Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 23, 2024

There were hardly any Orthodox Jews in the college I went to after yeshiva high school. I hung out at the Hillel office and became friends with many non-religious Jews who also made that office their home base between classes, as well as with the Hillel directors.

While one might think this was a huge culture shock for me, I found that I respected my new friends while strongly disagreeing with their opinions. 

One Hillel director, a committed Reform Jew, decided to become a rabbi.When I asked her why, she said that the rabbinate was the only path for a Reform Jew to continue learning within that framework. I had to respect that. We could throw good-natured barbs towards each other but we respected each other.  (I even studied Talmud with her.) 

I realized that I liked people who were passionate about Judaism even if I didn't agree with their brands of Judaism.

"Jewish Priorities: Sixty-Five Proposals for the Future of Our People," edited by David Hazony, reminded me of my college experience with a wide range of committed Jews. The 65 essays are each written by Jews from disparate backgrounds who are passionate about Judaism and its future. Each essay is a personal attempt to answer the question of what they think should be the single most important priority for the collective future of the Jewish people.

As Hazony writes in his forward, he book is intended  to be a "good old fashioned intellectual food fight."


The contributors are a stellar list of the most interesting thinkers today, from Hen Mazzig to Ruth Wisse, from David Wolpe to Yishai Fleisher. The book is the equivalent of a really great dinner party where everyone has something fascinating to say.

Many, perhaps most, of the articles are outstanding - Yossi Klein Halevi on "Finding God in the 21st Century," Leil Liebovitz' "Stop seeking validation from those who hate us," Einat Wilf's "Zionism as Therapy," Armin Rosen's "The Satmar Art of Not Giving a F*ck." are just a few. But everyone will like different articles.

You can see the table of contents here.

The passion for our future is evident on nearly every page. There is an occasional sub-par article- often those that are thinly veiled advertisements for the author's own pet project - but since each piece is less than 10 pages long, it is easy enough to read through them and go to the next. All of them are worth reading. It is especially gratifying to read great essays on topics that are not normally associated with the author. 

There are a lot of smart Jews out there!

I thoroughly enjoyed "Jewish Priorities" and hope that it becomes a springboard for new projects where some of these ideas can move from the written page to implementation. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, September 03, 2023

Diplomacy and peacemaking is not a smooth process. It requires a huge amount of preparation, planning and flexibility. 

It is always illuminating to look behind the scenes of the Oslo process. Gidi Grinstein, the youngest person at Camp David in 2000, is releasing his account of the events that he witnessed as well as his opinions of what to do moving forward to mark the 30th anniversary of Oslo.

His book, "(In)sights: Thirty Years of Peacemaking in the Oslo Process"  is his attempt to set the record straight after so many others gave their own versions of what happened at Camp David. 

Grinstein writes from the perspective of someone who truly wants to see peace. No one can doubt his love of Israel and Zionism - he was part of the team that founded Birthright Israel - but his perspective is decidedly on the Israeli Left.

I found his account fascinating, but perhaps not for the reasons he intended.

Obviously Grinstein tries to spin the events towards his own politics. Instead of giving a straight chronological account of what happened, he spends a great deal of time on the "sausage" behind each negotiating point and then an overview of what has happened since then, along with his own opinions as to where things failed and what Israel should have done instead, in retrospect.

While Grinstein was the junior member at Camp David, he is perhaps the one person with the most knowledge of the big picture. He served as the Secretary and Coordinator of the Israeli Delegation for the Negotiations with the PLO from 1999-2001 under Ehud Barak.

Grinstein admires Barak a great deal, but his description of Barak is of someone who is cold and calculating, who is more than willing to throw his own people under the bus for his own ends. He keeps his own cards close to his vest, so no one working for him has a clear idea of what their goals are. Grinstein extols Barak as "the smartest man in the room" who keeps his people working in a "matrix" of smaller tasks, while only Barak knows his real plan. This means that Barak creates his own backchannels to undermine the people officially working for him when he deems it necessary, he bypasses the chain of command, and he ensures plausible deniability.

Which, when you think about it, is a lot like Yasir Arafat. 

Before he worked for the Prime Minister's office, Grinstein worked for the Economic Cooperation Foundation. The ECF, founded in 1990, was itself one of those backchannels for creating relationships with, and building a peace plan with, the PLO. It was a power that helped bring about the Oslo Accords. 

To me, one of the most jarring parts of the book was where Grinstein describes how the ECF helped end Bibi Netanyahu's first term as prime minister. The ECF, which worked hand in glove with Yitzchak Rabin, opposed Netanyahu - and this Israeli think-tank colluded with the PLO to bring him down. Netanyahu demanded more concessions from the PLO in order to keep the Oslo process going, and the ECF convinced their friends in the PLO to pretend to agree to Netanyahu's demands, prompting him to sign the Hebron Agreement and the Wye River Memorandum based on lies. This caused the right wing of his coalition to revolt and new elections were called that brought Barak into office, just as the ECF intended.

Grinstein seemingly has no compunction about Israelis collaborating with the US and PLO to bring down an Israeli prime minister. The cause of peace justifies all.

Even Grinstein admits that the peace negotiators never really seriously thought about the possibility that Arafat had no intention to really sign a permanent agreement that would end the conflict and what would follow. They became friends with the PLO negotiators, and he lovingly describes how well his team would be treated when they visited Bethlehem or Ramallah and the personal friendships they struck up with the Palestinian team. He mentions and is fully aware of the wave of terror attacks during the 1990s, Arafat's incendiary speeches in Arabic, his actions being fully consistent with his "phased plan" to destroy Israel, but all of that is brushed aside in the pursuit of peace, just as using underhanded methods to bring down an Israeli prime minister is framed as a positive thing.

The only person who predicted the failure of the Oslo process, and that it would lead into war, was US Ambassador to Egypt Daniel Kurtzer, who hosted the negotiators for a Shabbat dinner. He had better insight than the entire Israeli peace delegation, who didn't even consider this.

Barak bet everything on the idea that Arafat could be pressured into signing an agreement. He was wrong. But there is very little hand-wringing on that mistake that brought about the second intifada. In fact, Grinstein emphasizes that Arafat was not the direct instigator of the intifada - even as he admits that Arafat had planned for such an event months ahead of time, and that his own security forces, trained and armed by the US, turned their weapons against Israeli forces in the first days of the fighting. He emphasizes that Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount that supposedly triggered the war was fully coordinated with the PA but still doesn't blame the PA for its role - instead noting that the Jerusalem police response to the violence helped escalate it. 

Again, Grinstein isn't blind. But he seems to purposely keep one eye closed. 

Similarly, he emphasizes that, in retrospect, Barak should not have pushed for an all or nothing deal, and worked towards a provisional Palestinian state that could be further refined with later negotiations. This, of course, would have been a huge concession by Israel to recognize a Palestinian state up front. But while he praises the Quartet for employing that idea in their Road Map for Peace, he glosses over that the Palestinian leaders rejected the Road Map out of hand, and have consistently said that they do not want a provisional state. 

