Can you be made to love a stranger or a group of them because someone asked you to ? Because you were commanded to? Because it was made a condition of your employment?
Can a
loveless marriage, arranged under coercion ever develop the authenticity of the
naturally developed love which normally takes roots and flourishes between two
people?
Of
course, you cannot be made to love an individual or a group of the same kind
because you were asked, commanded or threatened if you don’t. In fact, any
level of real or perceived coercion will cause you to pushback against what’s
being imposed on you, developing instead a level of hatred that will grow in
time for those you are forced to love, and those forcing you to love them.
Believe
it or not, this is the kind of diabolic matchmaking which the Government of the
United States of America has decided to undertake so as to counter what they—whomever
they are—call antisemitism. You’ll find a full account of this story in the
Jewish online publication Algemeiner. It came under the title: “Biden Administration Releases Historic
‘Comprehensive and Ambitious’ Plan to Counter Antisemitism,” written by Andrew
Bernard and published on May 25, 2023.
Well, my
friend, if you cannot imagine being made to love the unlovable, you are one whiff
away from imagining 100 antisemitic silver bullets fired into the hearts of
America’s civil servants. Why is that, you ask? You’ll find the answer in the
first paragraph of the Bernard story. It says the following: “President Joseph Biden released the
first-ever national strategy for fighting antisemitism, a 60-page document with
more than 100 action items for the federal government and civil society”.
As if
this were not enough, Andrew Bernard further reports that: “The strategy says that the US has
embraced the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of
antisemitism supported by most American Jewish groups, however it also says
that the IHRA definition is one of several and that the administration welcomes,
appreciates and notes other such efforts”.
But will
this calm the fear of those in the American civil service who are familiar with
the way that the Jews begin by asking for a finger yet end up owning the hand,
the shoulder and everything else you got, including your unconditional love,
your kitchen sink and the toilet bowl? The answer is no, these people will not
calm down. What will happen instead is that the anger generated by fear will
bottle up in their hearts, and will express itself at some point forcefully if
not explosively.
Lest you
believe that all which has been happening lately, must have taught the Jewish
leaders a powerful lesson about being moderate when it comes to asking the
government for favors, the following passage in the Bernard story should dispel
your optimism. Here is the infamous passage: “Many Jewish groups and leaders including the Conference
of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the Anti-Defamation
League (ADL) had called for the IHRA definition to be adopted as the ‘Sole’
definition of antisemitism in the plan”.
This
prompts us to pause, to catch our breath and to mull over the relationship that
may exist between the “definition” of a word that’s embraced by the government,
and the written or unwritten “law” which the government enforces on its civil
servants day in and day out, as each individual wonders if what he or she said
has or has not violated the definition of a word they never heard of before, but
may now cause them to be ostracized or forced to resign or fired outright.
And
while the Jews who demand that the IHRA definition be adopted at the exclusion of all
other definitions, feel they stand on solid ground and can continue to
implement their highly successful policy of “creep and grab” what others cannot
have, the American civil servants and the rest of society will turn the
language of the underground into a mainstream of everyday discourse. This will
happen because not knowing what the neighbor thinks or believes, each
individual will protect the self by keeping mum at first, but then burst out by
speaking what has heretofore been considered unspeakable.
But if
you believe for a moment that the Jewish leaders have learned that it is better
to begin an intellectual journey by staging an adversarial debate in which the
opposing groups challenge each others’ assumptions, you’ll be disappointed to
see the following mind boggling statement. Here it is as reported by Andrew Bernard:
“Chairman of the Louis D.
Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law Kenneth Marcus said:”
“Much of
the language of the document is far more consistent with IHRA than with Nexus…
It’s just unfortunate that they muddle what would otherwise have been a very
good discussion of definitions by praising a definition inconsistent with their
approach.”
Do you
realize what Chairman Kenneth Marcus is saying? He says that a very good
discussion can be had if the American Government adopts the IHRA definition of
antisemitism at the exclusion of all other definitions. In other words, he is telling
the Government to shut everybody up and listen to the Jewish voice only so as
to have “a very good discussion”.
Well
then, this forces me to remind lawyer Kenneth Marcus of the reality that
governments listening to Jews at the exclusion of all others is what has caused
the current flare up of antisemitism — indeed caused all the anti-Jewish violence
seen in history.
Keep pushing your luck, Ken, and before you know it, you’ll hear Gentiles and Jews haggle (not debate) what the ultimate fate of the Jews must be.