This post is part of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.
In the waiting area at the Orlando airport, the Lufthansa passengers sit contently. They are ignorant of the carrier’s part in the Holocaust past. As I was. Though I teach the Holocaust, I am constantly caught up short by depth of the depravity and by the wholesale participation of German society during the Holocaust years. How much of that society lives on in the present is amazing.
Try Deutche Bank. Or Allianz insurance. If they’ve been around long enough in Germany, they profited during the Nazi era. Then remade themselves and survived in the democratic future. Don’t only think German, however. Think Ford, General Motors and IBM. Where the money is, corporations are. In any currency.
Yes I know we shouldn’t make distinctions when it comes to human suffering. And yes privileging the Holocaust is used politically to further the suffering of Palestinians. I still have the politically incorrect gumption to say that there was something different about the Holocaust.
Every institution became part of the Third Reich, though some were reluctant at first. When pushed to the profit wall they all found a way to do their bit for the country. So it is all over the world, then and now. There’s always a reason found to join, even if it’s the old canard – reform from within.
Has reform from within ever occurred in real time?
Yes Gvul – There is a Limit. The first Israeli resistance to invading Lebanon in the 1980s. A reform from within. How did that work out?
Three decades later, where are the soldiers who said “no”? How many remain in Israel. How many have left Israel. Is there a limit to remaining an Israeli in Israel?
Many Israelis who remain, many Israelis who leave, no longer identify as Jewish or even Israeli. Because they are so identifiably Jewish and Israeli, I call them Still/Former Jewish/Israelis. I don’t believe you can leave Jewish or Israeli.
They’re not the only Still/Formers. Wherever they live, Jews of Conscience are Still/Formers. They can’t leave either. Even when they protest their freedom to leave, they “leave” in such a Jewish way that it’s obvious. So Jewish.
Years ago I met Henry Schwarzschild, an ACLU anti-death penalty lawyer. As the Nazis rose to power, Henry’s family left Germany. Many years later during the Lebanon war, Henry wrote and published an official letter of disavowal – from the Jewish state of Israel. The bombing of Beirut was the final straw. Henry was done.
Here in part is his statement:
I will not avoid an unambiguous response to the Israeli army’s turning West Beirut into another Warsaw Ghetto. I now conclude and avow that the price of a Jewish state is, to me, Jewishly unacceptable and that the existence of this (or any similar) Jewish ethnic religious nation state is a Jewish, i.e. a human and moral, disaster and violates every remaining value for which Judaism and Jews might exist in history. The lethal military triumphalism and corrosive racism that inheres in the State and in its supporters (both there and here) are profoundly abhorrent to me. So is the message that now goes forth to the nations of the world that the Jewish people claim the right to impose a holocaust on others in order to preserve the State. I now renounce the State of Israel, disavow any political connection or emotional obligation to it, and declare myself its enemy….
The response from the right-wing. Predicable. In 2003 the The Jewish Press created an annual ‘Henry Schwarzschild Award’ for “a person in the public spotlight who, by his or her statements, displays contempt for the Jewish people, disregard for historical truth, a desire to sup at the table of Israel’s enemies, or who otherwise plays into the hands of the enemies of Jews and Israel.”
When I discovered this letter, I told Henry that it sounded like resignation from the Jewish people. That couldn’t be accepted. There was no resigning from the Jewish people. Period.
What a delight Henry was. He used to regal me with stories of his Civil Rights days. Henry was one of those Jewish lawyers that surrounded Martin Luther King, Jr. One day I asked Henry what King was like close-up. What set King apart?
Henry set the stage. After a long day’s work, Henry would sit around with King and other Civil Rights leaders in Negro-only motels. There was no air conditioning, so in the Southern heat they would strip to their drawers and under shirts, drink in hand and chat. As Henry looked around he saw others who were King’s equal – in preaching, strategy and courage. Henry paused so I pressed him. If there were others good or better than King, what was it about him that set him apart? Henry thought for another moment, then continued: “There was an aura around King, an aura you could feel. King embodied a destiny – it was right there. Like you could touch it.”
An aura, signaling the presence of a prophet. It isn’t about being better or higher, it’s a presence that is palpable. That in a world that often seems mundane and meaningless, that presence posits meaning. The prophet embodies meaning – at least the possibility of meaning in an apparently meaningless universe. That is why we are drawn to the prophet.
Like other prophets, King embodied the possibility of meaning. That was his aura.
The prophetic community gathered around King as other communities have gathered around prophets before and after.