Also jarring is that, as far as I can tell, the Israeli peace negotiating teams -- both Track I and Track II - apparently were exclusively made up of non-religious males, overwhelmingly if not exclusively Ashkenazic. He notes that the only Israeli woman at Camp David was a secretary. He never mentions that any of the participants in the many meals hosted in the West Bank or Europe had to make accommodations for kosher food. Most of Israeli society is not represented by these peacemakers, who all seem to believe that they are smarter than anyone else in how to look at the big picture, and not really self-critical when it comes to their miscalculations and false assumptions that led to the failure of the peace process. Diversity was not a priority for these liberals. 

There is a lot of good information in this book, and it is illuminating - sometimes in ways that it is not meant to be. It is not edited well, unfortunately - for example,  it talks extensively about the ECF without explaining what it is, and there are still numerous typos and misspellings (French Premier "Shirak"), it repeats the same anecdotes a couple of times. Hopefully these will be fixed by the time it goes to press. 

The book is planned to be released in Israel in two weeks and in the US in December.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, August 28, 2023

As long time EoZ fans know, I am a fan of science fiction - mostly short stories.  

Sometimes I stumble onto a story with Jewish themes, such as the examples linked to above.

While some of them have been decent, I always yearned for science fiction not only with Jewish characters and some Yiddish sprinkled in, but science fiction that had Orthodox Jewish characters or where halacha (Jewish law) plays a role. I always toyed with writing a story about a self-aware robot working for a religious Jewish family who wants to be treated as a human - counted in a minyan, able to build a sukkah, able to write a mezuzah or Sefer Torah. 

This new collection of stories, edited by noted SF writer Michael Burstein, gives me multiple stories that fit what I always wanted to see. 

As with all anthologies, the quality is uneven. But many of these stories are good enough to be included in collections of the best SF of the year. 

Notably, the lion's share of stories - and of the great stories - are written by women. 

Some highlights:

Samantha Katz's Shema has a plot that is not to my liking - the last Jew alive - but Katz is an enormously talented writer for a 16 year old high school student. Jordan King-LaCroix's The Last Chosen explores a similar theme, with a slightly more optimistic ending.

Mission Divergence, by E. M. Ben Shaul, has a very promising setup - a brilliant scientist in Israel finishing up the design of a space laser to protect the country. Unfortunately, the author is not at all familiar with how modern weaponry is designed, and the plot falls flat. It could have been so much better. 
 
Esther Friesner's Rachel Nussbaum Saves the World is an amusing zombie story where a Jewish mother comes up with a very Jewish solution to the menace.

Well known author Harry Turtledove's  One Must Imagine describes a future where Jews are still being pestered to convert to other religions.

Baby Golem, by Barbara Krasnoff, is an amusing story of a non-religious spacefaring woman who is nagged by gentiles to build a golem - so she does, sort of, with entertaining consequences.

Leah Cypress' Frummer House is a laugh-out-loud funny story about smart homes that suddenly enforce a higher level of religiosity on their Jewish residents than they are comfortable with. It is so steeped in frumkeit that it has its own glossary so everyone else could understand it.  For religious Jews who would get the references, the book is worth it for this story alone. 

Politics also comes into some stories. Initial Engagement by Steven H. Silver is about a future where many Israelis split with the religious Jews who have taken over Israel and they move to "Yehudah," the Jewish autonomous oblast of Birobidzhan. Yehuda and Israel do not have diplomatic relations but two of their female ice fencing stars are slated to meet in a sporting competition in Budapest - scheduled for a Shabbat. The story's use of a future world to help us understand  our world is the epitome of what SF should be.

As would be expected, there are a couple of stories of aliens who consider themselves Jewish and an AI that wants to convert, plus one about a physicist who discovers proof of God's existence and whose life is in danger as a result. The latter premise could easily be the basis of a book.

The longest, and best, story in the collection is Moon Melody, by SM Rosenberg, about a young religious Jewish woman who is a telepath who becomes friends with a young non-Jewish man who is a telekinetic empath.. It is outstanding in how it explores the moral issues of their awesome powers and her reluctance to use hers. Judaism isn't a plot device here but it is a major part of the fabric of the story. (It is refreshing to see a story about a deep friendship between a Jewish woman and a non-Jewish man that does not turn romantic.)  I would be surprised and disappointed if Moon Melody is not included in the "Best of the Year" anthologies for 2023.

Altogether, it is a really good collection of stories, with a higher percentage of stories that I enjoy than most anthologies I have read (and I've read a  a lot of them.) 

There have been other Jewish science fiction anthologies - notably the two Wandering Stars collections edited by Jack Dann, who wrote the forward to this volume, and a couple of SF collections from Israeli writers named Zion's Fiction - but this is to my mind by far the best, the most professional, and the most Jewish of all of them. 






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

The winners write the history books

by Forest Rain


Ironically, a book that just might hold one of the most important messages of our time is least likely to be read.

“The Great Revolt” by Dr. Michael Ben Ari tells of one of the most dramatic times in Jewish history: the Jewish revolt against Rome that ultimately led to the destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE), exile, and the loss of the Jewish homeland until it’s reestablishment almost two thousand years later (1948).

This pivotal moment in history has been discussed by many people. Interestingly, the story is always told a certain way, from a very specific perspective.

Dr. Ben Ari tells the story differently and therein lies the importance of this book.

Standard discussions about the Great Revolt are based on the accounting of Josephus Flavius. The explanation of what led to the destruction of the Temple and the shattering of Jewish life, culture, and sovereignty is repeated without question, so much so that it has become a trope: “baseless hatred between brothers [between Jews] led to the destruction.”

Dr. Ben Ari, a historian with a Ph.D. in Land of Israel and Archaeology studies, a rabbi and teacher brings the perspective of the Jewish rebels while raising many questions about the “history” we thought we knew: Why did the Jews revolt against Rome? Did they not understand that they had no chance against the all-powerful empire? Why did the Romans feel it necessary to obliterate the culture of our tiny nation? Who were the rebels? Did baseless hatred cause the revolt to fail? Whose baseless hatred?

As I read the book, I felt horror growing inside me.

By bringing alternative historical sources Dr. Ben Ari tells a story of Jewish rebellion that most of us have never heard. Most importantly he explains the sources of rebellion and the connection between rebellion and sovereignty – a message of utmost importance and obvious parallels to current events in Israel (which echo in America as well).

The Nation of Israel is a nation divided. In ancient times there were those who wanted to belong to the greater empire, placing individual comfort over traditions that root us in this Land. Today we also have those who prefer individual comforts, wishing to be part of the “family of Nations,” unconcerned (or even feeling repelled) by the ancient and tribal traditions that make our family a Nation, separate and unique. Today, like the ancient story of the Revolt, we are receiving our “knowledge” about who we are as a People, our past, and even our future through the filter of other people who have a vested interest in fostering certain beliefs about who we are, what we are capable of and what we deserve.

