Parasha Ki Teitzei

This week’s Torah portion consists of Deuteronomy 21:10–25:19. Listen here and here.

* You can take a woman captive and make her your wife, but first you have to let her shave her head and mourn her family for 30 days. This seems like a realistic way of dealing with human nature. According to Talmudic law, a Jew after a battle may rape a woman captive once, but after that, if he still wants to marry her, he has to follow the above.

* Deut. 22:5: A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.”

* 13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.

22 If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.

25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her.

28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[c] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

* Exclusion From the Assembly
23 [a]No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord.

2 No one born of a forbidden marriage[b] nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation.

3 No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation. 4 For they did not come to meet you with bread and water on your way when you came out of Egypt, and they hired Balaam son of Beor from Pethor in Aram Naharaim[c] to pronounce a curse on you. 5 However, the Lord your God would not listen to Balaam but turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the Lord your God loves you. 6 Do not seek a treaty of friendship with them as long as you live.

7 Do not despise an Edomite, for the Edomites are related to you. Do not despise an Egyptian, because you resided as foreigners in their country. 8 The third generation of children born to them may enter the assembly of the Lord.

[In the Jewish tradition, Edom equals the West, it equals whites.]

Uncleanness in the Camp
9 When you are encamped against your enemies, keep away from everything impure. 10 If one of your men is unclean because of a nocturnal emission, he is to go outside the camp and stay there. 11 But as evening approaches he is to wash himself, and at sunset he may return to the camp.

12 Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. 13 As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement. 14 For the Lord your God moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, so that he will not see among you anything indecent and turn away from you.

* Dealing with excrement is related to God walking among you. Judaism is realistic. It is focused on the nitty gritty realities of life.

* Deut. 23:15: ” If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master.”

If a slave can run away and can’t be forcefully returned, you can’t really have slavery.

* 17 No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute. 18 You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute[d] into the house of the Lord your God to pay any vow, because the Lord your God detests them both.

19 Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite, so that the Lord your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess.

* 24 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. Do not bring sin upon the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.

5 If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married.

* 17 Remember what the Amalekites did to you along the way when you came out of Egypt. 18 When you were weary and worn out, they met you on your journey and attacked all who were lagging behind; they had no fear of God. 19 When the Lord your God gives you rest from all the enemies around you in the land he is giving you to possess as an inheritance, you shall blot out the name of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!

Every people is going to have enemies. You can think of your enemy as evil, or you can think of your enemy as an adversary with whom you have conflicting interests. The Bible vs the Carl Schmitt approach.

* What is a Nazi? A neo-Nazi? A National Socialist? We’ll use the relevant Wikipedia entries as our shared text.

* A goy messaged me: “Jewish New Testament scholar rethinks homosexuality. Hello fellow whites, let’s reform your religion together. I don’t like it. The reasoning in that last paragraph is such a girlish attempt at Socratic thinking. Fake dialectic. I’m sure I’d like her as a person, but Jewish women should stay out of Christian theological concerns… I mean, who is the best-known female gentile Talmud scholar?”

Luke: “Perhaps Christine Hayes at Yale, you hater. #LoveWins”

Hayes published 2003’s award-winning Gentile Impurities and Jewish Identities: Intermarriage and Conversion from the Bible to the Talmud.

In the 19th Century, we got the first important gentile scholars of Talmud.

* Amy-Jill Levine writes:

Not Good to be Alone: Rethinking the Bible and Homosexuality

Conservative readers regard Scripture as having authority over their lives, and they attempt to be faithful to texts they see as divinely revealed. They are not reading erroneously when it comes to same-sex relations: the Bible does not condone such relationships.

Further, many of these same conservative readers would also forbid women’s ordination, but they are by no means bigoted against mothers, wives, or daughters. Indeed, they may struggle to follow the divine word over their personal preference regarding women’s ecclesial roles.

Similarly, they may believe that individuals who are not baptized are bound for hell, but that view does not necessarily make them haters of individual Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims. Rather, they are deeply concerned for their neighbours’ souls. They do not hate gay people, any more than they hate women, or non-Christians. Liberals should at least recognize these individuals as acting according to their convictions in granting certain Scriptures precedence over secular culture.

* Amy-Jill Levine writes:

Holy Week and the Hatred of the Jews: How to Avoid Anti-Judaism this Easter

Jesus of Nazareth, charged by the Roman authorities with the sedition, dies on a Roman cross. But Jews – the collective, all Jews – become known as “Christ-killers.”

Still haunting, the legacy of that charge becomes acute during Holy Week, when pastors and priests who speak about the death of Jesus have to talk about “the Jews.”

Every year, the same difficulty surfaces: how can a gospel of love be proclaimed, if that same gospel is heard to promote hatred of Jesus’s own people?

The charge against “the Jews” permeates the pages of the New Testament.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Pilate literally washes his hands while “all the people” – all the Jewish people – clamour for Jesus’s death: “Let him be crucified … His blood be on us and on our children!” (Matthew 27:23, 27).

John’s Gospel identifies the Jews as “from your father the devil” (John 8:44) and blames them for backing Pilate into a corner and forcing him to kill an innocent man.

In the Acts of the Apostles, Peter charges “the entire house of Israel” (Acts 2:36) with crucifying Jesus and so having “killed the Author of life” (Acts 3:14-15). Paul then bluntly refers to “the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus” (1 Thessalonians 2:14-15).

Perhaps this vilification was inevitable. Jesus’s followers could not understand how the vast majority of Jews could not accept their belief in him as the Messiah. The majority of Jews, in turn, saw no sign of the Messianic age having dawned: no general resurrection of the dead; no ingathering of the exiles to Zion; no end to death, war, disease, or poverty. What was self-evident to one group was incomprehensible to the other. Incomprehension turned to mistrust, and mistrust, on both sides, turned to vilification…

We come finally to our sixth option: admit to the problem and deal with it. There are many ways congregations can address the difficult texts. Put a note in service bulletins to explain the harm the texts have caused. Read the problematic texts silently, or in a whisper. Have Jews today give testimony about how they have been hurt by the texts.

