Tuesday, August 23, 2011

On Roger Cohen's Prescription to British Jews

Floyd Abrams (m) and Anthony Julius (r)
argue Shylock v. Antonio in a mock trial
Floyd Abrams the famous First Amendment attorney has a letter in the NY Times today which is a very appropriate response to Roger Cohen's Op-ed, Jews in a Whisper”, in which Cohen admonishes British Jews on how they must behave in order to remove the taint of Antisemitism: "The lesson is clear: Jews, with their history, cannot become the systematic oppressors of another people. They must be vociferous in their insistence that continued colonization of Palestinians in the West Bank will increase Israel’s isolation and ultimately its vulnerability." In other words, they must become 'As-A-Jews', as described in Geary Theory: A Goy contemplates “As-A-Jews” in CIF today (see below Abrams' letter).

To the Editor,
"Re “Jews in a Whisper” (column, Aug. 21):
"Roger Cohen’s acute depiction of the perpetuation of British anti-Semitism recalls the description of it in “Trials of the Diaspora,” Anthony Julius’s epic study of the topic.
“It is not Jew-hatred that we must write of,” Mr. Julius concludes, “but Jew-distrust ... it is a story of snub and insult, sly whisper and innuendo, deceit and self-deception.”
But is there not more than a touch of self-deception in Mr. Cohen’s insistence that “the task” — apparently, the only task — of diaspora Jews is to condemn the “colonization of Palestinians in the West Bank”?
Even if one shares, as I do, Mr. Cohen’s concerns about the settlements, I would have thought that if diaspora Jews or others were being assigned tasks vis-à-vis Israel, a prime one would be to respond to the torrent of calumny, one-sided and often false, that is directed at that nation on the basis of supposed standards that are applied to no other nation.
New York, Aug. 21, 2011
"The writer, a First Amendment lawyer, has represented The New York Times."
And here is a sample from Geary Theory: A Goy contemplates “As-A-Jews”:

"The As-A-Jew certainly wants to be loved. He desperately desires to be accepted into the shallow hypocritical soi-disant left-leaning world which he feels is his natural habitat (that would be, by the way, the world whose UK branch is pandered to and bolstered by the Guardian). But he has a problem. He’s Jewish. And one of the trade-marks of, one of the tribal markings you must have to enter that shallow hypocritical soi-disant left-leaning world is a hatred of Israel, aka the Jewish state. That soi-disant left-leaning world is therefore suspicious of Jews: do they or do they not pass the Jonathan Freedland "Israel test"? Tell us you despise the place and there is a seat at our dinner table. Tell us you feel any affinity and you can find your own way to the door. As Freedland puts it most succinctly:
[I]f Jews refuse to dissociate themselves from Israel, then they are fair game for abuse and attack until they publicly recant. Liberals rightly recoil from the constant pressure on Muslims to explain themselves and denounce jihadism or even Islamism. Yet they make the same implicit demand when they suggest Jews are OK, unless they are Zionists.
"The effect is to make Jews’ place in British society contingent on their distance from their fellow Jews, in this case, Israelis."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated so kindly keep it clean and respectful. All racisms -- including anti-Muslim hate speech -- will be denied a place here, as well as terms like Nazi used to designate anyone other than an actual living or past member of a Nazi or neo-Nazi organization.