Such a move would be great for one’s career, but was it good? Was it good for humanity? Was it good for the Jews? Nobody seems to ask these questions. They just take it for granted that making the Holocaust the center of Jewish identity is a good thing.
Would it be good for Ukrainians to make their genocide at the hands of Stalin central to their identity?
I don’t think making victimhood the center of one’s identity is a good thing.
“Eli Wiesel died as a hero in Israel, but it took him many years to become an Israeli hero,’’ said Yossi Klein Halevi, an Israeli American author and a fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem.
“In the early years of the state, Holocaust survivors were resented by native-born Israelis for their supposed passivity during the war. Elie Wiesel’s mission to centralize Holocaust memory in Jewish identity didn’t find a place in the Israeli ethos,” Halevi said. “Over the years, Israelis began to understand the Holocaust in a much more nuanced way, and not just as a story of Jewish passivity, and began to see survivors generally and Wiesel in particular as heroes of the spirit.”
Elie Wiesel — the Jew who taught us melancholy
Of all the contributions to humanity of Elie Wiesel, the global humanitarian, novelist, Nobel laureate, Zionist, professor and Holocaust memoirist who died Saturday night at 87, maybe the least-talked about is his embracing of melancholy.
It’s rare to see a picture of Wiesel laughing. There was a dark sobriety, a certain drama, that never seemed to leave his face. It wasn’t depression—which can paralyze the soul— but more of a lingering melancholy that he carried with him everywhere he went…But what do you do with such darkness when you become a global rock star, when kings, presidents and popes cherish your presence, when you’re a celebrity in a world that worships fame?
Maybe this is why Wiesel clung so tightly to his melancholy. It was his way of telling the world, “Don’t think that all this veneration will change me. Don’t think I am forgetting for one instant who I am or why I’m here. Don’t think I don’t realize how much more needs to be done.”
Did Jews really need somebody to teach them melancholy? Do Jews need more Jews making a living from the Holocaust?
Could you imagine what it would have done to Elie Wiesel’s stature if he came out of the closet with happiness? His whole stardom was based on being sad. His stardom was obviously good for Elie Wiesel, but was it good for anyone else?
Clarisse comments: “Ted Koppel at the funeral stated that he enjoyed laughing with Elie Wiesel and that he told him jokes.
I do not think we want to remember him in terms of melancholy and I don’t think we need to focus on tendencies that you mentioned in your report. He lived a long prolific life, created a beautiful family, and educated the world about the horrors of genocide. That should be our focus.”
Did the world really need anyone educating it about the horrors of genocide?
Are people “educated” in the Holocaust any better? Any more useful to others?
The Torah is strangely silent about any Jewish imperative to educate the world about the horrors of genocide.
Surviving a genocide does not automatically make anyone more moral and more wise. Educating people about genocide does not automatically improve them.
I can’t think of anything Elie Wiesel wrote that was unique and valuable. He made a great living from the Holocaust. Good for him.
Comment: “Are Orthodox Jewish conservatives immigration restrictionists? That is one aspect of my conservatism that I suspect would be unpopular in Orthodox Jewish settings as well as non-Orthodox Jewish settings.”
Orthodox Jews care primarily about the welfare of Orthodox Jews. While all the major Jewish organizations are for more immigration, your average Orthodox Jew does not want to be around more blacks, Mexicans and Muslims, but they are rarely politically engaged on the issue of immigration restriction (seeing that Jews may well need refugee status in some first-world country). Most Orthodox Jews will vote for Donald Trump (about 70%), but very few of them will be passionate about it. Most Orthodox Jews are skeptical of Donald Trump but hate Hillary. I have not met in person an Orthodox Jew passionately pro-Trump, but neither have I met an Orthodox Jew who supports Hillary.
I am completely out of the closet in the Orthodox Jewish community with my political leanings (race realism, HBD, immigration restriction, Alt-Right). I would say that the primary reaction I get is one of amusement. Traditional Orthodox Jews (aside from some of their leaders) are rarely offended by “racism.” There’s no Torah category of “racism.” When Trump clinched the Republican nomination, some Orthodox Jews called me “navi” (prophet) because I predicted that last August (and that Trump will become president).