Today, our People are divided between those who believe the media narrative and the stubborn rebels who do not. The ancient Jewish Revolt is taught through the perspective of Josephus, a Jewish military commander during the revolt who betrayed his People and joined forces with the Roman enemy to save his own skin. Is the fact that he detailed events extensively proof that he did so accurately? Does someone who turns on his own People not have a motive for recounting events in a way that makes his actions sound reasonable and right?

The winners write the history books. That doesn’t mean that they are written truthfully.

Dr. Michael Ben Ari investigates what we really know about the ancient Jewish rebels. Were they the hate-filled, irrational, violent bandits we are told they were? What if the truth is exactly the opposite? Perhaps the faith, courage, and collaboration of these heroes is the source of Jewish hope for 2000 years that the sovereignty we lost then can be regained.     

Considering the Revolt from the perspective of the rebels it begins to become clear why it might be in the interest of foreign occupiers to make us believe that the Jewish warriors of old were twisted in their ideology and morality and as such, people that should not be emulated.

Dr. Michael Ben Ari is himself a rebel. It is no wonder that his heart would be drawn to our ancestors, the rebels of ancient times whose story remains untold at best, at worst – deliberately mistold. A soft-spoken man, Dr. Ben Ari was ejected from Israeli politics for extremist views. He considers himself a student of Rabbi Meir Kahane who advocated for Jews arming and defending themselves and expelling enemy Arabs from Israel. In the past, Dr. Ben Ari explained that despite everything that was said about him, his perspective is not one of hating Arabs but rather concern for Jewish survival.

Many people, including many Jews, are very uncomfortable with the idea of warrior Jews, capable of defending themselves and even vanquishing their enemies. It is easier to express horror at Jews who are too brash, aggressive, or quick to violence than to address the existential threat that drove them to conclude this was the best way to proceed. It is easier to assume fault than to question why people behave as they did or to discover what really happened.

There will be people who will not read “The Great Revolt” because it was written by a man labeled an “extremist”, ignoring the fact that he is a historian, teacher, and rabbi with knowledge that most of us do not have.

Unfortunately, this important book is written more like an academic thesis than the dramatic and compelling story it conveys. So much research and knowledge went into its making that it is hard for the average person (myself included) to absorb all the details. Most of us, particularly those who had little or no religious studies in our background are shockingly ignorant about the history of our own People.

The winners write the history books but it is up to us to uncover where the truth lies.
It is our action – or inaction – that determines who “wins”.    

************************
This book was privately published and is not yet set up to be ordered online.
You can connect with the author via this Google form and indicate where you are from and what type of order you would like to make.

https://tinyurl.com/GreatRevolt


 



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, August 25, 2023

By Daled Amos

The modern State of Israel, during its short history, has been blessed with many great leaders. They have been instrumental both in establishing the Jewish State, nourishing its growth and leading it past the numerous hurdles that have confronted Israel during the first 75 years of its existence.

But there is more to the Jewish State than just the modern State of Israel. There is the ancient, historical Jewish State as well. And don't forget that even after its defeat at the hands of the Romans and the dispersion of Jews into the Diaspora, there continued to be Jewish leaders both among the Jewish communities that remained in the land and among the Jewish communities in the Galut.

These leaders and their statesmanship are covered in Meir Y. Soloviechik's new book, Providence and Power: Ten Portraits in Jewish Statesmanship. He writes that
Statecraft is, at its essence the marshaling and application of available power on behalf of one people--and also in the Jewish case, the representation of one's people before the powerful. (p. xii)
In the case of the Jewish people in history, statesmanship applies both to the Jewish people when they are in their own land and when they live in the lands of other nations. It applies both to King David, Shlomtsion, Yohanan ben Zakkai, David Ben Gurion and Menachem Begin on the one hand -- and Queen Esther, Don Isaac Abravanel, Menasseh ben Israel, Benjamin Disraeli, Theodor Herzl and Louis D. Brandeis on the other.

Queen Esther in particular plays a transitional role in the evolution of Jewish statesmanship. Previously, under the leadership of the prophets, their job was to "proclaim what was true, what was just, what was righteous." It is the approach of Mordechai -- but Esther does not take a direct approach. Meir Soloveichik quotes his great-uncle, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, known as The Rav:
Esther, with her incisive intelligence, understood that no plea addressed to the king would produce any results. Hysterical crying supplication, begging would at best be ineffectual. At worst, they might cause the infliction of more harm. Since Haman had succeeded in brainwashing Ahasuerus and in arousing in him paranoid, mortal fear of assassins and rebels, there was no power in the world capable of dissuading him from destroying all of his imaginary enemies Could anyone sway Stalin form his mad designs? [p. 26]
Instead, Esther "could avail herself of one method, namely, to turn the tables on Haman...to arouse doubts in the sick king's mind concerning Haman's loyalty and devotion." Esther's strategy of inviting both Ahasuerus and Haman to two private parties raises suspicions in the king, which she takes advantage of when he becomes inebriated. Then, revealing she is Jewish, she turns the tables on Haman painting him as the one plotting -- against the queen. And we all know the rest of the story. 

Esther's innovative approach is based on her understanding
that the new situation requires a new mode: a more flexible and realistic approach to safeguarding the Jewish people in a hostile environment, an approach that in large part must rely on instinct and an innate mastery of realpolitik. [p. 29-30]

 He concludes that "Esther emerges as the originator, the inventor--the mother--of Jewish Diaspora politics."

Today, even at a time that the Jewish People have returned and re-established the Jewish State of Israel, they are surrounded by enemies. As a result, in addition to its advanced armaments and military strategy, Israel continues to have to utilize "Jewish Diaspora politics."

One practitioner of course is David Ben-Gurion, whose grasp of realpolitik made that re-establishment possible and enabled him to lead the country during its initial, formative years.

Another practitioner was Menachem Begin. Ben-Gurion and Begin are similar, yet different.

Meir Soloveichik writes:

The Zionism of David Ben-Gurion was driven by, in the Hebrew phrase, ahavat Eretz Yisrael: a fierce love for the land of Israel informed by close study of the Jewish history upon that land. Begin's Zionism, for its part, while no less profoundly connected to the land, was motivated first and foremost by what he would have learned in his childhood to call simply ahavat Yisrael (or, in the Ashkenazi pronunciation, ahavas Yisroel): the love of Jews and of the Jewish people, a deep respect for their beliefs, and a reverence for the covenantal bonds among them. [p. 166, emphasis in the original]

The latest practitioner of Jewish statecraft is Benjamin Netanyahu, who is not discussed in this book, maybe because the final chapter has not been written on Netanyahu's service to Israel.