The prophetic community gathers around the prophet who is doomed. Is the prophet doomed precisely because he embodies the possibility of meaning in an apparently meaningless world? Perhaps.
The doomed prophet – there have been so many in history. Their doom offers others a chance to make their statement of hope in history.
To present that witness to the world, the prophetic community has to live its vision to the fullest.
Still/Former Jewish/Israelis are the Jewish boots on the ground. They have carried violence to others – in our name. Now they join other Jews of Conscience who embody the possibility of justice in Israel/Palestine- in our name.
Where the politics of meaning – certainly not to be confused with prophet’s embodiment of the possibility of meaning in the world – the primary difference being the politics of meaning is a pseudo-Rabbinic gloss on suffering in history rather than a deep encounter with the indigenous of the people Israel – and the politics of International Law – another, this time, secular gloss on suffering in history – have fallen short, Jews of Conscience draw near to the prophetic core of Jewish history.
No gloss. No kippot. Not the United Nations. Not international tribunals. The difference is profound. It is being explored. It awaits articulation.
Henry’s letter. Strong stuff. Declaring himself an enemy of the state. This is dangerous anywhere. Dangerous as a Jew, too. Henry just couldn’t take it anymore. A place for us to start?
The price of a Jewish state – “Jewishly unacceptable.” But we have a state, I replied to Henry. Henry knew this all too well.
Henry had every reason to resign and couldn’t – because letters of resignation from the Jewish people aren’t accepted. Henry’s disavowal of the state of Israel is so strong it betrays a commitment. Henry was a Still/Former, even in relation to the state of Israel.
Henry’s letter about Israel, so angry. Henry’s evocation of King, so tender. You can’t understand Henry with one or the other. They go together.
And his beautiful daughter Hannah, who I know. Who plants olive trees for Palestinians in the West Bank. Henry’s legacy in full bloom. She entering the Still/Former stage, too.
Being Still/Former Jewish, being Still/Former Jewish/Israeli is testimony that nevertheless there is a way forward – through the end. This means that there aren’t any (gloss) detours.
When you a (gloss) detour option is offered know you’re somewhere other than real Jewish commitment. This is fine, if you want some time off.
Everyone needs a vacation. When the vacation is over, we know it’s time to get back to the prophetic work at hand.
Plowshare time.
Believe whatever you want, but don’t brag about how “politically incorrect” you are, particularly when you’re asserting a belief as politically utterly mainstream as the uniqueness of the Holocaust.
precisely, Wburns. and it’s not ‘politically incorrect’, it’s historically inaccurate to pull the murder of jews from the context of the full national socialist program, as well as stalin’s plans, and then the allies reshuffling of millions in post-war europe (not to mention the pre-world war ii militarily imposed movements/murder of various populations.) ellis’s superlative may be emotionally galling to those of us whose families come from eastern europe, but i can get over that easily enough. it’s the fudging of the facts that i can’t get past.
ellis reminds me of ‘jack’ in delillo’s ‘white noise’, the head of the college ‘hitler studies’ department who can’t speak german. an academic autism of sorts.
Does Ellis remind you of a guy who’s gotten a divorce, but never stops talking about, arguing with, or seeing his ex-wife?
MARC ELLIS- “I still have the politically incorrect gumption to say that there was something different about the Holocaust.”
“…up to a certain point, the Nazi war crimes consisted largely of inflicting on white Europeans levels of brutality that had previously been reserved only for Asians, Africans, and the native populations of North, Central, and South America.” (Bertram Gross)
Any honest review of history will quickly reveal that mass-murder is the rule, not the exception. Focusing on the Jewish Holocaust as something other than a more recent example of mass-murder tends to diminish the long history and universality of the phenomenon. It also tends to obscure the consequences of advances in the technology of mass slaughter.
“To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control one million people than to physically kill one million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill one million people than to control one million people.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, quoted by Andrew Gavin Marshall, Dandelion Salad 1/28/11)
keith, sven lindvist follows the evolution of warfare and international law as western nations overcame their reticence to make war “on white Europeans [at] levels of brutality [] reserved only for ________”. see ‘a history of bombing’ and ‘exterminate all the brutes’.
MARC B- I have both.
Yup, the Holocaust may have taken advantage of advances in communications, administration, and technology, but it comes of a proud, old tradition. Now the inflated numbers in Biblical massacres (and other ancient historical records) could be made real, and surpassed!
Let’s get one thing very clear Mr. Ellis! True, nobody can resign from being Jewish, but that doesn’t mean you can’t get kicked out!
“I still have the politically incorrect gumption to say that there was something different about the Holocaust”
Just like everyone else Marc, you are Prejudice! just a matter of degrees.
“So is the message that now goes forth to the nations of the world that the Jewish people claim the right to impose a holocaust on others in order to preserve the State.”
Only just catching up? The message that went forth from the 1897 Zionist Congress was “We matter, and you don’t.”
““I still have the politically incorrect gumption to say that there was something different about the Holocaust”
Hmm….why do you think the Jewish holocaust was different from others?
Is it because of instead of just slaughtering people helter skelter, the Germans did it methodically with some kind of planned cold blooded precision ?
That’s the only real difference I see in that holocaust and the religious slaughters in primitive ancient times and the recent one like in Rwanda where murdering hordes just hacked 800,000 people to pieces with machetes for lack of mass killing modern weapons.
Planned orderly killing of people does make it seem more chilling or more evil in some regards than a savage frenzy of killing the other in the heat of some battle….and too probably because it was so “rationalized” as necessary for the good of the nation.
But they all come from the same things. Only the methods are different.
Prof. Ellis,
It was interesting, and had a miraculous or magical feel to it, when Henry Schwarzschild described Martin Luther King Junior: “There was an aura around King, an aura you could feel. King embodied a destiny – it was right there. Like you could touch it.”
The description made me feel that there was something special about Rev.Martin Luther King Jr.’s approach beyond simply making speeches, but that it envolved a certain spirit, sense of faith, inner dedication, and sense of timeliness as well. I think it could be helpful if someone with this feeling and spirit was in the movement for the rights of the native peoples of the Holy Land. And in fact, I think there probably are to some extent.
Furthermore, I think MLK Jr was following the heritage or way of prophets. For example, he spoke correctly and poetically of the future when he said that there would be a coming “promised land” that he has seen, when black and white children would play together without segregation, but that he might not live to be in it.
This speech and its words about “seeing” the promised land show the reward in being a prophet despite the risk and rejection involved. Today in the eastern Churches (to which Palestinian Christians belong) is the Feast of the Transfiguration. Soon before it, Jesus said to His disciples that some of them would see the Messianic era. It is a question among scholars: How could it be that the disciples would see this era, when even 2000 years later the Second Coming hasn’t apparently happened? And one answer could be that in fact, they did see it: in the Transfiguration not long after the promise was made.
And this too perhaps reflects the duality of the prophets’ nature. On the one hand, ancient prophets sometimes did not live up to the time of the blessings they predicted, like the Rebuilding of Jerusalem. But they were rewarded in part by the vision itself that they foresaw: one of living together in peace and rightness.
Perhaps this was reflected in their “aura” of “embodying” a destiny regardless of whether the destiny would be reached in their lifetimes?
Regards.
“Perhaps this was reflected in their “aura” of “embodying” a destiny regardless of whether the destiny would be reached in their lifetimes?”
Actually, it was the Dead Sea Mud they patted on their faces every night before retiring. Gave their skin a prophetic glow which was irresistible!
“Soon before it, Jesus said to His disciples that some of them would see the Messianic era.”
And he managed to say it with a straight face. I call that a miracle!
Yes, the holocaust WAS different, but – in history – not that different. Think the Christian Crusades and the invasion of Russia by tribes from the Far East that killed cities wholesale. And our killing of he Indians and now – where is Israel headed? I was born in Germany and survived, because in Germany Jews had some time to make plans, and more options. For a long time I had trouble with things like Mercedes and the old people I saw there, though my home town (Frankfurt/M) felt like home, even though most of it had been turned to rubble by the Allied bombings. I thought that “they brought it on themselves” and did not deserve my pity. But I am old myself now and there are few people arounf older than me, who could have ben Nazis, and the sixty-eight generation is filled with guilt and has tried everything possible to make up for the Hlocaust. You see signs of it everywhere. And when is it enough? My friends there are closer to me than many friends here. And are the neo-Nazis there worse tha here? Check with the Southern Poverty law Center. And where would Israel be without reparations? I object to the Germans’ unwillingness to criticize Israel. And I stand with the survivors who say “never again” meand the jews too.
sliver
“is the prophet doomed because he embellishes the possibility of meaning in an apparently meaningless world?”
how much of this meaninglessness is attributable to the belief in a heavenly afterlife that’s supposed to more than make up for any earthly shortcomings?