|
Speaking the truth to Jews
Paul Eisen
December 17, 2003
Paul Eisen is a British Jew, director of Deir Yassin Remembered
and executive committee member of Sabeel UK. This article is based
on "Speaking the Truth to Jews" which will appear in a
forthcoming book, "Speaking the Truth about Israel and Zionism",
edited by Michael Prior and published by Melisende in March 2004.
As the onslaught on the Palestinian people continues and the hundred-year
conquest of Palestine enters what may be its final stages, efforts
by the Israeli, Zionist and Jewish establishments to silence any
remaining criticism of Israel and Zionism intensify. At the centre
of these efforts is the claim that anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism.
Critics of Israel are warned that whilst like any other democratic
state, Israel is open to criticism of its policies, any criticism
of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is, by definition,
anti-Semitic.
First, it is not true that we are free to criticize Israeli policies
since so many perfectly legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy
are blanketed as attacks on Israel's right to self-defense and therefore
as attacks on Israel's right to exist and, therefore themselves
as anti-Semitic. But what of the core argument that, since all other
peoples are entitled to statehood, to deny to Jews that which is
granted to everyone else is discriminatory and, therefore, anti-Semitic?
There are of course some who really do want to "push the Jews
into the sea", and there are certainly those who say that Jews
are not a nation, but a religious group. There are others who undoubtedly
would deny the right of Jews to establish a state anywhere. These
people can fight their own battles. For my part, if Jews say they
are a nation, that's fine and if Jews want to wear blue-and-white,
wave flags and set up a state on some piece of uninhabited and unclaimed
land, although I won't be joining them, that's also fine. The problem
is when this state is established on someone else's land and maintained
at someone else's expense.
So what is this state of Israel, this Jewish state, whose existence
we are forbidden to question? Founded on the expulsion and exile
of another people, and defining itself as for Jews alone, Israel
officially and unofficially, overtly and covertly, discriminates
against non-Jews. Is denying Jews such a state denying them that
which is granted to all others? One may agree or disagree with any
of this. One may argue for or against Jewish nationhood, the need
for a Jewish state, the right of Jews to have a state in Palestine,
and even, post-Holocaust, the justification for Jews to establish
that state at the expense of another people. One can agree or disagree
with any of this, but is such agreement or disagreement necessarily
anti-Semitic?
Anti-Zionism Equals Anti-Zionism?
The anti-Zionism equals anti-Semitism argument amounts to this:
If you do not agree with the right of Jews to go to Palestine, settle
there en masse against the wishes of the indigenous population,
expel this population from 75% of their land and then, for the next
fifty years and more, continue this assault on the remaining land
and population, then you are an anti-Semite. Similarly, if you do
not support the existence of an ethnically based state which defines
itself as being for Jews only and discriminates officially both
inside and outside its borders against non-Jews, then, again, you
are an anti-Semite.
This would be laughable if it came from any other group of people,
yet coming from Jews, even though not always agreed with, it is
still seen as legitimate. So how do they get away with it? No-one
else does, so what's special about Jews?
Whether there is anything special about Jews is not really relevant.
What is relevant is that a large part of the Western world, even
the most secular part, seems to believe that there is, or, if they
don't believe it, are not confident enough in their disbelief to
say so. The Western world seems at times almost obsessed with Jews
and Jewish life. Stories of struggle from the Hebrew Bible, such
as the Exodus from Egypt, have become paradigms for other people's
struggles and aspirations. The emigration of Jews from Eastern Europe
into their Golden Land in America has become as American a legend
as the Wild West. Jewish folklore and myth, stereotypes of Jewish
humour, food and family life-all are deeply woven into the fabric
of Western, particularly American, life. Yet these preoccupations
are complicated and often ambivalent.
Despite our present secularity, Christianity still occupies a central
place in Western culture and experience, and Jews occupy a central
place in the Christian narrative, so it is no surprise that Jews
and Jewish concerns receive a lot of attention. But Christian attitudes
towards Jews are themselves complex and contradictory: Jesus was
born a Jew and died a Jew, and yet, traditionally, His teachings
supersede those of Judaism. Jesus lived amongst Jews, His message
was shaped by Jews yet He was rejected by Jews and, it has been
widely believed, died at the behest of Jews. So, for many Christians,
Jews are both the people of God and the people who rejected God,
and are objects of both great veneration and great loathing. This
ambivalence is reflected in the secular world too where Jews are
widely admired for their history and traditions and for their creativity
and success yet are also held in some suspicion and dislike for
their exclusivity and supposed feelings of 'specialness'. Jews seem
either loved or hated and, now since the Holocaust, publicly at
least, they seem loved or at least if not loved, then certainly,
indulged.
Is Jewish Suffering Unique?
The establishment of the state of Israel in May 1948, coming just
three years after the liberation of Auschwitz in January 1945, marks,
for Jews, the transition from enslavement to empowerment. This empowerment
of Jews took place not only with the establishment of Israel, but
also continuously, from the mass emigration of Jews to the West
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, to the present
day. Today in the West Jews enjoy unparalleled political, economic
and social power and influence. Jews are represented way beyond
their numbers in the upper echelons of all areas of public and professional
life-politics, academia, the arts, the media and business. But even
more than the political and economic power which Jews possess, is
the social power. Jews have a moral prestige derived from their
history and traditions as a chosen and as a suffering people. In
these more secular times, however, especially since the Holocaust,
it is as a suffering people that Jews occupy their special place
in Western culture.
