Leonid Goldin | The Jewish question in context and subtext

Аналитика 30.10.2024

Эта статья на русском языке  – здесь

Оставайтесь в курсе последних событий! Подписывайтесь на наш канал в Telegram.

Фото автора

The people shall live separately and shall not be numbered among the nations.

Torah, Bemidbar 23:9.

Unexpected

The process of Jewish emancipation initiated by the revolutions in France and America was complicated and controversial. Still, after the victory over fascism and the re-establishment of Israel, it seemed that thousands of years of disenfranchisement and hatred were over, and the global development of democracy and enlightenment would overcome the recurrence of anti-Semitism.

But it took only a few weeks after October 7 for hopes of a free, equal life to be shaken, and anti-Semitism, which has never disappeared, gained global vindication and support from the street to international, state, and public institutions. The vast majority of UN members and its leadership have taken a position hostile to Israel. There are civil and inter-state wars, acts of genocide, ethnic discrimination in many countries, and tens of millions of refugees in the world, yet Israel accounts for more condemnatory resolutions than all other countries combined. Even in countries with which Israel has enjoyed favorable political and economic relations in recent years, today they demand sanctions and a halt to military action. However, such measures are to save the irreconcilable enemies of Israel and the Western world.

Attempts of political, economic, and cultural globalization and cooperation have failed, but global anti-Semitism has developed at pandemic speed. Opinion polls show a dramatic increase in negative attitudes toward the Jewish state and a rise in anti-Semitic sentiment everywhere. Even in America, only a third of respondents have recently expressed sympathy for the Jewish state, and among Americans aged 18-29, only 13%. Support for military and economic aid to Israel has fallen sharply. On the anniversary of October 7, pro-Palestinian demonstrations with pogrom slogans were far more numerous than pro-Israeli ones. Anti-Semitic incidents increased by hundreds of percent. Statistics do not reflect reality; most victims do not report to the police. The new status of Jews is normalized. Church doors are always wide open, with no security, but on Jewish holidays and the Sabbath, synagogues have police and internal guards, detectors, and checking women’s purses.

Jews are blamed for all the ills of mankind, genocide, wars, control of governments, finance, and media, even today, when Jews cannot stop a critically dangerous development. “Blood libel,” the ritual use of the blood of Christian babies, has been revived in accusations of the murder of Palestinian children; Jewish students go to class shouting ‘Baby Killers,’ and the defenders of the rampaging obscurantists talk about free speech.

Not so long ago, Jews were prominent in media and education. Still, in recent years, even if their presence remains, their influence has been lost, the mainstream media is anti-Israeli, and the education system has become a school of anti-Semitic education.

Alan Dershowitz, America’s most famous lawyer and Harvard professor, can no longer appear in university classrooms because of his strong support for Israel. A Jewish professor at Columbia University who demanded that the administration take action against bullying and threats is barred from campus. At New York University, a professor world-renowned for research in the fight against cancer who supported Israel lost his job. Even Hillary Clinton, a star and liberal icon who came to lectures with a state security, had to stop teaching at Columbia University when she spoke of Israel’s right to self-defense. The atmosphere at elite universities is determined by foreign students and sponsors and their supporters, raised on “Anti-Colonialism,” “Diversification, Inclusion, Equality,” “Critical Racial Theory,” and other liberal demagoguery of that ilk. They started in elite universities and quickly made it to the lower grades of public schools.

I taught sociology, psychology, philosophy, and literature in America for 30 years, but I could not work today. Even silence does not ensure self-preservation; one must “take a stand” predetermined by the sentiments of colleagues and students. The administration is afraid of mass protests, and the authorities are primarily concerned with the votes of the electorate. Impunity leads to an escalation of aggression and hatred.

I was recently at a meeting with the famous French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy; he has a huge international reputation as a human rights activist and witness to the world’s most acute interstate and ethnic conflicts. He has often been a consultant and policy advocate for the UN and other international organizations. His lectures attracted large audiences, and his voice was listened to by statesmen. A testament to Levy’s authority was his recent speech at the UN on the war between Russia and Ukraine. He has been a peacemaker and mediator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for years.

But after Oct. 7, he declared, “Israel must win this war and destroy Hamas.” The day after the terrorist attack, he flew to Israel to witness the crime. He published a book, “Israel Alone,” in which he showed a picture of the universal lies and hypocrisy toward the Jewish state. Temple Emanuel, where his speech took place, decided to send 5,000 copies of the book to universities in America. Levy is planning a series of lectures at universities, in many of which he has taught. Levy is a brilliant speaker and author with powerful logic and knowledge. Still, it is hard to imagine that his book will impact the university environment and that his tour will be possible if he goes beyond Jewish audiences.

Fareed Zakaria, the gold standard of liberal journalism, gave Levy the floor on his CNN program, but after him gave three times as much time to African-American activist Ta-Nehisi Coates, who has become the oracle and prophet of the mainstream media, after visiting the West Bank for ten days and accusing Israel of apartheid and discrimination.

In France, Levy’s homeland, the situation of Jews worsens every year. Natan Shcharansky asked French philosopher Alain Finkelkraut if there is a future for the Jews of France, his interlocutor responded with the question, “Do the French have a future in France? Does Europe have a future in Europe?” – “France belongs to Islam, not to the French. I have no place here. I cannot show my face in the street”, says Finkelkraut. Insults, death, and death threats have become part of his existence. Finkelkraut and Levy are super-celebrities, and intellectual status is still valued in France, but their public appearance without police protection is impossible.

In America, the situation is less dramatic, but when Levy performed in Manhattan at the podium and signed autographs, a policeman was standing near him. Today, no public Jewish event is without police protection. And the anti-Semitic paranoia is only growing.

The context.

According to the biblical story, there was a time when people spoke the same language and understood each other. But when they thought the heavens were not their limit and decided to build the Tower of Babel to punish their overconfidence and desire to know the unknowable, God sowed chaos among the builders, separating them by language. There are reasons to believe that the ideas of social and cultural integration of mankind are alien to the project of the Almighty.

Since then, there have been severe obstacles to mutual understanding of people, which cannot be overcome even with great desire and education. Even more so with intellectual and moral degradation.

Philosophy did not avoid linguistic and cognitive difficulties and offered a solution: contextualism and deconstruction in epistemology—the theory of knowledge. To put it simply, philosophy uses an understanding of place, time, states, motives, intentions, and other specific circumstances to interpret what is said and written.

Often, the author of a maxim does not realize what he says and writes and is amazed at the explanation offered or rejects it. Politicians, social scientists, and journalists always have an excuse ready: the meaning is taken out of context, distorted it, or perverted it.

Psychologists Lev Vygodsky and Uri Bronfenbrenner, philosophers Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jacques Derrida, were at the origin of the theory of context. All of them were Jews, not religious, although they were dealing with the same problems as Talmudists and Kabbalists. However, they could not imagine that their ideas could serve as a justification for vigorous anti-Semitism.

From Washington to the fringes of the country and far abroad, Congressional hearings of elite university presidents about “threatening, hate-filled anti-Semitism on campuses that has deprived students of the safe environment to which they are entitled” became known. The universities represented at the hearings were headed by educated, modern-minded women who epitomized emancipation, tolerance, and diversification. Still, to justify the anti-Semitic bacchanal, they amicably followed the advice of their lawyers or babbled about context and free speech. They had to leave their posts, but the situation did not improve. Replacing leaders does not solve the issue.

In America, education has extremely strict standards against bullying and harassment in all forms. I know from my own experience that if you talk to a negligent student, especially a minority student, you will get into trouble; a careless phrase about race, ethnicity, or gender will result in the loss of your job. I asked lawyers why these rules do not apply to Jewish students. The explanation – it all depends on the context. If the threat or action is directed at an individual, it is an offense. If it is without a specific addressee, as an expression of personal opinion, it is free speech. But if someone at school or university had said something about people of color, women, homosexuals, immigrants, drug addicts, obese or anorexics, there would have been no talk of context or freedom. There are special norms and rules for Jews.

However, concerning Israel, it is not the historical context used but particular standards. After the terrorist attack on America on 9/11, the civilized world expressed sympathy to the response, and gave great assistance in the war against Al Qaeda and ISIS, who are not different from Hamas and Hezbollah. Relative to population, Israel lost twenty times as many civilians on October 7. Terror against the Jewish state has never stopped.

U.S. and allied military actions have taken place thousands of kilometers away, on other continents, and have resulted in hundreds of thousands of casualties and tens of millions of refugees. Still, Israel is not allowed to secure its borders and cities from incessant shelling and acts of terror. Moreover, the terrorists receive aid, including from Western countries. Abu Dhabi and Singapore could have been built in Gaza with those funds, but instead, there are rockets, tunnels, and corruption.

It is inconceivable that it would be possible for the American mainstream media to give the floor to representatives and defenders of Al Qaeda and ISIS during a time of war. Public outrage would explode if something like this happened, and legislative action would be taken. But Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are allowed to promote their views and interests in order to give a “balanced”, “objective” picture of what is going on. The terrorists’ actions are seen “in context” – they are sufferers of neocolonialism, apartheid, and discrimination. In this absurd picture, the victim and perpetrator are swapped. In this picture, not the terrorist Sinwar, but Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is presented as the main obstacle to a ceasefire and peace.

No one questions the legitimacy and moral justification of the actions of the anti-fascist coalition during and after the end of World War II. The Allies in the war against Nazism used all available arsenals to destroy the enemy, including carpet bombing of populous cities where there was no army and military enterprises. At the end of the war, when its outcome was a foregone conclusion, America used nuclear weapons. As a result of the war, Germany and Japan lost significant territories; fourteen million Germans became refugees, but no one demanded the return of land and reparations. Allied troops occupied Germany and Japan until society eradicated the threat of Nazi revenge. But what is demanding from Israel is not its security but that of the Palestinians, the vast majority of whom, to this day, approve of and support the terrorist regime.

The biblical prophecy: “A nation shall not be numbered among the nations” is coming true. Democracy gave hope of becoming equals among equals, but today, increasingly succumbing to obscurantism and lawlessness, it is powerless to resist millennial evil.

The moment of truth – will there be an epiphany?

The cycles of the new Jewish history and the ups and downs of life in the Diaspora are presented with remarkable conviction and artistic skill in Amos Elon’s book “What a Pity It All”. A chronicle of struggle, achievement, integration, and assimilation, the golden age of European Jews culminating in the Holocaust. Titans of world culture and science Moses Mendelssohn, Heinrich Heine, Felix Mendelssohn, Karl Marx, Theodor Lessing, Theodor Herzl, Sigmund Freud, Albert Einstein, Theodor Adorno, Leon Feitwanger, Arnold Zweig, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Franz Kafka, Hannah Arendt lived and worked during this time. There was a brilliant galaxy of Jewish politicians, financiers, lawyers, doctors, journalists, and even “court Jews” and military commanders with a severe influence on power. The gains seemed irreversible.

The book says a lot about Jews who forgot and rejected their ancestral roots, obsessed with the temptation to make a career, to get rich, to get recognition, who accepted Christianity, socialists living in illusions of world brotherhood and cooperation when anti-Semitism would be ended, and about Jews-anti-Semites, of whom there were also many.

Historical parallels are always tentative and sometimes inapplicable to changed circumstances. But comparing the situation of Jews in Germany before the war with the situation in today’s world is shocking. Not so long ago, the Jews of America epitomized the benefits of freedom and democracy, the progress of social relations, science, and culture. They had considerable influence in public institutions, media, and education. Jews could freely express their religious affiliation and national identification. In the new country, not all immigrant Jews from the USSR made brilliant careers, achieved prosperity, and found a desired place in society. Still, no one till recently could complain about national discrimination and obstacles related to their beliefs and convictions. Today, Jews, two percent of them in America account for more “hate crimes” than all others combined. The anti-Semitism of the social bottom has mingled with the sentiments of the celebrities; anti-semitic voices are heard in Congress.

The most aquite question today is what Jews have and have not done to prevent the current explosion of anti-Semitism. After gaining equal rights, taking advantage of a democratic society, and achieving recognition and prosperity, the Jews of the West felt safe and engaged in the problems of others: colored and sexual minorities, immigrants. Jews were in the forefront of the struggle to overcome social and economic inequality, liberalization of all aspects of public life, for multiculturalism, and were convinced that good deeds will ensure gratitude and eradicate prejudice.

Reform liberals dominate American Jewish life, rejecting traditional Judaism and turning it into a catechism of utopian ideas about society and human nature. 70% of American Jews voted for the Democratic Party, which, under the influence of demographic changes, has been subjugated to the increasingly aggressive ideology of progressives and has given a place and voice in politics, media, and education to outspoken anti-Semites.

In recent years, criticizing Israel and Zionism and fighting Trump and his supporters has become an obsession of Jewish liberals. The outcome of American elections is decisively influenced by the “swing” seven states, and recent opinion polls show that 70% of Jews living there will vote again for the Democratic candidate. Trump believes that Jews who will vote for Harris need an examination of the state of their heads, but it is unlikely that such an analysis will reveal anything new; liberal utopias took hold of the Jewish consciousness long ago and firmly.

Темпл Эмануэл

“American Jews failed themselves and their children after Oct. 7,” writes JNS editor Jonathan Tobin. – “Something is very, very, very wrong… Jews are in shock and fear, rather than outrage and willingness to stand up to those who are trying to intimidate them… American Jews… are based on false priorities and outright cowardice.” There is an extensive network of Jewish organizations in America. Still, they are mainly in the hands of Democrats. They are opposed to the Zionist Organization of America, the most principled and consistent fighter against anti-Semitism and defender of Israel.

Is it possible to see in the possibility of some clarification of consciousness and prospects for change? Today, there is no room for illusions and utopias. Anti-Semitism is not an anachronism that enlightenment, laws, and democracy can defeat. Integration, cultural assimilation, and good deeds have not overcome prejudice and hatred, nor have they provided Jews with security and equality. It has become apparent that anti-Zionism is nothing but pogrom antisemitism that does not distinguish between Jews by belief, social status, and place of residence. “What the rest of the world does and wants should never be a criterion for us. Otherwise, we will all be dead… Jews must trust their history lessons,” writes Shimon Rafaeli in The Tablet.

If we move from reflection and lamentation to practical matters, until a common strategy is found, and there is more dispute than agreement, there is something obvious and indisputable. In a divided, polarized country, the upcoming election’s outcome may depend on a few thousand votes. Jews are a small portion of the electorate, but if the proportion changes – 30% for Republicans, 70 for Democrats – there is some hope. Yes, Trump is impulsive and unpredictable, but his attitude toward Israel and its enemies is well-defined. Harris will follow the party line, the voice of the party base and sponsors; there is no expectation of anything else. This will be the point of no return. And if there is chaos and uncertainty in the mind, at least it is better to stay home than to blame yourself for the wrong choice and its consequences.