As to whether Netanyahu's statesmanship more closely resembles that of Ben Gurion or Begin, recent events suggest a comparison with Begin. Remember when Begin was elected Prime Minister in 1977? Critics claimed that the new leader posed a serious threat to Israel as a democracy.

Sound familiar?

Abraham Foxman, the former director of the ADL, draws the connection between Netanyahu and when Begin came to power:

It was a shock to the American Jewish system because they didn’t know him. It was a very scary time. I personally knew Begin and I knew what he believed in. It wasn’t a shock to me, but to the American Jewish community it was horrifying.”

At the time, the Jewish leader who stood up for Begin was the leader of the Reform movement, Alexander Schindler, who  -- according to Foxman -- made clear that "as long as Israel is a democracy and as long as Begin was elected by the Israeli public, we will find a way to work with them." Schindler got the Jewish establishment in the US to give Begin a chance.

These days, Netanyahu has the Jewish establishment up in arms, but without American Jewish leaders who are increasingly vocal in refusing to stay on the sidelines and are instead critical of his right-wing coalition and plans for judicial reform.

So just what convinced this prime minister that he could engage in such radical change to an established element in the government?

Maybe it is because this is not the first time Netanyahu has attempted a large-scale and controversial reform -- or has everyone forgotten the role Netanyahu played as Finance Minister in the modification of the Israeli economy?

An article on the MarketWatch website notes how Ariel Sharon, as prime minister, "paved the way for Israel’s transition from socialism to capitalism", but the finance minister is the one who put in place the necessary belt-tightening measures.

In 2004, The New York Times reported Netanyahu Gets Tough to Transform Israel's Economy:

As Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushes to reshape Israel's economy, he makes a similar warning to almost everyone: expect to feel some pain.

Mr. Netanyahu, a former prime minister and potentially a future one, has spared no one during his 19 months in his current post.

But he says an improving Israeli economy justifies his tough approach.

At the time, Netanyahu did not declare war on the Israeli Supreme Court. Instead, he decided to "battle strike-prone unions that he says are dragging down the economy." Then, as now, his measures were considered controversial and generated push-back:

In a country that is now mostly middle class but that has never completely abandoned its working-class roots, Mr. Netanyahu's efforts to make broad, market-oriented changes have met resistance at almost every turn...frequent protests against Mr. Netanyahu's policies may have political repercussions.
These were also large-scale protests as "demonstrators opposed to his welfare cuts have maintained a presence in tents just outside the Finance Ministry for more than a year" and political adversaries were outspoken: 
Shimon Peres, leader of the opposition Labor Party, has denounced the government's economic program as "swinish capitalism."
Back then, too, the finance minister was accused of trying to do too much at once:
"I view his program as very destructive," said Barbara Swirski, director of the Adva Center, a private research group in Tel Aviv that studies social issues. "He tries to do everything in one giant step, and it damages the whole system."
Also, it was apparently not possible for Netanyahu to implement all of the measures he wanted:
heninHe is determined to go with a free-market approach, but there has been so much resistance that he has not accomplished as much as he thought he could," said David Levhari, a professor of economics at Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
In another parallel, Bibi was accused of underestimating popular opinion amidst predictions that "the minister would continue to battle ingrained Israeli attitudes that favor a large government role in the economy."

Unlike now, back then Netanyahu was aided by the courts:
But the court also said that municipalities would have to agree to an economic recovery plan sought by Mr. Netanyahu, who has charged the local governments with widespread mismanagement.
But unlike then, today he faces unified opposition that is organized and well-financed and is succeeding in making the judicial reform into an anti-Netanyahu issue instead of addressing the reform on its own terms. 

A good deal of Netanyahu's own statecraft has been focused on strengthening the state in the face of established political-economic interests. In the one case, he was clearly successful. In the current one, the jury is still out.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, July 04, 2023

By Daled Amos


I recently had the opportunity to interview the author Alex Ryvchin on his new book which presents a different approach to addressing antisemitism.

The answers have been slightly edited for clarity,




Over the years, many books have been written about antisemitism from different perspectives. How is your book different?

Many books have addressed the ‘why’ of antisemitism. Why are the Jews so hated? Why have such things been inflicted on them? Why do they continue to be targeted? This book will go some way to explaining the 'why' but my central interest is the ‘how’? How does antisemitism function in practice? How is it transmitted around the world and generation to generation. 

This question of ‘how’ led me to the seven deadly myths. It is through this complex and well-honed mythology that antisemitism thrives. As Isaac Herzog said in reference to my book: 

By shifting emphasis from the ‘why’ of this puzzling and dangerous phenomenon to the ‘how’ of the mechanics of its transmission, Ryvchin points to the possibility of actually confronting and diffusing it.

You mention in your book that it could be used in the classroom. There is discussion about Holocaust education -- and how it has failed, both in making people knowledgeable and in changing attitudes. What do you think are some of the causes for this and how would your book and a curriculum based on it overcome these problems?

Holocaust education is vital and I support it entirely. Within the study of the Holocaust we learn not only about the process by which the European Jews were destroyed, we observe everything of which man is capable of – sadism, cruelty, heroism, strength, apathy and cowardice. But in terms of understanding the hatred of the Jews, the Holocaust answers few questions. In fact, it raises these questions to fever pitch and leaves them unresolved. This is why despite so many admirable endeavors in Holocaust commemoration and education, antisemitism has continued to rise. 

Trying to understand antisemitism through the Holocaust is also highly problematic as it positions antisemitism as a historical event and not something in the here and now. It would be like trying to teach anti-Black racism and ending the story with the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation. It also falsely positions it as solely a product of race science, fascism and totalitarianism which completely ignores its political and religious sources and manifestations. 

This has all contributed to the extremely limited and poor understanding of antisemitism in society, despite it being the most lethal and persistent hatred. This is why it is essential to teach antisemitism itself, what it looks like, how it is expressed, what it continues to do to our communities and wider society.

Why do you think antisemitism persists even after the Holocaust -- why wasn't the world "scared straight" by the murder of 6 million Jews? 

Because antisemitism was too ingrained. Antisemitism was soaked into the world’s consciousness through centuries of lies, mythology and propaganda. It emanated from religious sources, nationalist heroes and popular culture. Even the horror of the Holocaust and the most devastating war in history could not dislodge it. 

As is often forgotten, Jews continued to be massacred in Europe even after liberation from Nazi occupation. To give one example, the Polish Peasants Party passed a resolution in 1946 thanking Hitler for destroying the Jews and calling for the expulsion of any survivors. Forty-two Jewish survivors were clubbed to death in Kielce, Poland. One of the heroes of the Sobibor Camp Uprising was murdered by nationalists after escaping a camp which had virtually no survivors. So of course, today, when the Holocaust is considered ancient history to many, the same myths and conspiracy theories that made it possible, are resurgent.