Orthodox Jews read the LA Times, NY Times, watch Fox News, like everyone and that shapes their views.
With most Jews, your political views won’t have any affect on your personal popularity. You will be treated according to your merits. If you are a loser, you will be treated like a loser. Similar social rules at work in the larger society govern also in Jewish life (if you like people and they like you, you will do well everywhere, if you are anxious and prickly, you will struggle everywhere). Goyim divide up on beliefs (about abortion, politics, religion, etc), Jews divide up over whether or not you are in the tribe. If you are a Jew, you are going to be welcomed into most synagogues. They will be glad to have you, whatever your beliefs (unless they are in the divinity of Jesus Christ). If you sponsor a nice kiddush, you will be assured of popularity.
Unless you are publicly against Judaism or against the Jewish state or against the welfare of Jews, you will achieve the same sort of popularity in Jewish life that you have in gentile life, whatever your political views. Most Orthodox Jews are conservative in politics, most are what would be called “racist.” When you go to shul, you are not interrogated about your beliefs. Unless you deliberately choose to antagonize people, you will be judged on your own merits irrespective of your politics. Judaism is an extended family.
As far as driving on the Sabbath or any other violation of Jewish law, if you publicly flaunt it, you will get negative reactions. If you keep it quiet, you’ll be like every other Orthodox Jew who violates some laws privately.
It’s just like belonging to a stamp club. Every club has rules.
You will find plenty of Republicans and moderates in non-Orthodox temples (about a quarter of the members). The leaders of all major Jewish organizations, including religious ones, align with the coalition of the fringe, but regular Jews not as much. In the non-Orthodox synagogues I belonged to (before I went completely Orthodox in 2000), there was always a club of Republicans who supported each other and socialized together.
It’s not complicated why most Jews are liberal. Organized Jewry in the West has always aligned with the coalition of the fringe because the stronger the goy is in his racial, religious and national identity, the more the Jew in his midst stands out as an alien. You won’t find many (if any) Jews in movements in gentile countries that seek to maximize the majority’s rights over minorities, while most movements to maximize minority rights at the expense of the majority are disproportionately Jewish. That’s why it is not healthy for white Christians to not have some negative views of Jews (just as it is not healthy for Jewish welfare for Jews not to have some instinctive negative reactions against Christians and Muslims). Different groups have different interests.
Life is war.
“Do all the conservative Jews just get sick of it and just stop following politics (or in extreme cases, leave the tribe)?”
Most “conservative Jews” are neo-cons (pro-Israel, see Republican party as better suited for protecting Israel, aka National Review, Weekly Standard).
What does it mean to be “conservative”?
To be right-wing is to be for hierarchy, for the natives and their traditions, and against equality and multi-culturalism. Few Jews in the diaspora are right-wing because the right-wing by definition has been against treating Jews like the native stock of the country, it has been against Jewish power and influence (because such power and influence is invariably deployed to help the fringe against core). Jews, like most healthy people, are right-wing in their own state.
Conservatism in America has been taken over by the neo-cons.
* I recently attend graduation at a well known tech school located in Massachusetts because of a family connection. It’s absolutely true that members of the tribe were thin on the ground compared to Asians. Engineering was never a particularly Jewish field to begin with – it tends to appeal to non-verbal thinkers and if Ashkenazi Jews are anything, they are highly verbal. But I looked at the list of senior honors and under the category “Most Creative Inventions” or something like that, there were a disproportionate number of -bergs, etc. Now I don’t know whether this was a consolation prize along the lines of “Miss Congeniality” at beauty contest, but I offer it up as a data point.
Maybe this won’t be popular on an anti-immigrant blog, but the energy that Jews once displayed and that Asians are displaying now is a form of immigrant energy – the 1st couple of generations in the US traditionally rise like rockets on the cooped up energy that has been bottled up in the homeland. Even before Jews arrived, we used to see this in the US with Scotsmen, Germans, etc. The Asians who are winning those math competitions are all 1st and 2nd generation immigrants and Jews in the US have run out of immigrants. We are confused now because Mestizo Hispanics don’t display much energy (immigrant or otherwise) so we forget what it was like.