Those who proclaim the problematic verses from the pulpit might imagine a Jewish child sitting in the front pew and take heed: don’t say anything that would hurt this child, and don’t say anything that would cause a member of the congregation to hurt this child. Better still: educate the next generation, so that when they hear the problematic words proclaimed, they have multiple contexts – theological, historical, ethical – by which to understand them.

Christians, hearing the Gospels during Holy Week, should no more hear a message of hatred of Jews than Jews, reading the Book of Esther on Purim, should hate Persians, or celebrating the seder and reliving the time when “we were slaves in Egypt,” should hate Egyptians.

We choose how to read. After two thousand years of enmity, Jews and Christians today can recover and even celebrate our common past, locate Jesus and his earliest followers within rather than over and against Judaism, and live into the time when, as both synagogue and church proclaim, we can love G-d and our neighbour.

* When a goy gets his FICO score, does he feel that the Jews are ranking him?

* I like much of Southern California’s non-native vegetation. When I see a beautiful flower or tree, I rarely ask, is this native? I am not bothered if the vegetation is not native. Yet, there are non-native forms of vegetation that are pernicious. The same principles apply to people. Just as I want a country to select non-native vegetation carefully, I want them to select their immigrants carefully.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Torah | Comments Off on Parasha Ki Teitzei

For Race And Nation: George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party

An Amazon customer review:

This is the only book I’ve ever read about George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party, although I have read other works on the hard right movement. It was a very revealing, but disturbing portrait of a man whose life became a futile, wasted exercise into the downward spiral of self-hatred, which manifested itself in the hatred of all others who were not lily-white, pure-bred Protestant Americans. This hostility found an collective outlet among delusional, self-hating bigots like himself, and Rockwell, who could have been a remarkable American success story if he had continued to follow the route of some of his college and military colleagues, chose to throw away a beautiful wife, adorable children, and even a brilliant naval career to pursue a worthless life by advocating white supremacy. This biography is testimony to what causes hatred within and what drives individuals addicted to causes that will not benefit anyone, including themselves.

Rockwell reminds one of another well-bred White Anglo-Saxon Protestant racist whose delusions of grandeur had a far greater and more malignant impact upon American history: John Wilkes Booth. Like Booth, Rockwell had every advantage with which to succeed in life and chose a blighted path of self-destruction. Both men were tall, handsome, well-educated, and came from socially prominent families, but both became increasingly intolerant of those who were different and their feelings of racial superiority nurtured dangerous detours into megalomania. It should be no surprise that one chose to assassinate a President and that the other was himself assassinated by one of his own stormtroopers.

I gave the book four stars because it is well-written and researched, but would have been obliged to give the biography the maximum if I had read more about Rockwell’s background and his two marriages. The book tells us so much about his latter career as the country’s most infamous right-wing extremist. His charismatic qualities were no doubt the major reason he was so well-received on college campuses across the nation, and he was such a unique individual, one can’t help but wonder if Rockwell could actually have become Governor of Virginia or President of the United States if he had been an establishment-worthy liberal like John Kennedy or Bill Clinton. He had aspirations for greatness, yet he wound up on the ash heap of history. His life story is a lesson for us all, and it needs to be taught.

Here are excerpts from the book:

On June 22, 1960, George Lincoln Rockwell, the leader of the American Nazi Party, flew into New York City to defend his application to speak in Union Square. Waiting for him at the airport was stormtrooper Roger Foss, who had hopped a bus from Washington, D.C., to New York City. They rode the subway to the New York State Supreme Court; there they walked cautiously through dozens of protesters standing outside the building. Nobody recognized Rockwell in a business suit-he looked more like a congressman than a Nazi. The courtroom was in chaos. Six lawyers stood before the bench to oppose Rockwell’s petition to speak; the gallery was filled with angry-looking members of the Jewish community. One by one citizens, attorneys, and pressure group representatives of New York City denounced Rockwell before the bench, claiming that his appearance would jeopardize the health and safety of the community. Then it was Rockwell’s turn to speak.

The courtroom fell silent as he approached Justice Vincent Lupiano. Rockwell paused a few moments for dramatic effect before launching into a masterful soliloquy that utilized both legal citations and humor to disarm his opponents. Around the courtroom the lawyers and public officials stood open-mouthed; no one had expected such an effective performance. Suddenly a bearded rabbi stood up in the back of the courtroom screaming of “Nazi atrocities.” A heavyset Irish policeman yelled at him to “sit down and shut up,” but the rabbi’s hysterics intensified; he changed from broken English to Yiddish, waved his arms in wild gestures, and finally collapsed to the floor in convulsions. Bystanders and police carried the man off, but not before he had stolen the moment from Rockwell, the moment during which the entire courtroom had been hanging on his every word. The timing was perfect. 1 Judge Lupiano called a recess. Rockwell and Foss made their way out to the rotunda, where several television cameras were set up. The Nazis stood back to back, surrounded by an angry mob of 150 people. Rockwell told television reporters that the ANP was “growing every minute” but that his goals had been misrepresented by newspapers. “Contrary to newspaper reports we are not trying to exterminate anybody, but we are trying to eliminate communism. We want to shock the American people into the awareness of the extreme danger of what is going on.”

A reporter asked if he intended to gas Jews; Rockwell replied that he intended to gas traitors, Jews or not. The reporter asked how many Jews that might be; Rockwell said, “Eighty percent.” Immediately, shouts and curses rang through the rotunda. A spectator yelled, “If he’d go outside I’d break his neck for it! You dirty bum you! You call eighty percent of the Jews traitors!” The man lunged at Rockwell, but Foss grabbed his wrists and pushed him back. A television reporter asked, “Mr. Rockwell, how do you react to this kind of treatment?” “I’m used to it,” shouted Rockwell. “They never make such a fuss over communists speaking; it’s only when someone is an anti-communist.”

A bystander half Rockwell’s height wriggled through the mob to stand toe to toe with Rockwell. “Only dogs that spew disease all over the place, dogs like you that have the gall to come in here and do what you do.” Rockwell kept his arms crossed, high on his chest so they would not be trapped at his sides if he had to start swinging his fists. Another spectator yelled, “How much do you get from the communists for fomenting this disorder, you animal?”  

The mob surged forward, surrounding Rockwell and Foss, pushing and pulling to get at them. Television cameras tipped over and crashed on the marble floor; reporters were knocked down and trampled under foot; the mob pressed in on Rockwell, shouting “Kill him! Kill him!”

