The new social rule has it that some words and some expressions can no longer be used because they represent an insult directed at some people or because they recall a past that was so painful to a group, the uttering of the word or expression brings back memory of the pain. Although some people consider this rule so absolute that it allows no exceptions, the reality is that it does — make that, did.
For
example, if I am bald, I can make a joke about baldness, and I’ll get away with
it. But if someone with hair that is standing beside me, mentions baldness even
without making a joke of it, he’ll most likely be reprimanded by those in
attendance, even by me who could make a joke and get away with it. Do you see
an exception somewhere there?
In
contrast to today’s situation, if you went back half a century, you’d find that
there were no restrictions on what you could use as material to make jokes
either in a private setting or on a television show. In fact, nothing was considered
sacrosanct: Not race, not religion, not even the condition of being handicapped
was beyond use as fodder to draw laughter from an audience.
So,
what happened between then and now? What happened was that the Jews became
enraged at the idea of being treated the same as everyone else; they who are
the chosen ones.
To
remedy the situation, they started a new trend that will again set them apart.
They did so by professing to see defamation of character in literally
everything that did not praise them. It is not much of an exaggeration to say
that there was a time when you could not say: “I sat on my front porch and saw
a Jew walk by…” without being threatened with a lawsuit, accused of maliciously
inviting the listener to imagine that you were adding under your breath: “…and
this was a bad omen.” Thus, to avoid getting into trouble, what you would do from
then on, was to complete the sentence by adding aloud: “…and this was such a
blessing, it made my day to see a Jew first thing in the morning.” That turned
you into a philo-Semitic individual who will be safe for now.
Once
again, because everybody believes in the adage that goes, “What’s good for the
goose is good for the gander,” the trend that was started by the Jews,
proliferated among the other groups, though no one went to the absurd extreme attained
by the Jews. In time, however, the trend permeated the entire American culture,
and began to mutate into several versions. Examples abound, and you’ll
encounter some of them in an article that was written by Jonathan S. Tobin.
The
article came under the title: “New York’s ‘Bail Reform’ Disaster Shows
Democrats Don’t care About Racism Against Jews,” and the subtitle: “’Bail
reform’ doesn’t just endanger New Yorkers, it exposes how the left views
antisemitic hate crimes as less important than woke politics.” It was published
on May 7, 2021 in The Federalist.
This
is about a New York law that reformed the bail system because it turned out
that two people, one rich and one poor, accused of the same crime but not yet
convicted — which makes them innocent until
proven guilty — got treated differently by the
old system. The rich would post bail and be released till his day in court. The
poor that would have no money to post bail, goes to jail till his day in court
that may well find him innocent of the charges for which he spent time in jail.
And this was the unfairness that was meant to be corrected by the new law.
Jonathan
Tobin does not like this law because he cryptically accuses the so-called
leftists of pursuing “equity” which, to civilized people means equal treatment
for all, be that under the law or anything else. Instead of this approach, Tobin
prefers the use of the word “equality” as defined in the Jewish lexicon. Huh?
you ask. What the hell is that? I’ll tell you what it is.
The
Jews do not believe in the equality that demands everybody be treated the same,
according to the provisions of one and the same law. What they do, is begin
with the notion that they are chosen, therefore occupy a unique place in the
pantheon of existence. If it will make you feel better, they say, you may think
of it as standing at the same level as that occupied by everyone else. But the
place is separate, therefore can be subjected to an altered version of the law.
Such alteration is required, they say, to accommodate the uniqueness of the
Jewish condition of being chosen.
This
makes it so that the Jews can have laws made specifically for them and no one
else. It also makes it so that if a law made for others does not set them apart,
they can veto it. In fact, this is what Jonathan Tobin is trying to do to the
New York Bail reform law.
He
admits it is a good law for everyone but not the Jews, and that’s reason enough
to see it repealed.
Wait till the rest of society catches up with them, and you’ll see
them come up with yet another trend.
It is another case of, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”.