If, as you write, antisemitism is not just a result of bad information but is a result of "a defect in reasoning" what is the best we can hope to accomplish in the fight against antisemitism?

Our aim in fighting antisemitism is not elimination – it is a disease without a cure. Our aim is to inoculate as many people as possible from catching it. 

There are only two ways to do this. The first is education. But it must be the right education. If we can systematically debunk antisemitic mythology, as my book does, far fewer people will be susceptible to it. Once this education occurs, there has to be engagement. The mythical Jew – bloodthirsty, all-powerful, vengeful, obsessed with money cannot coexist with the real, flesh and blood Jew. The more that people see the real Jew, the weaker these myths become.

Considering the longevity and intensity of antisemitism, to what do you ascribe the survival of Jews and the Jewish identity?

Antisemitism has certainly been a contributing factor to our tenacity. It has hardened our minds and matured our souls. Being hated and excluded also makes us seek familiar company. 

But the secret to our survival, in my view, stems from our perspective on life which stems from our teachings, our traditions and national holidays. We live life as though on a mission. This gives us our restless energy, our refusal to be bystanders and our refusal to submit and die. We have important work to do.

You write that your book is not only for the classroom but also for policymakers -- how could you see your book being used? 

During my recent US book tour, I had the honor of presenting to law enforcement about my book. They were fascinated by this approach of reducing antisemitism into these 7 deadly myths. This provided them with a clear means of monitoring antisemitism, seeing the sorts of mental processes that lead to horrific acts and enabling them to prevent hate crimes in future. 

This education is really critical to understanding antisemitism, how it works and how it can be stopped. Antisemitism is so poorly understood and any plan to combat it must begin by overcoming this. This is where my book can be really helpful.










Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Friday, June 23, 2023

I generally abhor divisions in the Jewish community. There are too few of us to be able to afford partisanship and needless hate for our own.

For those reasons I have been reluctant to criticize fellow Jews outside of the fringe who are anti-Zionist or anti-Judaism. And I have been equally reluctant to criticize the leaders of American Jewish organizations, trying and wanting to assume that they do the best they can with the resources they have.

That position is no longer tenable after reading Betrayal: The Failure of American Jewish Leadership, a new book of damning essays edited by Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser.  

Betrayal is a strong indictment of those American Jewish leaders, on both the national and local levels. 

The single biggest issue that should unify American Jews is the fight against antisemitism. But as Betrayal shows, the mostly self-appointed American Jewish leaders have been more interested in maintaining their positions of power than in going toe to toe with today's antisemites.

Worse, in example after example in this book, when grassroots Jewish groups organize to fight a specific threat to American Jews, these pseudo leaders generally try to dissuade and discourage them. They claim that their connections with other powerful people, and their quiet diplomacy, will carry the day. Their message to ordinary Jews who want to defend themselves from specific threats is "sha, shtill" - shut up and be quiet.

We cannot read minds, but the overwhelming impression given is that these so-called leaders enjoy their perks of being considered as such. They love to attend their interfaith breakfasts and to attend meetings and parties with local and national secular leaders. They don't want to make waves, to risk their positions and their perceived prestige, their speaking engagements at Temples, their parades for progressive causes.

Problems which should and could have been attacked early on - mosques with terror links, undermining K-12 and university education with the concepts of "wokeness" that slot Jews as oppressors and supremacists, BDS and campus "apartheid weeks" as well as the other constant attacks on Israel that these leaders prefer to sympathize with instead of battle against - have metastasized into major sources of today's American antisemitism. 

An essay by Jonathan Tobin sets the tone with his analysis of how the Anti Defamation League has turned its back on fighting antisemitism and instead steered the ship to be more progressive and partisan rather than defending Jews.  The organization's hiring of a rabidly anti-Zionist Tema Smith as "director of Jewish Outreach" was particularly risible. 

Richard Landes describes how American Jewish leadership has exhibited cowardice in the face of the jihadist threat, preferring to partner with their Muslim friends rather than to ever confront them. Of course, this peculiarly Jewish tendency to compromise on principles in order to seek approval from others is not mirrored by the openly pro-Hamas Muslim American leadership, who - if anything - feel empowered to more extremism because the Jews are on their side.

Josh Block describes the failure of American Jewish leaders to push back against Ilhan Omar's antisemitic statements, and this led directly to her emerging from the controversy as more influential than ever. 

Caroline Glick observes that the "two state solution" has become a religion of sorts for American Jewish leaders, and instead of defending Israel they are defending cutting Israel in half and abandoning nearly all Jewish holy sites. 

Naya Lekht notes how liberal Jewish groups have replaced Judaism with "social justice," a philosophy that comes from Stalin's Soviet Union and that is ultimately used against Jews.

The ADL, the AJC, the local JCRCs and Federations, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs - all of them are stridently criticized as becoming part of the problem rather than the solution for the one theme that Jews should unite around, fighting antisemitism. Specific examples from grassroots groups who were stymied by their local Jewish "leaders" abound. 

The only national organization that has held on to its principles of unwavering support for Jews and Israel is the Zionist Organization of America, and its president Morton Klein writes an essay as well demonstrating how the eagerness by other Jewish leaders to make nice with the anti-Israel and ultimately antisemitic progressive philosophy hurts the Jewish community and makes everyone lose respect for their leaders.

One of the most interesting essays is by M. Zuhdi Jasser, of the Muslim Reform Movement, who has tried to partner with American Jewish leaders - only to be spurned because they prefer their partnerships with Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations that are actively antisemitic. His frustration of being abandoned by those who should be his natural allies is palpable.

Jacobs and Goldwasser's own essay doesn't only describe the problems, but offers a ten point program towards solutions - the exact thing that the supposed American Jewish leaders avoid. These pro-active ideas are what real leaders should come up with and implement. 

Betrayal describes outrageous examples of failed and counterproductive leadership. It will make you angry, and it should.

American Jews pour millions into these organizations that have little or nothing to show for themselves. It is time to replace those fossils with real leadership, real ideas, and real passion. The authors of these 22 essays are all fine candidates to be true leaders of the North American Jewish community. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, March 22, 2023



Can “The Whole World” Be Wrong? Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism, and Global Jihad is a book that makes you shake your head a lot. You just can’t believe how stupid people are. The stupid things they say and do to make themselves feel better about themselves; the stupid things and the lies they say that allow them to hate Jews and look the other way at the jihadists who target the liars, their loved ones, and their way of life. It’s hard to watch—you want to look away from this slow, global, own-goal suicide. But the author, Professor Richard Landes, has made this work so compelling, you have no choice but to continue reading, even when, as a sane person, it leaves you, the reader, feeling rather queasy. 