Security guards hustled Rockwell and Foss into an adjoining room to await the riot police. When order was restored the two returned to the courtroom, and the hearing commenced. At its conclusion, they were whisked off to La Guardia Airport under police escort and placed aboard an American Airlines plane bound for Washington. The next day the episode received nationwide coverage in newspapers across the country; Rockwell had succeeded in forcing the media to give him publicity. He could not force them to be impartial, but the “facts” were irrelevant. The important thing was that his name was now synonymous with the American Nazi Party. Newspapers, television, and radio stations found it impossible to avoid mentioning his brash and daring exploits; editors and columnists could not resist the temptation to denounce him to their readers. More important to him personally, Rockwell could now claim leadership of the most infamous political party in America…

One particular event, involving Fred Allen’s wife, made a lasting impression on Lincoln. In the midst of conversation with other guests, Portia Allen used foul-language. The boy was so taken aback by her vulgar tongue–especially from a woman–that he questioned his father about the incident. Doc explained that Mrs. Allen was Jewish. Lincoln asked if Jewishness had anything to do with it; his father replied that Jews were very “sophisticated people” who meant no harm by such language. There was a degree of anti-Semitism and racism expressed in many of the households where Rockwell spent his youth. But it is not a likely uncommon in the middle-class America of that era. Rockwell’s cousins described their family as “Archie Bunker types,” very anti-Semitic, anti-black, anti-Catholic, anti-Italian, but these were feelings they “didn’t talk about outside the family.”  

…He ran into problems with sociology. Unlike geography or psychology, where there were fundamental ideas and well-established facts upon which the science was based, he found the principles of sociology elusive. He could not get to the kernel of the discipline. The instructor’s egalitarian beliefs confused him; he was sure that such beliefs could not be facts. The differences between the mental capabilities of individuals as well as the levels of development of societies could not be wholly explained by environmental effects. Were there no inherent differences in the quality of human beings?

…A movement was under way to get General MacArthur the Republican nomination in 1952. Rockwell liked the idea and made telephone calls to see what he could do to help. He read a letter-to-the-editor in the   San Diego Union   by a woman asking for volunteers to help organize a MacArthur rally. Rockwell called her, and she invited him to her home to discuss the situation. There he told her his idea of renting a hall for the rally. The woman stopped him and with a sad face said, “No, you can’t get a hall so easily, even if you pay. They won’t rent one.” “What do you mean?” Rockwell blurted. “Who won’t rent one?”

The woman glanced quizzically at her husband, took a deep breath, and said, “The Jews.” “The Jews?” Rockwell ejaculated. “What have the Jews got to do with it? What do they care whether you get a hall or not?” “They hate MacArthur,” she replied. She unfolded a copy of the   California Jewish Voice   and pointed to an article condemning MacArthur. There were others like it. Rockwell sat in disbelief. It was too fantastic. He felt things were somehow being misinterpreted. The woman gave him some materials to take home and read. One of the papers,   Common Sense, by Conde McGinley, detailed how Jews instigated the 1917 Russian Revolution.

Noting that the sources listed were the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia and the Overman Report to President Wilson, Rockwell decided to check the “facts” himself. He went to the San Diego Public Library and dug through journals to locate the citations in   Common Sense. The citations checked out. It suddenly occurred to him that if the woman was telling the truth about the Russian Revolution being Jewish led, perhaps she was telling the truth about an “international Jewish conspiracy” to destroy the civilization of the gentiles. So it was, that in the basement of the San Diego Public Library, Rockwell awoke from “thirty years of stupid political sleep.” He continued to visit the woman. Under her tutelage, he read more and more literature, until he came to the conclusion that Marxism was the organization of the world’s inferior masses, attempting the overthrow of the elites of the world. He attended a speech by white supremacist Gerald L. K. Smith, director of the Christian Nationalist Crusade and publisher of   The Cross and the Flag.  

Smith implored his listeners to read the “holy” pages of Adolf Hitler’s   Mein Kampf; Rockwell scoured several San Diego bookstores until he found the book. He read it voraciously cover to cover, digesting its themes. He would later tell followers how the book delivered “mental sunshine which bathed all the gray world in the clear light of reason and understanding.”  

Rockwell the McCarthyite was now under the tutelage of Adolf Hitler. He came to the realization that National Socialism was the only thing that could save white men from degradation and racial degeneration. Hitler became for him a Christ-like savior and   Mein Kampf   his new Bible. But he kept these discoveries to himself, telling no one, not even his wife, that he had become a believer in National Socialism. He focused his energies on reading all the extremist literature he could get his hands on. He carefully studied   The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the same anti-Jewish book that Henry Ford Sr. gave away with each car for several years. Rockwell was unconcerned whether or not the Protocols was a forgery. The theme melded perfectly with his developing mind-set.

…Before he shipped out to Iceland, Rockwell visited with his cousin Pete Smyth. Smyth recalled that Rockwell became increasingly agitated as he described the magnitude of the “Jewish conspiracy” in America. Smyth was shocked by Rockwell’s fervor as he went on and on about the wickedness and cleverness of the Jews. During the evening, as the two men got inebriated, Rockwell told his cousin about the need for an American Nazi Party-to rectify the error of fighting on the wrong side in the last war.

…He banished the agony of a broken marriage by redirecting his energies to study and writing. He re-read   Mein Kampf   a dozen times, annotating and indexing the themes of the book.

…Disturbed by the accounts in the papers, he read requested transcripts of the proceedings in the Congressional Record.   He immediately realized that the newspaper accounts and the Record   were in contradiction. He concluded that American newspapers were suppressing the “truth” of McCarthy’s statements; the Jewish-controlled media were deliberately slanting the news to make McCarthy look like a “bad guy” to the public. Even the Armed Forces network was against McCarthy: the entire public information network was in a conspiracy to smear him. Why? he asked himself. Who had an interest in lying about McCarthy? He reasoned that anyone who was an effective anticommunist was labeled a hatemonger and a bigot. Since the “Jewish-controlled” media were against McCarthy, the Jews must be communist sympathizers. To Rockwell it made perfect sense: “Communism was Jewish.”