* The Orthodox are socially conservative but they are not really interested in politics except insofar as it impacts either their own local community (they love to participate in big city political spoils systems and get subsidized housing,etc.) or Israel. Mainstream Reform and Conservative congregations are just as liberal/leftist as mainstream Christian Protestant denominations (Episcopalian, Unitarian, etc.) There is not a lot in between.
* Well, fair enough, but I would suggest that most of that venom came from people who felt that Trump was being unfairly maligned. To me, the issue was whether that particular picture was anti-Semitic in a classic sense and worth getting excited about. What I know is: (1) whatever anti-Jewish import of that picture, it went right over my head, (2) the guy who created it is a satirist, and I looked over his material and didn’t find any “trend” against Jews, (3) the use of the six pointed star didn’t appear decisive to me, and I can’t say for sure that he was attacking Jews.
The kind of stuff described in the article looked pretty anti-Semitic to me, and that included the attacks on Jewish political candidates and bloggers, which almost certainly came from the right. On the other hand, the satiric use of anti-Jewish stereotypes has a long tradition, and is not necessarily used to generate hatred of Jews, although at times it can be used to ruffle Jewish feathers. The same sort of thing is done to Christian denominations on a regular basis. I mean, not all Catholic priests are pedophiles …..
We just have to admit that Jewish and non-Jewish sensibilities are not going to be the same, or at any rate, not all the time. I don’t think Dracula movies (to take a trivial example) are anti-Semitic, but I have Jewish friends who find them uncomfortable. I know why they think that way, but I don’t feel it, and if they harped on it (or harped on something else that makes them uncomfortable, like Wagner or Mel Gibson) I’d just avoid bringing it up. Why? Because I don’t want to fight with them.
But this is a political campaign, so confrontation is unavoidable. If someone says that “X” is a “classic anti-Semitic trope” and I don’t think so, I’m going to say so. If I feel that Trump’s candidacy is at stake or if I think that Trump is Our Last Great Hope (which I don’t) then I will be even more vociferous in my reaction, and that’s characteristic of a lot of pushback about this picture. I think Jewish Americans have to recognize that when non-Jewish Americans argue with them, strongly disagree with them, or even mock them concerning X, Y, or Z, it doesn’t mean that non-Jewish Americans hate them, or deny their humanity, let alone that they want to persecute them, or kill them.
I think Jews in America should be more wary of people and politicians who are always bending over backward to pay lip service to Jewish concerns, not because of honest agreement, but merely to curry favor, as opposed to those who will disagree with Jewish concerns and are forthright and honest about the grounds for their disagreement. The latter is to me far preferable because then at least you can find a common ground and work from there.
* To me, the issue was whether that particular picture was anti-Semitic in a classic sense and worth getting excited about. What I know is: (1) whatever anti-Jewish import of that picture, it went right over my head, (2) the guy who created it is a satirist, and I looked over his material and didn’t find any “trend” against Jews, (3) the use of the six pointed star didn’t appear decisive to me, and I can’t say for sure that he was attacking Jews.
The kind of stuff described in the article looked pretty anti-Semitic to me, and that included the attacks on Jewish political candidates and bloggers, which almost certainly came from the right. On the other hand, the satiric use of anti-Jewish stereotypes has a long tradition, and is not necessarily used to generate hatred of Jews, although at times it can be used to ruffle Jewish feathers. The same sort of thing is done to Christian denominations on a regular basis. I mean, not all Catholic priests are pedophiles …..
We just have to admit that Jewish and non-Jewish sensibilities are not going to be the same, or at any rate, not all the time. I don’t think Dracula movies (to take a trivial example) are anti-Semitic, but I have Jewish friends who find them uncomfortable. I know why they think that way, but I don’t feel it, and if they harped on it (or harped on something else that makes them uncomfortable, like Wagner or Mel Gibson) I’d just avoid bringing it up. Why? Because I don’t want to fight with them.