Richard Landes

The book takes its title from the words of two men on the subject of blood libels, issued a century apart. There are the mocking words of writer Ahad Ha’am (Asher Ginsburg), who in 1897, echoing the oft-expressed sentiment by European non-Jews when confronted with proof that, no. Jews don’t use the blood of Christian babies in the manufacture of matzah: “Is it possible the whole world is wrong and the Jews are right?”

Ahad Ha'am (Asher Ginsburg)

In 2002, little more than 100 years later, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, referring to Israeli denials of a massacre in Jenin that never occurred, said, “I don’t think the whole world, including the friends of the Israeli people and government, can be wrong.”

In this way, antisemitism takes its path. Because there are plenty of Jew-haters in the world. And the more there are, the more they give themselves moral permission to hate. The media, of course, is there to help things along with its own rendition of the modern blood libel. It’s called “lethal journalism.” They use fake footage, knowing it’s fake. They lie, because the lies are what their audiences want to hear. And they demonize Israel every time, because again: it’s exactly what their audiences want to hear.

Landes takes you on a journey, beginning in 2000 with the Al Durah hoax, moving on to 9-11, the phony Jenin “massacre,” and the Danish cartoon scandal (Danoongate). At the end of each chapter, Landes summarizes the stupid things that various figures have said in relation to these events. For example, journalist Catherine Nay said of the faked viral photo of the dead boy in his father’s arms, “This death erases, replaces the image of the boy in the Warsaw Ghetto.”

Every bit as shockingly stupid are the words of George W. Bush, spoken at the Islamic Center of Washington only days after 9-11, on September 17, 2001, “Islam is peace.”

Regarding the fictional Jenin massacre, journalist Janine di Giovanni wrote, “Rarely in more than a decade of war reporting from Bosnia, Chechniya, Sierra Leone, Kossovo, have I seen such deliberate destruction, such disrespect for human life," 'Inside the Camp of the Dead,' The Times, April 16, 2002.

And off Danoongate, the French Director of Intelligence speaking in 2005, said, “These riots have nothing to do with Islam.”

Landes has been documenting this astounding stupidity and world folly for more than a decade. The result is this 500-page compendium with its prodigious, painstaking footnotes that leave the reader open-mouthed and astonished. You wonder: “How on earth did we get here?”

But you already know. Landes has connected up all the dots: the lies and lethal journalism, and the way the world gave jihad a pass, while damning the Jews. The facts and the progression of this deadly state of affairs have been amply covered by the author and you begin to understand the depth of the threat to our world, today. 

This a book you want on your shelf. It is not an easy read, but a necessary one if you want to understand how we got here—and how we are to dig our way out of this ugly, Jew-hating, jihadi, fake news mess. I put some questions to author Richard Landes to learn more about his book and its implications for the future:

Varda Epstein: Most writers think about who they’re writing for and gear their writing to that reader. “Can The ‘Whole World’ Be Wrong?” seems to be identifying who the reader is not. The book begins with a warning, but it’s more like a dare, or even a threat—like you’re trying to scare the reader off: “If you feel up to the task . . . turn the page. If not, just sit in your tub tweeting about white, racist privilege, while you bleed out.”

Who do you envisage as your reader? Who is it you’re trying to reach?

Richard Landes: My ideal reader is someone who really does care about liberal and progressive values. I actually lay out my concerns in the introductory chapter by contrasting zero-sum and positive-sum values, and stating my unequivocal preference for the latter, while conceding that the former has an inevitable presence in our lives and warning that those thinking they can eliminate zero-sum are not only fooling themselves with messianic dreams, but ultimately opposed to key life forces.

What I document in the book, however, is a massive shift in what was considered “liberal” or “progressive” in the new century/millennium. By 2003 it became a “litmus test of liberal credentials” to be pro-Palestinian (Buruma in NYT), at a time when the Palestinians were engaged in a suicide-mass murder war against Israeli civilians. By any standards of real liberal values that was a travesty which continues to this day (think Gays and LGBTQ for Palestine). So in a sense, the book is an attempt to go back to the moment this travesty first “took” and rethink how it could have happened so quickly and thoroughly. But since I firmly believe that the willingness to hear criticism and take it seriously is one of the key components of the liberal sensibility, I address this criticism to liberals sufficiently committed to their values to take it seriously.

Varda Epstein: Do you worry you’re preaching to the choir? Do you even aspire to reach the masses?

Richard Landes: Well that’s hard to say. Obviously a 500-page book with notes at the bottom of each page is not for “the masses.” But, between masses and choir lies many a circle of readers. Obviously, the “choir” of pro-Israel people are going to find it congenial. A number of people have written me about devouring the book in one sitting and thanking me: “Someone finally has the words for everything I’ve been struggling to say!” wrote one person. And if it helps them make the point to others, that’s great. But my real audience is what we might call the goats. As shepherds know, if you have about one goat to every ten sheep, then when there’s a problem, the sheep look to the goats. If they’re calm, the skittish sheep settle down. Similarly, I don’t think I’m going to reach some gay guy so caught up in his peer group that he repeats nonsense about being passionately for a political culture that hates gays. But if I can reach the thoughtful ones, then maybe they can explain it to him.

Varda Epstein: You write, “In a sense, this book should not have had to be written and I should be able to work on the origins of modern Western civilization in the demotic millennialism of eleventh-century France to my heart’s content.” Why did the “Can The ‘Whole World’ Be Wrong?” have to be written, and why by you, Richard Landes? After all, as you suggest, lethal journalism, antisemitism, and global jihad are not your chosen field.

Richard Landes: Well, actually, global jihad is my field since it’s an apocalyptic millennial movement, and it came on my screen in the mid-90s through the (then) graduate work of David Cook (now at Rice U.). Actually, in the mid-1990s, in my work on the 11th century, I began to work out a model of antisemitism that went in waves starting with philo-semitism, leading to important socio-economic changes that eventually produced an antisemitic reaction. Given that the period after the Holocaust (i.e. my life) was the longest and most philo-semitic period in recorded history (especially in the USA where I grew up), I speculated that the advent of 2000 might mark the reappearance of antisemitism in the West. At the time I thought it would come from the apocalyptic “right” – fundamentalist Christian Zionists disappointed that the Rapture didn’t happen, and Jihadi Muslims who were already openly and ferociously antisemitic. What I didn’t see coming were two linked phenomena: 1) the attraction of the “Left” for the Jihadi apocalyptic narrative that Israel and the US were “Satans”/Antichrists, and 2) the utter failure of liberals, who had a huge presence in the public sphere, to resist. As a result, what I thought would be a wave of Jew-hatred that we could resist, has, over 20 years of astonishing and self-destructive mishandling, become an existential threat not only to Israel (its purported target) but to democracies around the world.

