To add to the below excellent post, here is a fascinating essay from 1987 by John Murray Cuddihy on Jewish Theodicy - which I think explains a lot of what weâre seeing
Jewish theodicy is the way Jewsâordinary Jews, secular or religiousâhandle the problem of evil in everyday life and in their writings and literature and art. For Jews, the problem of evil takes paramount shape as the problem of anti-Semitism, and the problem of anti-Semitism is climaxed in the Holocaust. In the course of performing their theodicy, the discourse of Jews is frequently irritating. Not necessarily wrong, or inaccurate, or immoral or illegal, but just simply annoying.
Why? Because, I would hold, of its presumption of total innocence on the part of Jews in relation to the historical phenomenon of anti-Semitism. In this theodicy, the Jewish people become as blameless and benevolent as God himself is supposed to be in the dilemma of classical theodicy. The problem becomes, âHow do bad things [read: anti-Semitism] happen to this good people?â If this people in practice really considers itself blameless, as sinned against by other groups, itself not sinning against them, it is driven by its own logic to a kind of Manichean view of the world in which a small weak, good group (the Jews) is dispersed among a large, strong, bad group (the nations, the goyim). This small, good group is self-defined as a victim of the large, strong, bad, Christian group that victimizes it.
It was not ever thus with Jewish theodicy. The classical theodicy blamed the Jews themselves for the woes of exile. The earlier lamentations were intrapunitive. I define Jewish secularization and emancipation as precisely a shift in the direction of blame: from a deserved punishment from God for violating the covenant to blaming the instruments of his wrath, the nations. The vector of blame shifts from intrapunitive to exteropunitive, leaving the Jews themselves relatively blameless.
Jewish theodicy so conceived finds nothing morally problematic about its claimed status as victim. Jews blame the victimizer, the anti-Semite. They see the anti-Semite as blaming the victim, the Jew. This they take to be very problematic and irrational. Yet, when Jewsâ own historical actions, in the Middle East for example, create a stateless people who, in turn, blame the Jews and the Israelis, what does Jewish theodicy do? It blames the victims, the Palestinians, and sees nothing irrational in this. This presumption of blamelessness is irritating because it violates reciprocity.
The self-image of the Jew as morally superior to the goyim is embedded in the situation of Jewish emancipation. Being marginal and relatively powerless, in other words, being luftmenschy , enabled Jews, especially Jewish intellectuals, to become very moralistic, very critical of the Diaspora. Ideologies like Marxism, Freudianism, Hebraism, and Reform Judaism embody this high-minded thrust. The luxury of powerlessness ended with the founding of Israel. In becoming Israelis, Jews dirtied their hands. But, despite les mains sales , the old-time theodicy of victimage continued, especially in the Diaspora. There is a strain, a conflict, between two rhetoricsâbetween the Diaspora Reform rhetoric of the Jew as ethical, moralistic, and pacifistic and the Israeli rhetoric of Sabra victory and pride, between, if you will, New York Times editorial talk and the talk of Menachem Begin and General Ariel Sharon
In more recent times, chosenness was inherited as a sense of oneâs betterness, oneâs betterness to the goyim. What a Jewish child in mid-century America inherited, writer Philip Roth told an Israeli audience, was âno body of law, no body of learning and no language, and finally, no Lordâwhich seems to me a significant thing to be missing.â But what one did receive, Roth went on, was "a psychology, not a culture and not a culture in its totality. What one received whole, however, what one feels whole, is a kind of psychology; and the psychology can be translated into three wordsââJews are better.â This is what I knew from the beginning: somehow Jews were better. Iâm saying this as a point of psychology; Iâm not saying it as a fact."34
In a recent book, Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin maintain that, in fact, âJews generally have led higher quality lives than their Gentile neighborsâ owing to the higher values instilled in them by their Judaism, and that gentiles, perceiving Jews as âbetter thanâ themselves, resent and envy them precisely for this.35 This, they claim, is the cause of anti-Semitism.
Alienating powerful western interests to try and make pals with brutal Arab regimes is incredibly stupid.
At least when Paddy Cosgrave starts mouthing off, at least itâs only his interests that are harmed. Whe senior politicians stick their noses in, itâs everyone else who suffers.
Is anyone else just wishing that our politicians would just stay out of this? Send our thoughts and prayers and maybe a token million or two of food and medicine for victims and then call it a wrap.
SF refused to call for this only last week. It just shows how behind the curve SF are, just like on water charges. Theyâre following the herd, in a quite female fashion actually.
But those are the same âpowerful western interestsâ that are oppressing us. Israel and western Zionists are constant enemies of Ireland. All the nastiest anti Irish Tories in the UK are going nuts at Irelandâs stance on Israel.