But this is a political campaign, so confrontation is unavoidable. If someone says that “X” is a “classic anti-Semitic trope” and I don’t think so, I’m going to say so. If I feel that Trump’s candidacy is at stake or if I think that Trump is Our Last Great Hope (which I don’t) then I will be even more vociferous in my reaction, and that’s characteristic of a lot of pushback about this picture. I think Jewish Americans have to recognize that when non-Jewish Americans argue with them, strongly disagree with them, or even mock them concerning X, Y, or Z, it doesn’t mean that non-Jewish Americans hate them, or deny their humanity, let alone that they want to persecute them, or kill them.
I think Jews in America should be more wary of people and politicians who are always bending over backward to pay lip service to Jewish concerns, not because of honest agreement, but merely to curry favor, as opposed to those who will disagree with Jewish concerns and are forthright and honest about the grounds for their disagreement. The latter is to me far preferable because then at least you can find a common ground and work from there.
When you understand the scope of food export, and also the risks of food manufacturing, and when you understand the severity of quality control needed to produce food safely, you begin to understand why massive corporations are now overwhelming the independent farmer.
You’ll also discover why outbreaks of Listeria, E-Coli and other food processing illnesses are increasingly common.
These outsourced manufacturing and processing plants have far lower safety standards than U.S. manufacturing. Other than corporate actuarial analysts who calculate risks, ie. the value of human life and comparative risk from the outsourced manufacturing, no-one else ever talks about that cost.
Get sick from Listeria and try suing the manufacturing company. You’ll soon find yourself amid a multinational network of legality filled with “Hold Harmless” agreements where the manufacturing companies are shielded by the government of the nation doing the production. Good luck suing Mexico.
Remember all the Chinese pet food that killed hundreds of American cats, dogs? If you think these inherent risks are not real because you don’t eat fig newtons and don’t have a dog, well… where exactly are your pharmaceuticals coming from? You see, the risk doesn’t diminish.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce rails against C.O.O.L (Country Of Origin Labeling), and spends hundreds of millions lobbying congress to ensure the origin of ‘store processed’ raw material foodstuffs do not have to be identified to the consumer. Why is that?
Massive floating seafood factories operate for months at a time outside any nation’s jurisdiction. Floating vessels that capture fish, process fish, manufacture and package fish sticks, and deliver a frozen finished product by the time they reach the port. Who’s inspecting that process?
That’s just a few current food examples.
It’s not just “trade” of products within these trade deals, that’s why there are 6,000 pages to the summary version (the broad outline of commitment) of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal alone.
When the U.S. congress signs up to one of these deals they are giving away more than just American jobs, they are giving up American safety, sovereignty and caretaker custody of the supply chain.
* The entire FIRE economy is organized around people trying to avoid the Black underclass. If the government were to re-legalize freedom of association, the whole thing–housing prices, college tuition, prison population, suburbanization, car prices, insurance rates, corporate diversity departments–would collapse.
* It’s really interesting the way America’s elite use blacks as a kind of biological weapon to move whites around.
* A friend has pointed out how brilliantly the Obama Administration’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing plan to disperse urban blacks to the suburbs is calibrated to solve problems currently impeding the triumphal progress of the Democrats to ruling nationally a one party state in the manner of a giant Chicago. I’ll return to that topic in the future.
* Dilute what’s left of the white suburban vote via AFFH imported black/hispanics/refugees, and you break the back of the GOP (especially in the south).
It’s almost worked in turning Virginia and North Carolina permanently blue, and Georgia isn’t far off.
I watched first-hand as some of the nicest suburbs in America were overwhelmed with blacks, when the Olympics forced the destruction of government subsidized housing in Atlanta.
See Clayton, DeKalb, Gwinnett, Cobb, Henry and increasingly Fayette County as an end-result of this racial displacement of whites.
It really comes down to this, and it’s something Trump touched on recently: do white people have self-determination or are we allotted to only pay for the sins of our eternally racist ancestors for the rest of our existence?
* The black share of the population has also begun to decline in cities ranging from Boston and New York on the East Coast to Los Angeles, San Francisco and Portland on the West Coast.
* They’re still in the greater Portland area. They’ve moved out to the farther east side (past 82nd), where they are still blowing one another away on the regular. Occasionally they shoot each other downtown, for variety. The central white majority studiously ignores these events. Probably because they are a factor in keeping the yuppie bastards in the Pearl well supplied with cocaine.