Why did I have to write it rather than someone else? I don’t know. But someone else didn’t write it. It’s such a hard thing to grasp, a history of your own time. Maybe working historians in the early 11th century writing histories of the turn of that millennium made it a conceivable project. Obviously I don’t write about everything (and neither did they). I write in depth about what I think were errors of judgment on a civilizational plane, which continue to be made by very smart people. We all love the story of the emperor’s new clothes, but few of us want to entertain the notion that it’s actually happening. Someone jokingly said that Amazon should bundle my book not with another book, but with antidepressants. It’s dark stuff. Very depressing. Without a deep sense of humor, I wouldn't have been able to keep my eye on this ball over the course of decades.

Varda Epstein: How, if at all, does your work as a medievalist inform your book, and in particular your interest in eleventh-century France? Does your work on the al Durah story, which you mention in your book, have anything to do with that? You cite many French sources and drop French phrases in your book. I’m getting the idea that you’re a Francophile—but not!

Richard Landes: As for the Middle Ages, there are three key issues:

1)      Honor-shame societies: As a medievalist I work on a society in which gaining/keeping honor and avoiding/revenging shame were key components of public life, where it was legitimate, accepted, even required that one shed blood for the sake of honor. Without understanding those dynamics, you don’t understand Arab political culture. Now Edward Saïd made it taboo to discuss these matters (the quintessence of “Orientalism”), and in doing so blinded the West to the cultural dynamics of this region. In my book I show how the Oslo Accords were based on thinking that Arafat and Arab political culture were ready to give up the view that the very existence of Israel was so shameful that it must be destroyed, and go for the positive-sum, win-win, of “land for peace,” to the benefit of both the Israelis and the Palestinians. And how ignoring those dynamics meant that right up to the last second, the peace negotiators thought we were “sooo close.” And still do.

2)      Apocalyptic millenarian: the jihadis are a classic expression of a distinctly (but not exclusively) medieval form of eschatological thinking, namely they embrace an “active cataclysmic apocalyptic scenario” – evil permeates the world and we are God’s agents in destroying it – aiming at a hierarchical millennium – Islam will dominate the world, infidels either accept dhimmitude (subjection), or convert, or die. It’s really hard for moderns to take apocalyptic beliefs seriously because every time in the past that people have been so moved, they’ve been wrong, sometimes disastrously so. (This included modern historians of the Middle Ages.) As a result of this cognitive lapse, and the pressures of political correctness in the 21st century, to avoid anything too negative about Islam (don’t say “radical Islam”), has produced a Western culture that cannot see its enemy (embodied in the absurd formula “war on terrorism”).

3)      Public Secrets: for reasons that I’m not sure about, both my academic career and my journalistic one have found and investigated public secrets, that is, something everyone “in the know” knows about, but when it comes to the public record, they deny any knowledge or existence of the issue in question. In the Middle Ages it was about how Charlemagne was crowned on the first day of the year 6000 from Creation – a millennial date Christian chronographers had been tracking for over 6 centuries – and yet no one who wrote about the coronation, or his imperial period, mentioned it. In this book, the main public secret I deal with is that the Palestinians fake news footage all the time, and that the press is so profoundly intimidated by them, that they run Palestinian “lethal narratives” as news. This unacknowledged, even denied phenomenon, has immense impact on the kind of lethal journalism that we get constantly from our news media.

Varda Epstein: There’s a lot about stupidity in your book—you call it when and where you see it, using exactly that word “stupid” in its various forms. Why is it important to you to use precisely this descriptor and how do you account for the sheer amount of it that exists in the world? 

Richard Landes: First because it’s a technical term in economic and game theory for someone who hurts someone else without gaining any advantage (Cipolla). Secondly because it’s so stunningly prominent in our times. I define “astoundingly stupid” as creating advantages for an avowed enemy. And as far as I can make out, that has been a consistent pattern among the Western opinion leaders – journalists, academics, public intellectuals, politicians, and policy makers – for the last two decades. As Elder of Ziyon put it, my book is a “modern take on the Emperor’s New Clothes.” Then, when I found the comment by Bonhoeffer (which I included in the epigrams)—who also lived at a time when his society was being seized by apocalyptic memes—about the impossibility of arguing with precisely this kind of self-destructive stupidity, I knew I was on the right track. 


Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Varda Epstein: How did you decide on the structure of the book? How does the first part complement the second? Why not have it in, say, two volumes? Oh, and you must tell us about the haikus! That must have been fun.

Richard Landes: The structure wrote itself. The first four chapters are my “history of my time,” namely four incidents in the early aughts (‘00s) that chronicle key moments in the assault of global jihad on western democracies, and the astoundingly stupid way in which the West processed what was happening to them: the outbreak of the intifada and the al Durah affair; 9-11; the “Jenin Massacre”; and the Danish cartoon scandal.

Then, to explain how this could happen, I went through the key players: 1) Shame-Honor driven Arab culture; 2) Apocalyptic-Millennial driven Jihadi beliefs – what I call Caliphators; 3) Liberal Cognitive Egocentrics: people who project their positive-sum values onto cultures that don’t share it; 4) radical progressives who, blinded by Saïd’s assault on Orientalism, end up allying with the most imperialist movement in the world because it’s “anti-imperialist,” i.e. anti-USA and Israel; 5) the lethal journalists who radically disorient their audiences with their Palestinian-compliant “news” reports; and 6) the virtue-signaling Jews who adopt their enemy’s narrative (something an apocalyptic Caliphator predicted in 2001), thereby giving wings to the very kind of exterminationist antisemitism that fueled the Nazi madness.

The last part sketches developments over the next decade and a half (mid-aughts to now), identifying some of the phenomena so striking in our current culture that I think this turn-of-the-millennium seizure helped set in motion – woke, cancel-culture politics, fake news, anti-racism discourse, and what I call pre-emptive dhimmitude, namely the adoption by our information elites of a posture of subjection to Muslim demands for respect which ends up attacking not the invaders of democratic culture, but those (like me) who warn and mobilize against those enemies.

As for the haikus, I’ve been writing them ever since I ran across the form in my youth. The one for al Durah (chapter one) was originally written for Y2K: “We need not have been/ Mouths open inhaling, when/ The sh*t hit the fan.” My favorite is the one for the chapter on Jews against themselves: “Have ever before/ lambs denounced lambs who refuse/ to lie with lions?”

Varda Epstein: I so appreciated all the detailed footnotes you included at the bottom of each page (I hate it when writers put them the end and I have to flip back and forth). But that would have been a daunting task! You must have been taking voluminous notes for years on end, as you read, watched, talked . . . does that about sum it up? How many years was this book in the making? 

"A book that keeps writing itself,"
Tat Aluf Yossi Kuperwasser



Richard Landes: Yes, it does sum it up nicely. Thanks to Evernote (I have over 35,000 notes clipped there), I’ve been able to preserve access to articles that no longer can be found online. I’m ashamed to say the book was over a decade in the making. The working title – They’re so smart, cause we’re so Stupid – was inspired by the Fort Hood Massacre (2009) in which a Palestinian-American major in the army, after extensively displaying his jihadi sympathies, shot dozens of his fellow-soldiers, and inspired Mark Steyn to write an article entitled: “These days, it’s easier to be even more stupid after the event.” It’s just hard to write a history book about your own time. As Yossi Kuperwasser put it, “It’s a book that keeps writing itself.” When Shireen abu Akleh was killed, I knew I couldn't include this ongoing, slow-motion train wreck.

