Why do people never refer to the “Y-word” in place of the offensive “yid”?
“Yid” refers to Yiddish language, which was not imposed onto Jews by anyone else, but developed by Jews themselves despite them already being fluent in German:
a main point of difference was the use of the Hebrew alphabet for the recording of the Germanic vernacular, which may have been adopted either because of the community’s familiarity with the alphabet or to prevent the non-Jewish population from understanding the correspondence.
If you feel a need to invent a completely new tribal language to hide ingroup intentions from the outgroup, it is not offensive for the outgroup to point out that you are doing it.
Why, when the BBC recently broadcast a reading of TS Eliot’s poetry, did it read out the famously and staggeringly racist lines from “Burbank with a Baedeker” when it is inconceivable that it would regurgitate similar abuse of any other minority, even in the name of art?
Because Jews are not any other minority. Jews are practitioners of Judaism, a racist religion. Criticism of Jews is therefore anti-racism.
Yes, Judaism is categorised as a religion but there is no anti-Semite in history who viewed atheism as grounds for exemption from persecution.
Because atheist Jews are merely Jews who do not believe Yahweh exists, but who still self-identify as Jewish and are identified as Jewish by other Jews (theists as well as atheists) for tribal purposes. Even if all Jews stop believing in Yahweh’s existence, they will continue to use the tribal behaviour of the Israelites (as described in the Tanakh) as models for their own behaviour. That is the true meaning of religion. Theology is peripheral.
How, with the Holocaust still a living memory, do so many on the left feel content to dismiss the fears of one of the most persecuted peoples in history, to regard anti-Semitism as something that matters less than other prejudice, a sort of second-degree offence?
Firstly, thank you for acknowledging that the True Left is rising.
Secondly, no one has actual memories of any “Holocaust” ever occurring. That is precisely why people are imprisoned for investigating the official story:
Sixteen European countries and Israel have laws against Holocaust denial,
Thirdly, Jews were historically persecuted because they were historically racist. Leftists are anti-racists. Why should leftists care that racists are persecuted? We only care that racists are not persecuted enough! I suspect you know this. Why otherwise do you call our anti-Jewishness “anti-Semitism” if not because you are worried that “anti-Jewishness” would sound too self-evidently reasonable and justified? For how is it not an anti-racist duty for all non-Jews (those who have been placed in the outgroup) to be hostile towards Jews (those who have placed themselves in the ingroup)?
Anti-Semitism is on the rise and yet political progressives, the people who ought to be allies and who normally stress the need to listen to the experience of other minorities, seem to suspend those rules when those voices are Jewish. Why is it, as writer and comedian David Baddiel asks in his short polemic, that Jews Don’t Count?
Firstly, we are True Leftists, not progressives (who are False Leftists):
Secondly, “whites” have always been a numerical minority in South Africa. Should we therefore listen to them? Should we take them seriously if they complain that Whites Don’t Count? No! Because we know the history of Apartheid. It was “whites” (Jews included) who decided to call themselves “white” and everyone else “non-white”. Thus every last one of their bloodlines must be eliminated. (Preferably starting with Elon Musk’s bloodline, though that is a separate discussion.) Similarly, we know the history of Zionism. It was Jews who decided to call themselves Jews and everyone else non-Jews. Thus every last one of their bloodlines must be eliminated. It is about history, not numbers.
Speaking of Apartheid and Zionism:
South Africa was among the 33 states that voted in favour of the 1947 UN Partition Plan, recommending the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine, and was one of only four Commonwealth nations to do so. On 24 May 1948, nine days after Israel’s declaration of independence, the South African government of Jan Smuts, a long-time supporter of Zionism, granted de facto recognition to the State of Israel, just two days before his United Party was voted out of office and replaced by the pro-apartheid National Party. South Africa was the seventh nation to recognise the new Jewish state. On 14 May 1949, South Africa granted de jure recognition to the State of Israel.:109–111 The Israeli interest in South Africa sprang in part from the presence of about 110,000 Jews in South Africa, a figure which included more than 15,000 Israeli citizens.
Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequent occupation of the Sinai and West Bank alienated it diplomatically from much of the Third World and African states. Black nationalist movements then began to see it as a colonial state. At the same time, in South Africa, Israel became the object of widespread admiration, particularly among the country’s political and military leadership. The editorial of Die Burger, then the mouthpiece of the South African Nationalist Party, declared: “Israel and South Africa are engaged in a struggle for existence… The anti-Western powers have driven Israel and South Africa into a community of interests which had better be utilized than denied.”
Within less than a decade, South Africa would be one of Israel’s closest military and economic allies, whilst Israel would occupy the position of South Africa’s closest military ally, and Israel had become the most important foreign arms supplier to the South African Defence Force:117–19
By 1973, an economic and military alliance between Israel and South Africa was in the ascendancy. The military leadership of both countries was convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament, fighting for their survival against the common enemy of the PLO and the ANC.
Israeli and South African intelligence chiefs held regular conferences with each other to share information on enemy weapons and training. The co-ordination between the Israel Defense Forces and the South African Defense Force was unprecedented, with Israeli and South African generals giving each other unfettered access to each other’s battlefields and military tactics, and Israel sharing with South Africa highly classified information about its missions, such as Operation Opera, which had previously only been reserved for the United States.
The South African government’s yearbook of 1978 wrote: “Israel and South Africa have one thing above all else in common: they are both situated in a predominantly hostile world inhabited by dark peoples.”
Israel was one of the most important allies in South Africa’s weapons procurement during the years of PW Botha’s regime.
By 1980, a sizeable contingent of South African military and government officials were living permanently in Israel, to oversee the numerous joint projects between the countries, while their children attended local Israeli schools. Scientific collaboration also continued to increase, with many scientists working in each other’s countries. Perhaps most sensitive was the large group of Israeli scientists working at South Africa’s Pelindaba nuclear facility.
During Operation Protea in 1981, the South African Defence Force made military history, as arguably the first user of modern drone technology, when it operated the Israeli IAI Scout drones in combat in Angola. They would only be used in combat by the Israel Defense Forces a year later during the 1982 Lebanon War and Operation Mole Cricket 19.
South Africa provided much of the yellowcake uranium that Israel required to develop its nuclear weapons. South Africa built its own nuclear bombs, possibly with Israeli assistance. Some Resolutions of the UN General Assembly in the early 1980s which condemned the cooperation between Israel and Apartheid South Africa, also mentioned nuclear collaboration. U.S. Intelligence believed that Israel participated in South African nuclear research projects and supplied advanced non-nuclear weapons technology to South Africa during the 1970s, while South Africa was developing its own atomic bombs. According to David Albright, “Faced with sanctions, South Africa began to organize clandestine procurement networks in Europe and the United States, and it began a long, secret collaboration with Israel.” He goes on to say “A common question is whether Israel provided South Africa with weapons design assistance, although available evidence argues against significant cooperation.”
Chris McGreal has written that “Israel provided expertise and technology that was central to South Africa’s development of its nuclear bombs”. In 2000, Dieter Gerhardt, Soviet spy and former commander in the South African Navy, stated that Israel agreed in 1974 to arm eight Jericho II missiles with “special warheads” for South Africa.
According to journalist Seymour Hersh, the 1979 Vela incident, was the third joint Israeli-South African nuclear weapons test in the Indian Ocean, and the Israelis had sent two IDF ships and “a contingent of Israeli military men and nuclear experts” for the test.
The author’s question is less about why anti-Semitism exists than why good people care less about it.
That’s what makes us good people. Good people hate racists. Jews are racists by definition. Therefore good people hate Jews.
The key is that Jews are not seen as underprivileged or marginalised. They are caricatured as rich capitalists. They are also “too white” for campaigners. This means they are beyond the interest of social justice activists who see racism as a class construct, one in which you need to be economically or socially disadvantaged.
It is true that Jews are “white” (not just by Apartheid South African standards either; look at their role as colonialists worldwide in colonial-era history!) and rich. It is untrue that social justice activists only care about racism against economically or socially disadvantaged groups. If we did, we would ignore racism against, for example, Chinese (with China well on the way to becoming – if not already – the leading economic power in the world). We do not. Because we know the history of China’s colonization by the Western colonial powers. We know the history of the Opium Wars. Speaking of which:
When the Treaty of Nanking opened up China to British traders, Sassoon developed his textile operations into a profitable triangular trade: Indian yarn and opium were carried to China, where he bought goods which were sold in Britain, from where he obtained Lancashirecotton products. He sent his son Elias David Sassoon to Canton, where he was the first Jewish trader (with 24 Parsi rivals). In 1845, David Sassoon & Co. opened an office in what would soon become Shanghai’s British concession, and it became the firm’s second hub of operations.
In 1844, he set up a branch in Hong Kong, and a year later, he set up his Shanghai branch on The Bund to cash in on the opium trade.
David Sassoon, as an Orthodox Jew, continued his Jewish religious observances, observing the Jewish Sabbath throughout his busy life.
Wrapped into this, of course, is anger at Israel, a poster cause for the left. But on this Baddiel, no supporter of Israel, has a simple riposte. The issue of Palestine offers no justification for anti-Semitism in Britain
Absolutely it does! Without British Jews, there would have been no Balfour Delcaration:
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population. The declaration was contained in a letter dated 2 November 1917 from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland. The text of the declaration was published in the press on 9 November 1917.
In other words, greater hostility towards British Jews a century ago could have prevented the existence of Israel. That ship has unfortunately sailed, but perhaps greater hostility towards British Jews from now on can contribute to ending the existence of Israel.
The one worry is that this will be read mainly by Jews and not by those who need to read it. It should be essential reading for progressives, self-proclaimed anti-racists, and those offering diversity and awareness courses. If it is, then Baddiel will have done a sterling service.
This self-proclaimed anti-racist has read it and rebutted it. Baddiel’s service is to offer yet another demonstration of Jewish intellectual dishonesty.
(P.S. Please contrast the above easily explained moral reasoning based on readily verifiable historical information, the approach that characterizes True Left anti-Zionism, with the approach of such clowns as Marjorie Taylor Greene that characterizes rightist anti-Semitism (which really is hostile to non-Jewish Semites (e.g. Rashida Tlaib) also). Under no circumstances should newcomers be tempted by False Left propaganda to assume that Greene’s batshit lunacy discredits all forms of hostility towards Jews.)