Rockwell surmised that as long as conservatives focused on the economic-materialistic rather than the racial, defending a system rather than a race, they would continue foolishly to pursue spurious and superficial solutions rather than fundamental ones. In essence, he was falling into line with Hitler’s doctrine: “The instinct of preserving the species is the first cause of the formation of human communities. But the State is a folk organism and not an economic organization. A difference that is as great as it remains incomprehensible to the so-called “statesman,” especially of today. They believe therefore, that they can build up the State by economy, whereas in reality it is always the result of the activity of those qualities which lie in line with the will to preserve the species and the race.”

…A mutual friend arranged a meeting between Rockwell and   William Buckley, Jr., publisher of the National Review. Rockwell was overwhelmed by the intellectual prowess of Buckley and his staff-which included several Jews. He felt there was “more pulsating brain-power and genius surrounding Buckley than in any place else on earth.”   16   Buckley would not discuss the “Jewish question,” but he did hire Rockwell to promote   National Review   in colleges and universities. Their business relationship did not last long; Rockwell gave the job a half-hearted effort. Promoting conservatism was not his paramount objective. He wanted to fight Jews.

Rockwell moved his family to Atlanta. There he experienced a series of dreams, each a variation on the same theme. A man would approach him and say, “Someone wants to see you.” The two would walk to a room, where Rockwell would open the door and find Adolf Hitler waiting for him; then he would wake up. Always a skeptic when confronted with the supernatural, Rockwell was shaken by the recurring dreams, omens that became for him a symbolic summons to a path not yet taken.

…When they arrived at Pennsylvania Avenue, police informed Rockwell of the rules for picketing the White House. Rockwell grabbed a “Kike” placard and with little fanfare, stepped off a small curb–the first step in becoming the world’s most notorious anti-Semite since Adolf Hitler. There were no mobs of screaming Jews, no “three hundred niggers” to beat them the snot out of them. Their audience consisted of journalists and Anti-Defamation League photographers. After a peaceful demonstration, Rockwell accompanied the youths to a motel to celebrate their success with a few beers. Rockwell’s criticism of Jews was so far limited to Israel, but there is no doubt as to the true motivations of a man using caustic epithets like “Kike” on protest signs. He hated not only Israel but American Jewry as well. Public criticism of Zionists may or may not be acceptable to American Jewry, but open hatred and condemnation of their heritage, will mark a man for life–Rockwell was marked for life. Crossing over the unmarked line into anti-Semitism is an act from which there is no return. A political career-other than that of an extremist–is no longer possible. Moreover, his family was held accountable and impugned for his actions.

…Rockwell insisted to FBI agents that his own writings were not meant to incite anyone to violence, except when being attacked by Jews. “Literature setting forth the truth was worth more than 10,000 cross burnings or a bombing. Their fight was against the political Jews and not the religious Jews.” He tried to convince the press and the FBI he was not anti-Semitic. “I am anti-Zionist and anti-Communist Jews, and any other form of treason. I’m pro-American republic.”

…In Iceland, Thora’s wealthy father received word of his son-in-law’s activities. Concerned about the well-being of his daughter and grandchildren, he telephoned Arlington and pressured her to return to Iceland. The dashing naval fighter pilot she had fallen in love with was now an open National Socialist.

…Rockwell trudged through the concourse, now totally alone–no family, no job, no money, his home in jeopardy, the ire of the Jewish community raised against him. As the days passed into weeks, Rockwell slipped deeper and deeper into depression. The house that had been alive with playing children was not quiet, cold, and empty. The sight of a doll or baby dress left behind brought him to the verge of sobbing. He spent Thanksgiving and Christmas alone. His fellow conservatives ostracized him. The utility company shut off the electricity and telephone.   16   On December 1, 1958, Rockwell’s naval status was changed to standby reserve: no more weekend flying, no more monthly paychecks. Rockwell’s siblings were shocked by his actions. His sister Priscilla said they were “horrified … we wanted to crawl in a hole and hide … it was a nightmare.” Most affected by his older brother’s notoriety was Robert, a rising young businessman raising a family in New England. Robert offered to help pay for psychiatric treatment for what he believed was Rockwell’s clinical paranoia.

…Nevertheless, he continued to sink deeper into depression and self-pity. In time, however, a strange experience pulled him out of his misery. One morning he received a package from a “fellow traveler,” James K. Warner. Inside he found a carefully folded Nazi flag, eleven feet long. He believed it was a stroke of destiny. He dosed the living room curtains and hung the flag across one entire wall, placed a plaque of Hitler at the center of the flag and three lighted candles on a bookcase in front of it, then stepped to the other side of the room to “worship” at his shrine, his altar to Adolf Hitler. He felt an upsurge in his soul, a religious-like power. Goose bumps covered his body, his hair stood on end, tears filled his eyes. He experienced a sense of being more than himself, communion with something vast and eternal. His purpose in life was now clear; he was filled with a sense of mission, a sense of destiny. He would fight Jews to his final day. He snapped his heels together, raised his arm in salute, and shouted “Heil Hitler! Heil Hitler! HEIL Hitler!”

…Rockwell believed that millions of people were either conscious National Socialists or were “only a synapse away from discovering that they were National Socialists–and never knew it–because they have never been allowed to know what National Socialism is.”   12   To his way of thinking, National Socialism was the very essence of what conservatives desired, but they were afraid to examine the doctrine because of the propaganda campaign directed at it. Instead of examining the ideas of National Socialism as propounded by Hitler in   Mein Kampf,   they let their minds be fogged by the emotional baggage of “Hollywood Nazism.” The constant images of gas chambers, ovens, and piles of corpses prevented any serious analysis of the doctrine. The media, in his view, never focused attention on the millions of executions by Russian or Chinese communists; in the public mind, only the German Nazi atrocities were remembered. Rockwell realized that the Holocaust had to be refuted or inroads could not be made. Without the Holocaust, Hitler was just another dictator and National Socialism another fascist form of government. Holocaust denial was unheard of in 1959. Only fourteen years had passed since the end of World War II, and the public was still coming to terms with Hitler’s mass murder of European Jewry. Some of the culpable, like Adolf Eichmann, would not be brought to justice until years later. Rockwell needed to refute the facts. The testimony of survivors, the photographs,
and the presence of the actual concentration camp buildings used in the killings were of no concern. If the Holocaust could be even slightly discredited, National Socialism, Hitlerism, might become palatable, maybe even respectable, as an ideology. The massive amount of evidence did not deter Rockwell; it was simply a large stone that needed to be chipped away. Future generations could reduce it to rubble. To establish a Holocaust-was-a-hoax theme, Rockwell fabricated a story for a seedy men’s pulp magazine called   Sir!   The story, “by a former corporal in the SS as told to Master Sergeant Lew Cor (Roc-wel spelled backwards phonetically) related how the Nazis conducted vivisection on Jewish concentration camp inmates. The article was accepted, and Rockwell received seventy-five dollars in payment. When it was published, the editors used concentration camp photos alongside his story to enhance its appeal. To Rockwell’s way of thinking, since the publisher had used bogus photos for a bogus story, the Holocaust must be a Jewish fabrication. Rockwell was to use the magazine article as proof of a “holocaust hoax” for the rest of his life.

Rockwell…told reporters, “When I was in the advertising game we used nude women. Now I use the swastika and stormtroopers. You use what brings them in.”

…After a few days of attempts at reconciliation, he realized the futility of the situation and borrowed return plane fare from Thora’s father. As he waited to leave Iceland, Thora arrived at the airport to say good-bye. With tears rolling down their faces, they hugged and sobbed for several minutes. Then it was over, and she was gone. He would never see Thora or his children again.

…He realized that Thora, by throwing him out of her life, had given him a “priceless armor of fearlessness,” which he could carry forward into future battles.

…Trooper Dick Braun invited Foss into the building but insisted he wipe his feet on the “Jewish prayer rug” (an ark curtain stolen from a synagogue) in the entryway. This was the ANP method of uncovering Jewish spies.

…Rockwell’s activities were carefully reviewed and analyzed at length. The Jewish community was faced with a political conundrum: how could it advocate suppression of Rockwell without abridging the Bill of Rights? Encouraging the government to suppress civil liberties and persecute a minority viewpoint is a dangerous gamble; one never knows when a pogrom will be instituted. The same constitutional freedoms that protect hate-mongers from suppression protect other minority groups from arbitrary suppression. To arrest Rockwell would give him a platform from which to speak, a “field day” in court. A court battle would bring to defense civil liberties groups and provide him a “hero’s role” in the eyes of his followers and like-minded constituents. A plan of action was devised, and a memorandum was sent to all Jewish organizations: Do nothing to play into Rockwell’s publicity-seeking activities. Do not telephone or harass him – it only feeds his delusion of self-importance. Do not attend his public meetings. Never use physical force against the Nazis.

The memo closed with a plea for restraint against vigilantism: The strength and security of American democracy, and the security of the Jewish community as of all other groups, rests upon the unimpaired integrity of American law. When there is defiance of the law, and disrespect for the law and order, we are among the first to suffer… Jews ought to be the last people in the world to acquiesce in conduct which goes counter to the basic structure of American law under which the safety and freedom of all of us have their most secure protection.

The sympathizer praised Rockwell’s efforts but wanted clarification about the party’s continual use of the phrase “white Christian America” in its literature. Foss told the atheist that the party used the “white Christian America” line to appeal to the Christian segment of society. Most whites were opposed to atheistic communism, and the party wanted to play upon that fear. For some people the appeal of “racial pride” was enough to gain their support, but for others it was not. The “Christian America” theme was an appeal to their Christian pride, but it also helped further the notion that Jews were a different race than whites.

…In late October, Abe Rosenthal, the metropolitan editor of the   New York Times, received a tip that Dan Burros, former national secretary of the ANP and king kleagle (chief organizer) of the United Klans of America in the New York City area, was Jewish. Rosenthal assigned reporter McCandlish Phillips, a “born again,” evangelical, fundamentalist Christian, to do a background check on Burros and see if the tip could be substantiated. Phillips discovered that Burros had been a star pupil at a Hebrew school in a Queens synagogue and had had a bar mitzvah at age thirteen. Phillips tried to contact Burros on several occasions, with no success. Finally, in the early morning of October 29, he spotted Burros leaving his Queens apartment and followed him to a barbershop. Phillips confronted the crew-cut Burros when he emerged, and they walked to a nearby luncheonette. After Phillips recited Burros’s Klan and Nazi credentials, he asked, “There’s one thing about you I can’t figure out, it doesn’t fit the picture. Your parents were married in a Jewish wedding ceremony. ”

“You’re not going to print that!” Burros snapped. “I’ll have to retaliate, do you understand? If you publish that, I’ll come and get you and kill you. I don’t care what happens. I’ll be ruined. This is all I’ve got to live for.” They left the restaurant and walked into the street. Phillips turned to Burros: “I’m through asking questions. I just want to talk to you for a few minutes as one human being to another human being.” Burros made no reply. “I’ve been told that you feel trapped in this movement, that you think you can’t get out. But there is an exit for you. I want to quote a verse from the Bible, a verse that has been meaningful for me: ‘If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away. Behold all things are become new.’ ” “You’re trying to con me,” Burros sneered. “I’m not, I mean it,” Phillips answered. Dan Burros walked away, back to his apartment in Queens. Throughout that day Burros telephoned the   Times   with threats against Phillips. That evening he took a bus to the home of fellow Klansman
and one time ANP sympathizer Roy Frankhouser in Reading, Pennsylvania. The next morning, October 31, Burros left Frankhouser’s house to pick up the Sunday edition of the   Times   at a newsstand. The bold headline leapt from the page, sending a shock through his body: STATE KLAN LEADER HIDES SECRET OF JEWISH ORIGIN Burros stormed back to Frankhouser’s home seething with rage, kicking furniture throughout the house in an unstoppable rampage. He found Frankhouser’s nickel-plated .32-caliber revolver and yelled, “I’m ruined!” He put the barrel of the pistol to his chest and shouted, “Long live the white race! I’ve got nothing to live for!” He pulled the trigger, put the pistol to his head, and fired another round into his brain. The twenty-eight-year-old Nazi turned Klansman was dead.” 47 Rockwell’s eulogy in the Stormtrooper told how Burros’s life had been “steeped in racist revolutionary causes” like the ANP, the Minutemen, and finally the Klan. With his suicide Burros had “ended his miserably sad life of lies. . .The Burros Episode is but one more indication of the madness of the people known as Jews. . . They are a unique people with a distinct mass affliction of mental disorders… symptoms of paranoia, delusions of grandeur, and delusions of persecution. Dan Burros was the product of this unfortunate Jewish psychosis. It cost him his life.” Privately, Rockwell was stunned and saddened by the death. He admired Burros’s talent at writing propaganda, his ability to condense an idea down to its most elemental meaning in such a way that it was impossible not to understand and remember it. He had been a “brilliant young man and hugely dedicated to the Cause. . . and he worked like a Trojan as a printer.” Koehl remembers that Burros had not looked like a typical Jew and probably had a fair amount of “Aryan blood.” Rockwell
believed that whatever differences they might have had, Burros had been a sincere “righteous Jew” and that something could have been worked out whereby Burros could have continued to serve the National Socialist cause in some capacity and averted the tragedy.” 49 Burros’s exposure was not the result of FBI COINTELPRO action; Bureau files indicate that no action was ever directed against him. According to the Washington Evening Star, a more likely possibility was that his exposure was orchestrated by a Jewish organization.”

Posted in Holocaust, Jews, Nazi | Comments Off on For Race And Nation: George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party

Why One CEO Decided To Kick Nazis Off The Internet (HBO)

Zero Hedge: One Statistics Professor Was Just Banned By Google: Here Is His Story

Posted in Censorship, Google | Comments Off on Why One CEO Decided To Kick Nazis Off The Internet (HBO)

The Same Root Cause

Great thread.

Posted in America | Comments Off on The Same Root Cause

Peter Beinart: ‘The One Thing Jews Should Be Doing To Combat White Supremacy’

Peter Beinart writes in the Forward:

Today’s anti-Semitism isn’t like the anti-Semitism of 100 or even 50 years ago. Overwhelmingly, it comes not from society’s winners but from its losers. Jews no longer press their noses against the gates of restrictive country clubs, Ivy League universities or white shoe law firms. Jews no longer yearn to be accepted by America’s elite WASP families. We already are. The man who currently occupies the White House watched with satisfaction as his eldest daughter became an Orthodox Jew. The woman he defeated watched happily as her daughter got married under a chuppah.

Today’s anti-Semitism emanates less from society’s elites than from the people who feel victimized by them. This doesn’t mean the new anti-Semitism isn’t dangerous. It doesn’t mean Jews shouldn’t respond with outrage and mobilization. But it does mean that, if only to protect ourselves, we must combat the economic and cultural dysfunction that is contributing to neo-Nazism’s rise.

Sunday’s Washington Post profiled six young men who marched for white supremacy in Charlottesville. It described victims of “an economy capsized, a job market contracted, a student-loan crisis erupted,” who found a scapegoat for their woes, and a sense of belonging, in organizations that preach hate. Matthew Parrott, who was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome at age 15, grew up in a mobile home. At Indiana University, students from wealthier backgrounds “made fun of my accent and overbite and they called me ‘white trash’ and ‘hillbilly.’ I was never able to identify with a single person.” Until he found white supremacists. Peyton Oubre, from Metairie, Louisiana, couldn’t find a job after high school: “I could put in 500 applications and receive one call,” he said. He blames blacks for taking all the jobs. Tony Hovater, of Dayton, Ohio, grew radicalized while touring with his metal band through decaying, mostly white Rust Belt and Appalachian towns. “You see how a complete system failed a group of people,” he told the Post. Yet the media, he says, discusses only the African-American poor.

Gilad Atzmon writes:

How to make well-meaning Americans into antisemites?

Make sure they read Peter Beinart’s Forward article…

Beinart, a light Zionist ‘intellectual’ has kindly revealed how American Jews reacted when they heard the “neo-Nazis” chant, “Jews will not replace us.” Some were fearful, but, Beinart asserts, many others were somehow amused by it. “Replace you? Where, behind the counter at Wendy’s? We’re successful, industrious, upper-middle class. You’re the dregs of society. Replace you? Don’t kid yourselves. When it comes to America’s class hierarchy, we replaced you and your kind long ago.”

One might advise Beinart that looking down on Goyim and calling them ‘neo Nazis’ and ‘supremacists’ while simultaneously engaging in his own tribal self-love, supremacist exercise is a very dangerous game.

Beinart claims that ‘white nationalists’ are largely a dysfunctional group of economy victims. “Studies show that in purely economic terms, white supremacists don’t differ much from the population as a whole. But they do differ from Jews, who are America’s wealthiest religious group.”

But “they [the ‘neo Nazis’] don’t just differ financially,” Beinart continues, “they differ culturally, too. They are far less likely to have been raised in stable homes.” Beinart then quotes a study by the Southern Poverty Law Center that points out that“one of the most common background characteristics [of ‘neo nazis’] is some kind of family disruption, whether that be divorce or parental abandonment, a parent becoming incarcerated, or substance abuse by one or both of the parents.”

Beinart apparently doesn’t know that Right wing thinkers blame the Jewish intelligentsia, largely the cultural Marxists, the Frankfurt School and Wilhelm Reich for the destruction of the Church, the eradication of family values, the obliteration of the patriarchal family and so on. Rightly or wrongly, the white nationalists see the Jewish elite as at the core of their plight. One would expect Beinart to make a minimal effort to learn the white nationalists’ argument before he writes about the topic.

In the most supremacist and stereotypical manner, Beinart counsels his fellow Jews to fool the goyim. “For synagogues, countering the conditions that produce neo-Nazism might involve assisting a church in a troubled area. Why? Because …white working-class Americans who attend church are less likely to experience divorce, addiction and financial distress.”

Beinart advises Jews to throw dollars at churches not because religion bonds the nation, but because it is good for the Jews. The church maintains the Goyim’s tranquillity and stops their kids from drifting toward “neo-Nazism.”

Beinart’s recipe for fixing American society is throwing money at white goyim. I really believe that someone should explain to Beinart that American society isn’t a zoo and white people aren’t monkeys.

Beinart ends his article recycling the usual Jewish Tikun Olam (fixing the world) mantra. “We (the Jews) answer hate by repairing the country in which we live.” This might be the time for Beinart, The Forward and their followers to stop trying to repair countries and the world. They would do better to self reflect. Probably a good place to start is by asking why all of that animosity has happened again, just 70 years after the liberation of Auschwitz.

