My Judeophobia and the (squandered) potential of a human club

 

To the extent that I am a Judeophobe, however that maybe quantified, I can't find reason to be apologetic; best I can muster is its suppression. The only club I can authorize (maybe) is the human club; yet I can also endorse the prospect of human extinction as a less than tragic event.

 

As the term 'antisemite,' in its apparently poor current common usage, is associated with hatred of all things perceived to be jewish; 'semite' apparently refers properly to a category of languages, including Hebrew. Languages are magical and deeply fascinating and important to me, so it is not accurate for me to refer to myself as an anti-semite. I think what I wish to discuss is whether or not I am hostile to "things perceived to be jewish" - a Judeophobe, why I find myself here and whether I can or should do anything about it. My path therein does not seem clear.

 

One needs to study the history of resentment to the jewish 'club,' as somehow separate from 'jew-hating' born more of racism or creedism, a more brutal and irrational lashing out against anyone 'other,' in any attribute; differentiated to some degree by the tendency to scan the horizon, searching for scapegoat, anyone that can stand in for culpable party, seen as responsible for one's ill-fate. The 'classic' euro approach to this culminates in Hitler, of course. I have no reason to defend myself from this sort of thing, just for the record.

 

It is difficult for me personally not to fall to my easy stance vis a vis over-compensation; I extend this assumption to anyone recovering from trauma, and it's academic at best, cruel at worst. Jews or Zionists or any other historical parties have natural reaction to the circumstances of hatred with self-preservation. But I have to strain not see the subsequent actions as over-reactions, deeper entrenchment lacking self-reflection, liberally announcing righteousness, that the jew or the zionist or the isreali likely considers natural and just. So the logger-head. When justice be called over-reaction, when power be attained, meager or otherwise, when soapbox be positioned and available to those who remain after such a 'final' insult and persecution be found by those witnesses of Auchwitz, corrective action described as over-reaction, over-compensation, can only be received as knife in wound, insult to injury, and can be accepted only by the self-hating jew. But exploring this history, and my bystander meanderings about jewish traumas is not my planned focus here.

 

If you're going to 'set up' a membership club, presumably with gate keepers and exclusion, tribalist announcements about 'special' and special associations with gods; (not lost on me as the reverse of dogs, an interesting analog, as the dog clearly seeks to gain favor with a master and is deeply suspect of other dogs, sitting faithfully nearby hoping to garner favor with the master, the keeper of the food, the shelter and the fire pit. (Of course, I do not here mean to speak of the jewish of any variation as sub-human; I mention gods and dogs only make fun of fairytales and the followers of fairytales, though I reserve the rights for people to engage in them in the comfort of their own homes.) The first hurdle may be to qualify the use of 'club' to describe a organization of such enormous importance to jews, Judaism. I want this analogy to be limited, and to only go some distance to describe part of a prospective resentment by those on the outside, those vessels of hatred, those who claim purity, or those like myself, uncertain, with concern, to be found to be Judeophobic.

 

It will be important to parse the supposed complaints. Any person, presumably most non-self-hating jews (should the self-hating jew not be fiction; I know not personally) may well consider their existence natural and just, further would be shocked and insulted that any question about it exist in the mind, let alone travel from the tongue to the air. As with all peoples, self-absorbed or stepping lightly or acutely aware, jews seem likely to consider their treading, and justly, 'going about their business,' which requires no authorization of any kind and for which there is no reason whatsoever to apologize, or to do any 'laying low.' It is clear, if one is to review history, the supposed trespasses at the hands of jews in the world list many fabrications, for example, that jews are somehow responsible for endless tragedy and misfortune. It needs to be known if the actions of jews have any ramifications that are not merely at 'the hands of man' in general. Of course they are not; if jews are to suck ass, it is because man sucks ass. I believe we can discard any notions to the contrary.

 

So we here get closer to my beef: Why the (perhaps minor) 'resentment?' Hence the notion of the 'club.' Tribalism inherently creates resentment born of actual or perceived exclusion, much of it silly: It is mostly schoolyard ignorance that one is grumpy and spiteful to see the affectations of a club displayed, the accoutrement of difference, the star of the star-bellied sneech, of inclusion and exclusion. And the tendency to lash out, the suspicions like mold-growth, are apt to thrive with any outsider encountering the Amish, the Masai, the 'assimilated' amerikan jew, who might only dawn the cup hat once a year.

