Richard
Cohen wrote a column under the title: “Anti-Semitism is not just another
opinion”.
It
is not clear if Cohen means that anti-Semitism is no opinion at all, or that it
is part opinion and part something else. The column also came under the
subtitle: “The New York Times should know better,” and was published on
December 24, 2018 in The Washington Post.
To
avoid getting lost in the thick fog of haggling, we must begin the discussion
by sharpening our understanding of the word 'opinion.' So let's begin with Rene
Descartes' saying: “I think, therefore I am.” If we accept this concept, we
acknowledge that human existence stands on the factors that produce thinking.
These are the capacity to 'feel,' which we share with other primates, and the
capacity to 'judge,' which is ours alone.
Because
feeling and judgment are the ingredients that lead to the formulation of
opinions, we conclude that our existence as human beings, stands on our capacity
to formulate opinions. Take this capacity away, and we descend to the level of
the lower primates. What this boils down to is that anti-Semitism and similar
sentiments of revulsion toward the others, are natural products of our
humanity.
The
question is this: Is anti-Semitism based more on feeling which is a naturally
produced sentiment, or is it based more on judgment, which is an artificially
produced attitude? It's important to resolve this question because the answer
can lead to a better management of anti-Semitism.
There
is no doubt that people who do not know each other feel more at ease being
among people that look like themselves than being among people that look
different — be that a different
color of the skin, of weight, of general appearance, of accent or what have
you. This is a natural reaction whose sting is diminished by getting people to
know each other, which results in the fear of the unknown becoming acceptance
of the familiar.
In
fact, the Jews in Europe understood this reality centuries ago, and sought to resolve
their difficulties by mounting a comprehensive scheme to change their looks
from the Semitic appearance they had, to the European appearance they acquired using
a questionable method. What the Jews did was kidnap, adopt or lure Nordic
looking children into their ghettos where they raised them as their own. And
they worked on cross-breeding a new crop of Jews having looks more amenable to
the European population outside the ghetto.
The
scheme worked for a period of time, but anti-Semitism returned more intensively
in Europe. It happened because the Europeans turned out to be reacting more
repulsively to what the Jews were doing rather than how they appeared. Where
they reacted with indignation to the Jewish supremacist attitude in the past,
they now reacted viscerally for being conned by Jews that remained as supremacist
as ever, but were now wrapped in a European skin.
That
drama played itself in Europe for centuries, culminating in the Nazis forcing
the Jews to wear a yellow Star of David so that they can easily be spotted and
identified by the innocent Germans who might be conned and harmed by Jews that
were made to look like them, members of the master Aryan race.
This
happens to answer the question that was asked earlier: Is anti-Semitism based
more on feeling, or on judgment? The answer is that anti-Semitism is based more
on what the Jews do, than what they are as an ethnic or religious group; more
on how they interact with other peoples than anything else. And this suggests
that the resolution of the problem they label anti-Semitism, rests on the
shoulders of the Jewish leaders themselves, one of whom is Richard Cohen.
Like
the other Jewish leaders, Richard Cohen plays a big role in telling the
rank-and-file how to interact with the rest of society. His latest column is
about that. To see what he's doing wrong, compare two of his stances, and
marvel at the double standard that determines his manner of interacting with
the rest of society. He is doing it in full view of his readers, some of whom
will undoubtedly emulate him:
First,
Richard Cohen quotes Pamela Paul as saying: “We never question people on their
choices … The people's answers are a reflection of their opinions, tastes and
judgments.” To this, Cohen expresses his own opinion as follows: In other
words, anti-Semitism is just another opinion, taste or judgment.
Second.
Richard Cohen ends his column by making two accusations, and by demanding a
remedy. Here they are: “What's lacking from the Times is appropriate shock at
Alice Walker's bigotry and its own refusal to admit a mistake. An apology would
be fit to print”.
In
other words, Cohen is saying that we must apologize for being human enough to
form opinions of the kind that do not acknowledge the supremacy of Jews.