Tumgik
#this is from the first few pages of 'Antisemite and Jew' (1948)'
sidleyparkhermit · 5 months
Text
A classmate of mine at the lycée told me that Jews "annoy" him because of the thousands of injustices that "Jew‐ridden" social organizations commit in their favour. "A Jew passed his agrégation the year I was failed, and you can't make me believe that that fellow, whose father came from Cracow or Lemberg, understood a poem by Ronsard or an eclogue by Virgil better than I." But he admitted that he disdained the agrégation as a mere academic exercise, and that he didn't study for it. Thus, to explain his failure, he made use of two systems of interpretation, like those madmen who, when they are far gone in their madness, pretend to be the King of Hungary but, if questioned sharply, admit to being shoemakers. His thoughts moved on two planes without his being in the least embarrassed by it. As a matter of fact, he will in time manage to justify his past laziness on the grounds that it really would be too stupid to prepare for an examination in which Jews are passed in preference to good Frenchmen. Actually he ranked twenty‐seventh on the official list. There were twenty‐six ahead of him, twelve who passed and fourteen who failed. Suppose Jews had been excluded from the competition; would that have done him any good? And even if he had been at the top of the list of unsuccessful candidates, even if by eliminating one of the successful candidates he would have had a chance to pass, why should the Jew Weil have been eliminated rather than the Norman Mathieu or the Breton Arzell?
RIP to this guy who went to high school with Jean-Paul Sartre and is now immortalized solely for being racist and dumb
39 notes · View notes
helladirections · 9 days
Note
What do u think of the phrase “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free”? Apparently it’s antisemitic and I wanted ur opinion
Short answer: Yes, mostly.
Long answer: below the cut. I need to preface with a few things:
My statement on the war is the same as it has always been. Dying is bad, I am concerned about people living in imminent danger (including people I know and people I don't). Also, I have always been for a two state solution, human rights, self determination, etc. for everybody.
There's a narrative about how it's not necessarily the responsibility of a person to explain what is / isn't offensive to their culture / identity, which is valid. But most of my Jewish community is very into educating others, and I'd rather you come to me than not at all.
There's an old saying, "2 Jews, 3 opinions." So don't take what I have to say as the end all be all. Also, while I've spent a lot of time intentionally educating myself on this issue (especially beyond what they just teach us growing up), I have never claimed to be an expert.
Resources you might be interested in at the bottom.
Like most things in Judaism and surrounding modern day Israel, this answer can be a bit complicated when going into the full context. So please bear with me. And remember that one of our main texts (Talmud) is a tiny section of Torah surrounded by a giant page of two ancient rabbis literally arguing with each other. Please don't be mad that the answer isn't super easy.
First, a bit of history.
Claims to the land: Both Jews and Palestinians have ancestral claims to the piece of land that we call modern Israel. There's really not a way to argue around that, nor should anyone. In ancient times, Jews / Israelites / Hebrews were not the only people to be living there. Sometimes they lived in peace with others, sometimes they were at war. (As was typical for the time period). Up until about the time of the 1948 UN resolution, there wasn't really a concept of "Palestinians" as a specifically Arab people. Palestine was just one of the names used for the land, in addition to Israel, Zion, and others.
Theology: Jews have religious texts claiming that Israel is our homeland given by Gd. Much (but not all) of the religious context actually comes directly from the story of Passover, a holiday which is starting on Monday night. Jews were slaves in Egypt, Pharoah was bad, 10 plagues, parting of the Red Sea, 40 years in the desert, Israel. Etc. Do I think that this should actually matter in a modern day political / civil conflict? No. But I think it's worth mentioning for context because some people think it is relevant.
Religious Spaces: Jews, Christians, and Muslims all have highly important landmarks around what is now Israel.
Jews in the land: Although the Jews were as a whole kicked out of Israel in the post Temple period (after the second Temple was destroyed, leaving only the Western Wall that we have now), a portion of Jews remained in the area. Additionally, there has been a pretty through line of belief that Jews would some day be back in that land. (Also Passover: at the end of the service we say "next year in Jerusalem!") Zionism - the belief that there should be a modern state of Israel, has always existed in some form, although sometimes not using that name.
Modern Political Agreements: There were some phases of individual Jewish communities going into the land and building what is now Tel Aviv, parts of Jerusalem, etc. Then there was the British Mandate. I forget the timeline, but there were multiple international offers to give Jews a piece of land was smaller than what Israel is now, or didn't even include Jewish holy sites, and from my knowledge, most of the Jewish leaders at those times were ready to accept anything they were offered.
Then after the Holocaust, there were millions of displaced Jews with nowhere to go. One of the primary reasons why the UN established the modern state of Israel was to address that problem - No one wanted to let them in, they didn't want to go anywhere random, and a general sense that there had to be a place that Jews could go to a be safe if something like the Holocaust were to happen again. That UN resolution was in 1948. There has been on and off war in the region since well before 1948, but the day after that resolution, all hell broke loose.
Gaza & Hamas: A lot of progress has been made since 1948. Israel has peace treaties with many Arab countries, Egypt being a prime example. Most relevant to this question and this moment in time is that in 2005, Israel left Gaza. The Israeli government displaced tons of Jewish & non Jewish Israelis to give that land to Palestinians. After leaving, Gaza was left to govern itself. The government that was chosen was Hamas. Hamas is not really a government and does not look after its people, its goal is not to govern, but to destroy Israel. And not only to destroy Israel because it is the political entity, but because it is the Jewish state specifically.
Now, the actual phrase
Meaning of From The River to The Sea: This phrase directly references from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. It calls to completely eliminate the existence of the modern, democratic, Jewish state of Israel, and replace it with a modern, most likely undemocratic and led by Hamas, state of Palestine.
Also: This catchy chant was created and continues to be pushed by people who are antisemitic and want to destroy not only modern Israel, but see all Jews as inherently evil.
However: It's a catchy chant. People want peace, human rights, and self determination, just as I said above. If all the people around you are claiming to want those same things, and this is the catchy chant that has become part of the brand, it makes sense to join in on it.
Plus: From the the river to the sea, no one should be oppressed, deprived of human rights, or living in imminent danger. Dying is bad.
So what does that all mean?
One of the major reasons why modern Israel exists is for the protection of the Jewish people. One of the (many) major reasons why Palestinians do not have a modern state is because Hamas and other Palestinian leadership have refused to negotiate with Israel and have only ever called for its complete and total destruction. Hamas has always called for destruction through violent means not just because Israel is currently there, but because Israel is Jewish.
So my "final answer": The chant was created by, is in line with, and supports movements which not only seek to eliminate the modern state of Israel, but do so through violent and destructive means specifically because it is Jewish. Therefore, in my opinion and that of most of the Jewish community, From The River To The Sea Palestine Will Be Free is an antisemitic slogan.
Furthermore, regardless of if the slogan is defined formally as antisemitic or not, it often accompanies people and actions which make Jews, including myself, feel unsafe.
That being said, there have always been Jewish voices calling for the elimination of Israel. After all, 2 Jews, 3 Opinions. And, many, if not most, people who repeat that phrase don't know the full history and don't intend to be antisemitic - the Pro Palestinian movement has done a wonderful job at branding around human rights.
Some more of my opinions, just for the record if I still managed to have your attention.
Just because you disagree with a government or the way a country was formed, does not mean the country does not have a right to exist. I disagree with the American government almost all the time, and the founding of this country relied on abusing BIPOC. But America is here, and so we deal with it and try to make the best of it.
I hate Netanyahu. I always have. My grandpa, who used to like him, now hates him as much as I do. We talked last night about how he is making it so difficult to be Jewish around the world right now.
My definition of the word Zionism: The belief that modern Israel has a right to exist as a democratic Jewish state.
My perfect version of that land: People stop killing each other, everyone has the right to self governance, universal human rights, everyone has safe access to their own holy sites. I think the most likely way to get there is through some sort of two state solution. I do not know what the lines look like.
Israel policy and politics used to be a hobby for me, something I cared about and found interesting. It was also an entry point into my political career. Then it was my job. Now it's not fun and I do try to avoid it because I get too emotional and I can't really do anything about it anyway. I said Netanyahu is making it hard to be Jewish anywhere in the world, because diaspora Jews are constantly being blamed for the actions of an independent country. It gets hard.
I have generally avoided talking about October 7th, and the ongoing war. That is because there are images from that day that I cannot unsee. My intrusive thoughts are those images. It's not healthy for me to be plagued by that constantly.
You may have read me write about this before, but I know a lot of people in Israel right now. My best friend and her son - my nephew, live just west of Jerusalem in a small Orthodox community, which means it sometimes takes days for me to get responses from her after a big event, especially if it overlaps with Shabbat or another holiday. I check in with her just a couple of days ago though, and she said she's doing well and she feels safe.
Resources you might be interested in:
ADL on From The River to The Sea AJC on From The River to The Sea AP on From The River to The Sea
History.com overview of Israel history MyJewishLearning overview of Israel history US State Department on the creation of Israel in 1948 Brittanica on history & conflict in Israel
Anyway, I hope this answers your question, I'm sorry it was so long, and I'm aware that I'm about to get some hateful comments. If you are going to send me a hateful anon, just know that I'm going to block you, then check my blocked list, and know who you are. I'm not going to sacrifice my mental health and stability over people who don't understand the full context of what they are talking about and choose to just attack with hate.
8 notes · View notes