 

But though one can study and convert to this or most 'teams' - should the devotion be rigorous enough. This is debatable; the submerged ex-pat is always an outsider, despite the efforts of a lifetime among initial strangers. It is mostly a source of amusement for those born of a tradition, despite the respect one might receive for really well speaking Hebrew or Mandarin or Swahili after decades of study and practice. Of course, substantial effort to engage, if not trade cultural mindsets just to figure out why one has phobic thoughts would be a bizarre, unusual commitment.

 

A thought experiment: Would I take on a conversion so that I would 'understand' the perspective of the jew? So that I could take on the cup hat, so that I could be target of haters, so that I could presumably make big money in real estate, procure funding for a theatrical production? Of course, this is all ridiculous and no empowered jew would help install jewish attributes in an 'outsider' even if it were possible; it would be insulting and trivialize an ancient culture valued by many. What can be provided are lessons in the enormous depth and history of Judaism or the jewish legacy. Alas, I have little interest in any of that; though this perspective may well be seen by jews or non-jews alike as closedminded. But I feel I have other fish to fry, sorry about that, although I'm not sorry in the slightest.

 

 

When I see jewish real estate manipulators in Greenpoint, dressed not in the crispy clothes garb of the gentile businessman, but their religious costumes, with the associated cup hats and curly sideburns, why does this seem absurd and further stirs my distaste? I hate all real estate soldiers, of any and all stripes. It is because it is a preparation for separation: It adds denoted membership in a club, and one that seems to announce exclusion. But, I assume, I could join this club, sort of, I mean it's a little late for me to engage the full process, emerge from a jewish mother, run the gauntlet of rites, study the religious texts - and of course, what benefits of membership would I be seeking? Would I feel differently to see men in traditional Kenyan color dress discussing the value of brownstones? Yes I would, irrationally; such men are not historically associated with jewish landlord stereo-types. Undoubtedly, there is a Kenyan equivalent, but I know not of this.

 

What am I to do with this "coincidence:" I lived in a building owned by two Jewish guys, who just happened to be Jewish I guess, just happened to do a lot of things I did not like, and then screwed me over big-time, if not attempted to kill me, my 6-month old son and his mother and our two dogs by way of fire, subsequently forcing us onto the street in a secret real estate debacle. Well, it was just a coincidence that they were jews, they were not 'jewish' landlords, they were just landlords. Even "my" (jewish) lawyer wanted me to prove that they were assholes, which I didn't think was necessary or difficult. But of course he didn't need me to prove they were jewish.

 

My point is, if I was to feel sorry for myself, why should I think that jews were responsible for this and all other perceived problems in my life and society at large?

 

So, it seems necessary for me to parse my 'ill-feelings,' to make a determination in micro, as to whether my various distastes or resentments to the accoutrement, cultural attributes, or perceived collective actions or tendencies of a creed or looser group of peoples - are anything but one of my internal corruptions, systemic prejudice. I then must list things I do not believe: I do not believe people born to Judaism are inherently problematic or defective in any way (any more than any other person.) I do not believe in a jewish tribe or organization conspiring to destroy the world or create a 'reverse' Reich of deserving superior or god-chosen peoples.

 

My problems are more gnawing worm like: If we take just one example, I find myself irritated, essentially by people "in the way," an ambitious sort of person often in the media industry. One can see where this is going: Jews in show business and finance. To defend any feelings along these lines, one can say: Who on earth has calculated the percentage of "people of random jewish origin" participating in either of those two over-lapping "industries?" Since I can find myself with these thoughts, I assume I am Judeophobic, I am resentful of random people in front of me in line, and I irrationally decide they are jewish - why? Because they have curly hair, prominent noses, Brooklyn accents, respond as a Mr. xxGold, or Mr. Berg or xStein or some combination therein?

 

As I've explored in other forums, ambitious and aggressive people irritate me. But they are hardly ALL jewish, if more than a 'handful' of them are. There is no formal accounting.

 

Part of my impetus to scribble about all this: I've heard from an associate of mine who apparently has in recent times 'discovered' something jewish about himself, has taken to study this somehow and has made a number of very characteristically narcissistic statements about this 'condition,' with a tone that appears to raise his platform of genius ever higher in his own mind. This guy is found to be simultaneously intelligent and thoughtful, to the point of neurosis, but additionally deeply narcissistic, proud and dismissive and insane by most people I know that have encountered him. A paradox indeed: Are these contrary attributes a fair trade? One could say he appears to be self-confident, as do I. Aside from his recent divergence into screeds about his apparently new found jewishness, or even some likely benign ramblings about his admirable study of torahs, his asshole-dum would have little association with Judaism, and still may not have any bearing whatsoever therein. But this development, has degraded him in my mind, even though I suppose the discipline (that I cannot verify) to study his family history, admittedly admirable.

 

I knew another guy when I was young, a first born son of an Israeli immigrant, my first and perhaps only brush with a jewish family of the practicing sort. My friend, as I called him (and would today if I still saw him) was incredibly talented, in his domain (yes, in show business, whadya know), and very confident in this as he should have been. I don't think I did or would think of him as aggressive, though he was not meek. Was he confident because of his talent?  Yes, and naturally so. He defended the idea of the state of Israel, (to the extent that an amerikan born 18-year-old could) in the context of the first Intifada; he essentially described the need to protect the jewish peoples. I imagine he knew more about this than I, though I figured I understood that installing a state at the tip of bayonet in 1948 was at best an over-reaction to the Riech (a sacrilege of course), and at worst insult to injury and an additive historical injustice. We didn't really follow each other in this political discussion, but we had other interests that sustained our friendship. I am not a Palestinian.

 

In other words, with this stereotype of the jew, born of centuries of hardship in the world and in the Vaudevillian sciences, those who's uncle knows a banker who can secure the funds to make a movie, which imbibes the human interest story proposal with the appropriate profundity of the collective jewish toil in this mortal coil, to bring to life a saga of not only worthy poetics but box office ledgers to lighten even grandfather Ben-Eliser's ordinarily stern eyebrows... ...and this maker stands on the successful side of the red velvet stanchion rope at the film festival, chatting with the representatives of the salivating distributors of content, perhaps a Mr. xStein. So am I just envious? And I suppose this is a line item on the commandment stones of Moses, so, father (apparently) I have sinned. For dog's sake, is all this analysis culminating in 'the squeaky wheel gets oiled?' And the the wheel and the oil-can are neither jewish or gentile.

 

 

 

 

So aside from the likely fact that those invested in Judaism, which I might guess would be most people born to the traditions, at least to some degree, might object to the idea that Judaism is a club. I don't at all mean to suggest that any other associations couldn't be considered a club, even a group of neo-nazis. At the heart of this aspect of the discussion is, as I have mentioned, an effort to separate people from a human race, to create or perpetuate separations. I'm not a bleeding heart and I think it perfectly acceptable to ignore attributes, activities or any other traits should they not appeal, should they not inspire, should clubs on the surface or in depth smell even mildly of exclusion. Even within the modern notion of celebrating differences, one is free to pick and choose things to pay attention to.

 

Yet this idea belittles the gravity of the creations of the creator of the universe, his divinity and his chosen peoples. One might wonder why he brought into being unchosen ones, I guess as a point of reference or to do dirty jobs like picking pubic hairs out of bathtub drains. And I needn't speak of the indoctrination of the young; I have covered this in other forums. It seems strange that in these times where we talk of human evolution at the hands of technologists and supposedly the coming and cumming thoughtful technologies themselves, that conservatives are convinced the patriarchal, fairytale-based social systems represent the apex of human potential, emergent 2000 years ago or more, yet the digital revolution is somehow greeted with salivations. This apparent contradiction aside, what sacrilege, to describe religious and cultural phenoms, thousands of years old, as a club, analogous to a group of 13 year-olds trading baseball cards in a tree house.

 

It is not difficult to understand why it is that clubs arise; schoolyard brutality always a hearty weed, and will produce factions of dominant and submissive, those popular and unpopular, those in and those out. It is natural enough to divide into factions as a form of celebrating common interests or as a refuge from bullies. Regardless, the club of the Jew as with the club of the muslim, the christian or the brothel, are rather entrenched and dissolving such institutions in favor of a human club, (unfortunately) a remote prospect. The optimists or other smilers, would rightly suggest there isn't reason one cannot be a member of any number of clubs. There is also the variances in human technique, not all peoples think alike, some are loud some are soft, some adopt survival of the fittest as long as they come out on top, some propose equality, tribes may be inevitable should we actually have, celebrate or prioritize differences.

 

So if the notion of tribal clubs not be so insulting as to shut down the discussion, what are we to say about exclusion and resentment? The average member of the jewish club might easily suggest that the presence of jewish activities hardly places an abrasive and jarring blast onto the scene. One might say 'presence' can describe auras as thin as ghosts, and I suppose it a sensitive person who is distracted by or resentful of such subtle presences, I mean, grow spine you whimp. But are we searching for the sources of resentment to the Jew, some basis for ill-feelings about a tribe? We have tried to set aside for the moment, the insane notions of conspiracy like those motivating Hitler and company, or the more recent upgrades involving the banking or real estate 'industries,' or the more direct and obvious complaints Palestinians might have facing the actions of the Israelis, to focus on what one might describe essentially as secular jewish success in business, resented mostly as a function of envy. If I am irritated that representatives of a club appear to be 'in my way' in a cue at the bakery, do I have a valid complaint? What if they were people 'like me' whatever that means, conceivably creating the identical delay in my baguette purchase. If my retired mother was indecisive before me in the bread outlet, should I be just in cutting her some slack, would she be less annoying? Certainly not.

 

So this suggests that clubs of people are resented because they occupy territory and we are then talking about overpopulation and 'loss of habitat,' should we rub up against each other. This is rather literal when one reviews two deeds for a house in the 'disputed' territories, one in Arabic and one in Hebrew. If Hitler attempted to erase the Jew from the face of the earth and a Zionist attempts to erase a Palestian olive farmer's land deed, what is this - compensation? Eye for an eye, contradiction? One might point out there were few Palestinians in the Riechstad. So do we mean survival of the fittest? Or have we merely sunk into the mud of 'he said, she said,' incomplete evidence, alternative facts or other broken puzzle pieces, that leave reality riddled with holes?

 

These issues don't so much keep me up at night, as troubling and insane as they may be. Mostly, I cannot figure out why people bother me, I cannot seem to ignore my gut reactions to rather superficial attributes and coatings of any number of groups of peoples. An ambitious person who gets to the doorway in a cue before I do, dawning a certain type of club hat, one who talks as if auditioning for gig as John Waters' stunt double, or a gleeful 'young conservative' lawyer chuckling at the new impotency of affirmative actions, all make me want to barf on my own shoes or hide in a forest. But tough luck for me; I lack the adjustment so that I might tune out. I do not make the effort to get know these people and their wonderful clubs - Should I not be so selfish, lazy and narrow focused, I would soon see the redeeming qualities of these members, concede that meritocracy indeed is an operative system, and that jews are indeed often smart, thoughtful, humorous, inherently good writers, comedians, filmmakers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, visionaries - except when they are not any of these things, just like everyone else. There is no reason to even tally who is under or over represented in 'fields,' should it be possible - it is no different than trying to count how many people hesitate or take the initiative at a 4-way stop, those that have brown, black, blond or pink hair. But here, everyone at the intersection is in someone else's way - no one (I should hope) is claiming that they should be allowed to proceed first because their god chose them. I doubt a jewish driver is acting thus, or even taking their aunt's advise that to get anywhere in this world, especially as an oppressed person, if not a jewish one, one must not be coy or hesitant. Indeed the timid animal gets not to the trough in the feed lot. I should know this - I was broken-hearted once by a girl who turned to me and said: "What is "fair?" and in that moment I knew exactly what she meant; it was not a mysterious moment or statement.

 

I have this tendency: To get little distance with these sort of scribbles, derailing arguments as I make them. It is important to question what one thinks, certainly what one feels, taking the cues from the dog brain that creates such primitive impulses. This all, despite the modern cultural popular promotions that suggest having 'feelings' is not only natural, it is desirable, passionate, advantages come to those advertising one's vulnerabilities rather than suppressing them. And for the sake of your health: Studies show tumors come to those who suppress. I don't think that means one should have or broadcast creedist remarks. So "Don't say anything if you don't have anything nice to say;" every 4 year-old knows this, old man.