever it is needs to be discarded with the other toxic waste.

  6. eee
    July 21, 2011, 12:16 am

    Jews that want to “integrate” or assimilate are more than welcome. Jews that don’t want to “integrate” have that option also. It is not either/or proposition and there is no need for a war between the two sides.

    • notatall
      July 21, 2011, 7:23 am

      “Jews that want to ‘integrate’ or assimilate are more than welcome. Jews that don’t want to ‘integrate’ have that option also. It is not either/or proposition and there is no need for a war between the two sides.”

      On its face that would seem to make sense—until one remembers that for secular “Jews” preserving their distinctiveness always involves the “Jewish state,” by definition permanent war.

  7. annie
    July 21, 2011, 12:41 am

    phil, you know how much i like these kinds of posts you write. well, this one reminded me of something that happened to me recently at a family party i hosted for my son and his girlfreind when they were in town recently. it was just family (decent size) plus his godparents and very few close family friends.

    it was the first time he had brought his girlfriend down to meet all his cousins and especially my mom. my family has no ‘jew-dar’ (i just made that term up, from gay-dar’ as in radar’) iow they couldn’t spot a jew if one were singing israel’s national anthem in hebrew. it would never occur to me to announce to my family julie (i’ll grab the name you chose) is jewish. this simply has no meaning for any of them. (long story..my mom was asking me about 6 months ago but how can you tell?). seriously zero radar and zero relevance.

    so anyway..my son’s godmother (my best friend) is jewish and of course she was there (the only jewish person there except julie) and she was as happy as i had seen her in i don’t know how long. she was completely in heaven!

    my son’s girlfriend is a complete total doll. just abundantly perfect, he has such great taste (of course, i raised him). she’s smart, sweet, engaging, funny, dry humor, sarcastic, quick and bright, super cute but just enough plainness to put anyone at ease. easy disposition and totally reasonable. and i try not to bug my son too much about having children but he knows i don’t want him to follow in our family footsteps (having children late in life). anyway..they are not ready..i am digressing.

    anyway back to his auntie (that is what he calls his godmother). i cannot recall a time i have seen her so thrilled, you’d have thought my son had just won the lottery. she sat right next to her at the picnic table and they chatted constantly. of course julie had already heard all about his auntie and his auntie about julie. all of this flew right over my family’s head (why she adored her so, because my family doesn’t really see or understand or think about jewishness) but i knew why. plus, julie had just given me a mezuzah (to protect my house) and we nailed it in that afternoon. (it made me feel very special, that gift).

    i’ve met julie many times when i go visit them out of state. it’s been 3 years already. i am sooo crossing my fingers. she’s the sweetest. anyway, his auntie (who has no children of her own except my son) is going out of her mind. she’s probably planning the wedding already.

    just a story about something that happened on july 7th.

  8. CigarGod
    July 21, 2011, 9:09 am

    Nice meditation/reflection, Phil.

    “In the end the nationalists will lose. They will lose because young Jews believe in integrationism, and more than believe in it, they live it.”

    I wonder if it is even less conscious than that. In fact, I doubt they even care…which is a good thing imo, and still leads to your conclusion: In the end the nationalists will lose.

  9. Mooser
    July 22, 2011, 12:13 pm

    “Under this oar, the family then hooks shingles to advertise the various branches of the family who’ve shown up that weekend. “

    We just hang up a pice of fiberboard on which “Revenoors Will be Shott” is painted from a spraycan.

Leave a Reply