Posted in America, Jews | Comments Off on Peter Beinart: ‘The One Thing Jews Should Be Doing To Combat White Supremacy’

Donald Trump’s Identity Politics

Thomas B. Edsall writes in the New York Times:

Ashley Jardina, a political scientist at Duke, puts it this way:

When the dominant status of whites relative to racial and ethnic minorities is secure and unchallenged, white identity likely remains dormant. When whites perceive their group’s dominant status is threatened or their group is unfairly disadvantaged, however, their racial identity may become salient and politically relevant.

White voters for whom racial identity is important include a minority faction of white supremacists, but as a whole they constitute a much broader and encompassing group. In an Aug. 16 essay for The Washington Post’s Monkey Cage, Jardina wrote:

The whites marching on Charlottesville were only a small segment of a much larger population for whom the politics of white identity resonates. The vast majority of white Americans who feel threatened by the country’s growing racial and ethnic diversity are not members of the KKK or neo-Nazis. They are much greater in number, and far more mainstream, than the white supremacists who protested in Virginia over the weekend.

In a separate essay on the Post’s Monkey Cage site in March 2016, Tesler and Sides explained that

Both white racial identity and beliefs that whites are treated unfairly are powerful predictors of support for Donald Trump in the Republican primaries.

Once Trump secured this “white identifier” base — making him competitive in a multicandidate field — he was positioned to expand his traction among traditional Republicans, including a decisive majority of those who backed Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush.

What are the views of “white identifiers”?

According to Jardina, these voters

are more likely to think that the growth of racial or ethnic groups in the United States that are not white is having a negative effect on American culture.

And they are

much more likely to rank illegal immigration the most important issue facing the U.S. today, relative to the budget deficit, health care, the economy, unemployment, outsourcing of jobs to other countries, abortion, same-sex marriage, education, gun control, the environment or terrorism.

Perhaps most important, Jardina found that white identifiers are

an aggrieved group. They are more likely to agree that American society owes white people a better chance in life than they currently have. And white identifiers would like many of the same benefits of identity politics that they believe other groups enjoy.

In other words, most — though by no means all — white identifiers appear to be driven as much by anger at their sense of lost status as by their animosity toward other groups, although these two feelings are clearly linked.

Tesler argued last November, after the election, that the

Trump effect combined with eight years of racialized politics under President Obama, means that racial attitudes are now more closely aligned with white Americans’ partisan preferences than they have been at any time in the history of polling.

Just over a decade ago, political scientists were discounting the significance of white identity in elections.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Identity Politics

Why Israel Belongs To The Jews

Steve Sailer writes: “Winners are successful at portraying themselves as deserving their property. The Bible, for example, goes to great lengths to honor Abraham. The reverence paid to him is seen as justifying his distant heirs’ possession of the Holy Land. Conversely, the wickedness of the Canaanites, as recounted in their enemy’s book, explains why they didn’t get to keep their possessions.”

Posted in Bible | Comments Off on Why Israel Belongs To The Jews

Anti-Immigration As Politics

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* And a popular alt-right argument says that, anti-immigration or anti-diversity views will always be frustrated in a democracy because … There is a majority constituted of (1) a minority of male deep cucks, plus (2) a majority of women (who mostly sub-consciously favour importing & encouraging more aggressive young males, very commonly ‘diverse’ ones)

It’s said that USA Trump 2016 was a unique one-off, because you had palpable alpha male candidate (very rare), against super-unpleasant corrupt female with male cuck entourage (worse than usual) … women were drawn to the alpha as well as men

It’s said this explains why anti-immigration etc tends to ‘peak’ around 40% of voters … whereas it is said that anti-immigration would win if women didn’t vote … and that voter profiles look like this

Male voter segments
1 – Oligarchs
2 – Cucks, oligarch fellow-travellers & opportunists
3 – Most males, who have a ‘rebel’ streak, & can be motivated to defeat the minority of 1+2 above

Female voters
1 – Overall tend to get along & go along with dominant oligarch policies
2 – When males around them are significantly cucked & gov-fostered feminist policies – alimony etc – are in place –
– (a) Women’s feminism etc will erupt but never satisfy the women, and
– (b) Women will be drawn to favour non-cucked young male arrivals / minorities – ‘welcome refugees’, & thus support the oligarch programme to import migrants / foster ‘diversity’, against indigenous rebel males … who will always seem ‘weak’ because they didn’t grab power

It is said that men are in fact more ‘shocked’ by migrant or minority crimes, rapes etc than women … women are biologically, sub-consciously drawn to having more young males around who will fight & compete, such men are more instinctively attractive to women, & now migrant / minority males have more of this secretly appealing aggressive image ‘women like the bad boys’

It is said that anti-immigration is basically a male interest … with women voting, anti-immigration cannot triumph, they say … It is said that women sub-consciously have little respect for men who do not seize power against the cucks-plus-women alliance … power-grabbing minorities or migrants are instinctively more attractive to them.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Anti-Immigration As Politics

Jews argue whether Zionism is racism — in the Forward!

Philip Weiss writes:

Charlottesville has been a depth charge. The Israeli right was loath to condemn the white nationalists at the fringe of Trump’s base, and this has sent a shock through the American Jewish community. There is open argument about Israel; and it’s not going to end.

The best news is that the Forward, America’s leading liberal Jewish publication, published a piece by Naomi Dann of Jewish Voice for Peace last week equating Zionism with racism. That’s revolutionary. Time was when that argument was made by Arabs at the United Nations and then stifled as supposed anti-Semitism. Now it’s in the Forward, from the mouth of a Jew!

Dann says that white nationalist Richard Spencer was right when he expressed common cause with Israel, saying it’s an ethnocracy that discriminates in favor of a privileged group.

Richard Spencer, whose racist views are rightfully abhorred by the majority of the Jewish community, is holding a mirror up to Zionism and the reflection isn’t pretty.

Looking at Israel today, we can see a state premised on the privileging of one group, and all too often perpetuating the erasure and displacement of another. We also see an obsession with demographics and the maintenance of an ethnic majority.

Jane Eisner, from Jewish Boston

It’s a marvel that this piece even ran. Forward editor Jane Eisner then responded angrily to Naomi Dann, denouncing her as a member of “the radical group Jewish Voice for Peace” spreading untruths about Israel. Ouch! Hat’s off to Eisner for allowing the debate to happen. Even if she says it’s all lies.

We work hard to reflect a range of American Jewish opinion, which is why the piece and reaction to it was published. The free flow of ideas is to be cherished. But when a Jew even hints at comparing Israel to Nazis, it must be denounced.

The argument that Zionism is akin to Nazism is not new, and it’s never been correct. Its related equation – that Zionism is racism – was codified by the United Nations when it passed Resolution 3379 in 1975. Though hardly Israel’s best friend, the international body later came to its senses and overwhelmingly rescinded the resolution in 1991.

Eisner is an ardent Zionist. She believes that ideology is necessary to Jewish survival and that the current Israeli government is undoing Zionism (not expressing it) with its discriminatory policies and the occupation and “denial of Palestinian sovereignty.”

That such policies are done in the name of Zionism is painful, a perversion of the Zionist ideal. It is something that all Jews must reckon with. But the imperfections of reality do not negate the underlying fact that Zionism is not inherently racist and can — and, in fact, does — exist side-by-side with democracy.

It’s great that the Forward is hosting this conversation, because people can argue openly about whether Zionism is necessary. That’s all I’ve asked for; I believe the answer (No it’s an anachronism) will change US Jewry and crumble the Israel lobby. Norman Finkelstein once mocked the idea that Americans could or should argue about Zionism because Zionism might as well be “the name of a hairspray” to Americans. Good joke; but he was always wrong about this. People can argue about any idea that’s important, once it’s identified. And this toothpaste is not going back in the tube.

Eisner clearly believes that Jews are unsafe in America, and that’s why we need Zionism:

For Dann to write that Spencer is “holding a mirror up to Zionism and the reflection isn’t pretty” is especially perilous in the current political climate. The intimidating display of Nazi slogans and symbols in Charlottesville, Virginia, legitimized by the shocking statements of President Trump, are a chilling reminder that even in America, Jews are at risk simply because we are Jews.

We need to “recognize our shared vulnerability” and “strengthen our sense of solidarity,” Eisner says. Back to the monolith! Palestinian vulnerability just gets passing mention.

Also addressing the idea of Jewish vulnerability are writers Ayelet Waldman and Michael Chabon. Last week they published an “open letter to our fellow Jews, in the U.S., Israel, and around the world” declaring that Trump is an anti-Semite who is endangering Jews and it’s time for all Jews to denounce him.

Now he’s coming after you. The question is: what are you going to do about it? If you don’t feel, or can’t show, any concern, pain or understanding for the persecution and demonization of others, at least show a little self-interest. At least show a little sechel. At the very least, show a little self-respect.

To Steven Mnuchin, Gary Cohn, and our other fellow Jews currently serving under this odious regime: We call upon you to resign; and to the President’s lawyer, Michael D. Cohen: Fire your client.

To Sheldon Adelson and our other fellow Jews still engaged in making the repugnant calculation that a hater of Arabs must be a lover of Jews, or that money trumps hate, or that a million dollars’ worth of access can protect you from one boot heel at the door: Wise up.

“Boot heel at the door” is a Gestapo reference. In another traditional phrasing, the writers warn Trump’s Jewish family members Ivanka and Jared Kushner that if they don’t act, You’re dead to us.

To Jared Kushner: You have one minute to do whatever it takes to keep the history of your people from looking back on you as among its greatest traitors, and greatest fools; that minute is nearly past. To Ivanka Trump: Allow us to teach you an ancient and venerable phrase, long employed by Jewish parents and children to one another at such moments of family crisis: I’ll sit shiva for you. Try it out on your father; see how it goes.

Among all the bleak and violent truths that found confirmation or came slouching into view amid the torchlight of Charlottesville is this: Any Jew, anywhere, who does not act to oppose President Donald Trump and his administration acts in favor of anti-Semitism; any Jew who does not condemn the President, directly and by name, for his racism, white supremacism, intolerance and Jew hatred, condones all of those things.

Waldman and Chabon deserve a lot of respect because of their anti-occupation book Kingdom of Olives and Ashes, which contains anti- and non-Zionist voices. I disagree with them about the vulnerability of Jews in the United States. I don’t think history repeats itself; I think that chapter in the west is over and the belief in its endurance is atavistic. But I’m glad to have the debate; especially because that question is at the heart of Zionism.

Finally, here is Chemi Shalev in Haaretz, who is more in the Jane Eisner camp, warning that the Israeli right has shattered American Jewish solidarity with Israel by siding with the enemies of American Jews.

“Rash Embrace of Trump Accelerates the Jewish Schism” is the headline. Shalev says Netanyahu’s animosity toward “liberal, cosmopolitan, universalist Jews” is reminiscent of “the kind of anti-Jewish bile spouted by Jew-haters around the world, from David Duke to Viktor Orban.”

The delineation between the two opposing Jewish camps has never seemed clearer. On one side we have Netanyahu, many of his colleagues, the pro-settler lobby, an unfortunate proportion of Orthodox Jews, supporters of Jewish settlements, Obama-and/or Muslim-hating Israelis along with hyper-hawks and ultranationalists such as Sheldon Adelson. On the other side there are Israeli doves along with American Jewish liberals, Reform and Conservative Jews and other Trump-haters. And increasingly it seems that never the twain shall meet.

Israel’s willingness to embrace Trump above and beyond the call of duty is alienating large chunks of the American Jewish community. Those that supported Israel wholeheartedly are beginning to question themselves, those who had been harboring doubts all along have reached a guilty verdict and those who are sitting on the wall certainly won’t come down in Israel’s favor now or anytime in the future.

Emotions run high in times of conflict. When people fear for their country or for their wellbeing or for the safety of their love ones, there is scant room for moderation and nuance. In the era of Trump, the main question on the minds of his critics is the one Joshua asked when he met God’s emissary: Are you with us or with our enemies? By standing so firmly and so recklessly with Trump, Israel is telling American Jews exactly where it stands: With their enemy.

Posted in Israel, Jews, Nationalism | Comments Off on Jews argue whether Zionism is racism — in the Forward!

The Alt-Left

Link.

Posted in America | Comments Off on The Alt-Left