That Jews have suffered is undeniable. But acknowledgement of this
suffering is rarely enough. Jews and others have demanded that not
only should Jewish suffering be acknowledged but that it also be
accorded special status. Jewish suffering is rarely measured against
the sufferings of other groups. Blacks, women, children, gays, workers,
peasants, minorities of all kinds, all have suffered, but none as
much as Jews. Protestants at the hands of Catholics, Catholics at
the hands of Protestants, pagans and heretics, all have suffered
religious persecution, but none as relentlessly as Jews. Indians,
Armenians, Gypsies and Aborigines, all have been targeted for elimination,
but none as murderously and as premeditatedly as Jews.
Jewish suffering is held to be mysterious and beyond explanation.
Context is rarely examined. The place and role of Jews in society
- their historical relationships with Church and state, landlords
and peasantry - is hardly ever subject to scrutiny, and, whilst
non-Jewish attitudes to Jews are the subject of intense interest,
Jewish attitudes to non-Jews are rarely mentioned. Attempts to confront
these issues are met with suspicion, and sometimes hostility, because
of a fear that explanation may lead to rationalization, which may
lead to exculpation, and then even to justification.
The stakes in this already fraught game have been raised so much
higher by the Holocaust. Is the Holocaust "The ultimate mystery,
never to be comprehended or transmitted" as Elie Wiesel would
have us believe? Are attempts to question the Holocaust narrative
just a cover for denial or even justification? Was Jewish suffering
in the Holocaust greater and of more significance than that of anyone
else? Were the three million Polish Jews who died at the hands of
the Nazis more important than the three million Polish non-Jews
who also died? Twenty million black Africans, a million Ibos, a
million Kampucheans, Armenians, Aborigines, all have perished in
genocides, but none as meaningfully as the six million Jews slaughtered
in the only genocide to be theologically named and now perceived
by Jews and the rest of the Western world to be an event of near
religious significance.
Jews have not been just passive recipients of all this special
treatment and consideration. The special status accorded to Israel's
behaviour in Palestine, and Jewish support for it, is not something
that the Jewish establishment has accepted reluctantly. On the contrary,
Jews and Jewish organisations have demanded it. And at the heart
of this demand for special consideration is the demand that the
whole world, recognising the uniqueness of Jewish suffering, should
join with Jews in their fears about anti-Semitism and of its resurgence.
Anti-Semitism in its historic, virulent and eliminationist form
did exist and could certainly exist again, but it does not currently
exist in the West in any significantly observable form. Jews have
never been so secure or empowered, yet many Jews feel and act as
if they are a hair's breadth away from Auschwitz. And not only this,
but they require that everybody else feel the same. So soon after
the Holocaust this is perhaps understandable, but less so when it
is used to silence dissent and criticism of Israel and Zionism.
Jews, individually and collectively use their political, economic,
social, and moral power in support of Israel and Zionism. In their
defense of Israel and Zionism, Jews brandish their suffering at
the world, accusing it of reverting to its old anti-Semitic ways.
The Silencing of Dissent
Is a Jewish state acceptable in this day and age? Are the Jews
a people who qualify for national self-determination, or are Jews
a religious group only? Post-Holocaust, does the Jewish need for
a state of their own perhaps even justify the displacement of the
Palestinians? Are Jews who wield power to serve what they perceive
as their own ethnic interests and to support Israel, to be held
politically accountable? What is anti-Semitism? Is anti-Zionism
anti-Semitism? All this and a great deal more could and should be
debated. What need not be debated is this: that every complexity
and ambiguity of Jewish identity and history, every example of Jewish
suffering, every instance of anti-Jewish prejudice, however inconsequential,
is used to justify the crimes of Israel and Zionism. Every possible
interpretation or misinterpretation of language, and every kind
of intellectual sophistry is used by Zionists to muddy the waters
and label the critic of Israel and Zionism an anti-Semite. Words
and phrases become loaded with
hidden meanings, so that even the most honest critic of Israel has
to twist and turn and jump through hoops
to ensure that he or she is not perceived as anti-Semitic.
And the penalties for transgression are terrible. For those who
do not manage to pick their way through this minefield, the charge
of anti-Semite awaits, with all its possibilities of political,
religious and social exclusion. No longer a descriptive term for
someone who hates Jews simply for being Jews, 'anti-Semite' is now
a curse to hurl against anyone who dares to criticise Jews and,
increasingly against anyone who dares, too trenchantly, to criticize
Israel and Zionism. And for those Jews of conscience who dare speak
out, for them there is reserved the special penalty of exclusion
from Jewish life and exile.
Marc Ellis's 'ecumenical deal' which translates also into a political
deal, says it all. It goes like this: To the Christian and to the
entire non-Jewish world, Jews say this: 'You will apologise for
Jewish suffering again and again and again. And, when you have finished
apologising, you will then apologise some more. When you have apologised
sufficiently we will forgive you, provided you let us do what we
want in Palestine.'
As hard as it may be, for the sake of us all - Jew and non Jew
alike, do we not now have to break free?
This article comes from Arab
Media Watch
Subject Headings
Contact Connexions
Donate to
Connexions
If you found this article valuable, please consider donating to Connexions.
Connexions exists to connect people working for justice with information, resources, groups, and with the memories and experiences of those who have worked for social justice over the years. We can only do it with your support.
|
|
Donate or Volunteer
|