As for the footnotes, I feel passionately about a) having many, and b) at the bottom of the page. I took out all the URLs one can find for oneself easily from the hard-copy book, but for those who want to get them, I have them up at my personal webpage for the book: https://richard-landes.com/the-whole-world/

Varda Epstein: There are so many shocking parts in your book still rattling around in my head. For instance, that remark from a peer, “Well, the Jews have been asking for it, and now, thank God, we can say what we think at last.”

Richard Landes: For me it will always be Charles Enderlin, when I pointed out how much faking was going on at Netzarim Junction the day Muhammad al Durah was allegedly shot, saying to me “Oh yes, they do that all the time.”

But the two worst comments by far were a) when a colleague in the history department responded to my bemoaning the suicide terror war of the Palestinians with the comment, “What choice do they have?” and b) the journalist Catherine Nay saying that the image of al Durah “erased, replaced” the picture of the boy in the Warsaw Ghetto. Hard to get more empirically and morally disoriented, and yet people heard these kinds of remarks and nodded knowingly.

What would you say shocked you most about your findings? I’m guessing it’s the stupidity. . .

Richard Landes: That’s one way to put it. Cowardice is another. The way I’d put it, in the ‘90s, I may have seen a wave of antisemitism coming in 2000, and even a wave of Jihadi attacks on the West, but I never dreamed that Western democracies would be so feckless in responding.

Varda Epstein: What do you want the reader to take away from your book?

Richard Landes:

1) that when “the whole world” agrees on something (whether it’s the emperor’s courtiers or the academics and journalists and pundits who think they speak for “the whole world” and are sure they’re right) they can (and have, and are and will) be, sometimes, wrong.

2) that the meanings of “liberal” and “progressive” have been terribly distorted, even betrayed, in the 21st century. 

3) that when the legacy media reports Israel has done something terrible and Israeli sources deny it (or even admit to it only partially) it’s possible that the legacy media is wrong.

4) that we’ve gotten into this mess because a lot of nice and well-intentioned people have allowed themselves to be pushed around, silenced, and cowed by those filled with passionate intensity, and we need to speak up.

5) that to continue down this path spells disaster.

***

Landes, R. (2022). Can “The Whole World” Be Wrong?: Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism, and Global Jihad (Antisemitism in America). Boston : Academic Studies Press, 2022. 

(available on Amazon.)



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Sunday, January 22, 2023

Can “The Whole World” Be Wrong?: Lethal Journalism, Antisemitism, and Global Jihad, by Professor Richard Landes, is a hard but important book to read. 
Landes does no less than directly taking on the orthodoxy of the liberal world that regards Israel as one of the worst human rights violators, that regards supporting the Palestinian cause as the archetype of progressive values, that regards the West as Islamophobic and institutionally racist. He challenges the reader - what if everything you have read is wrong, and I am right? 

The first part of the book goes into some detail on four episodes from the early 2000s. 

It is no surprise that one of those episodes is the  Al Dura affair, which Landes is one of the world's experts in. It was indeed the first blood libel of the new millenium, where the media unquestioningly accepted and promoted the idea that Israeli forces murdered the child Al Dura on TV and in cold blood. The French reporter, Charles Enderlin, who spread the libel wasn't there and he trusted the reporting of a Palestinian cameraman. Hours of footage from the same scene showed it was essentially a soundstage, where Palestinians were play-acting injuries. Yet almost no Western reporters questioned the story, as the Arab media ran the footage non-stop for days.

Occuring only two days after Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in 2000, the incident inflamed the Palestinians and the Arab world. Indeed, it would not be inaccurate to call the second intifada the "al-Dura intifada," as it almost certainly was the spark that kept the brand new riots going.And it was all a lie - it is impossible that the IDF could have shot the child from their position. 

The other incidents that Landes examines from the early part of the millenium are 9/11, the Jenin "massacre" that wasn't, and the Muslim world's reactions to the Danish cartoons of Mohammed. Landes uses each of these incidents as springboards into examining the West's reactions, which often were, as he notes repeatedly, stupid. On page after page, Landes gives scores of examples of this stupidity: the reluctance by media to use the term "terrorism," the constant repetition that Islam is peace, the bending over backwards to find fault with Western and specifically Israeli actions and ascribing them the responsibility for Islamist violence.

It is easy to forget the early aughts of this century, but Landes reminds us that just as today we will see Western progressives justify Hamas rockets by asking "what choice do they have?," the reaction to the tsunami of suicide bombing attacks in Israel during the bloody years of 2000-2004 prompted the exact same justifications by the same crowd. 

The other two major parts of the book examine the key players in pushing the bizarre mindset of Western self-blame and bending to the will of the Islamists (whom Landes terms "Caliphators") and the current outlook on the war between the West and apocalyptic Islam - and how the Islamists are winning the battle by disabling their enemy. On the way, Landes expertly analyzes the honor-shame culture and the zero-sum thinking of the Islamists as well as the stupid western tendency to project our own mindset onto them, even as they use our own strengths of self-criticism against us.

Throughout the book, Israel is the canary in the coal mine. By any objective standard, Israel is the most progressive and liberal state ever in an extended state of war. Its successful integration of a 20% Arab population as equals is far more successful than what we see in Paris or Malmo with a much smaller Muslim minority. Yet Israel is regarded, even by those other "enlightened" progressive European elites, as a "shitty little country" that has no right to exist. 

As I said, it is a hard book to read. The amount of information is sometimes overwhelming - and often infuriating. Landes also often peppers the text with gems that demand to be re-read. Happily, he chooses to use footnotes instead of endnotes so one can dig deeper into his often offhand examples.

I have some nitpicks too. I didn't see that he has a glossary of terms, many of which he created, until I finished the book, so one often sees his coinages like "Y2KMind" or "Caliphator" a hundred pages before he defines them in the text. I'm not as convinced as Dr. Landes of the millennialist component of Islamist thinking.  

The tone of the book is often more strident than objective, but it is hard to fault Dr. Landes for that, since the reader is apt to be upset along with the author. There is ample excuse to get angry while reading it.  And while Landes gives some general advice on what the West needs to do in order to recognize and defeat the enemy of Islamism, I wish it was more actionable. (I have written and spoken about how I think the Arab honor/shame culture can be used to Western advantage.) 

In general, though, this is an important book to read, and even those of us who are immersed in these topics will learn a great deal and see connections that we hadn't thought of before. 

Disclosure: I am friends with Richard, and this site is mentioned at least three times in the book.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive