“…try to answer the most urgent question, the question which torments all those who have happened to read our accounts: How much of the concentration camp world is dead and will not return, like slavery and the dueling code? How much is back or is coming back? What can each of us do so that in this world pregnant with threats at least this threat will be nullified?” –Primo Levi
I read a lot. Perhaps not as much as those who can afford more time to read than I, but I read a lot. And in all my reading, one common peculiarity I find in all the articles written by the academia on the subject of Islamic anti-Jewish hatred is the safely-crafted reference to “the extreme and populist right” and to the fact that they are “definitely anti-Muslim,” to borrow the argot of Dr. Joel Kotek of ISGAP as an example (The New Rainbow Antisemitism: Time To Act, May 26, 2014).
I cannot deny the many good and useful analysis and delineations these academics have contributed to the fight against antisemitism, but the fact remains that they can never bring themselves to consider the possibility, though distant, that the mass renunciation of all Islamic antisemitism, contemporary and otherwise, as a result of honest and courageous exposure of its primary sources (even if such disclosure were extremely inconvenient for many of the culprits), would be a truly healthy example of a populism.
Simply because a movement gathers momentum to the point of what the “elites” would deem “populist” does not necessarily make that movement an evil, in much the same sense that, conversely, as Dr. Irwin Mansdorf points out, “Non-violence by itself does not mean it’s something that doesn’t hurt someone else.” That much of the Western world is waking up to the fact that Islam the religion is become dangerously and obtrusively problematic does not mean that an escape from our past somnolence in our failure to publicly recognize this danger is deserving of condemnation. The French Revolution, the Boston Tea Party, the Women’s Suffrage and the Civil Rights movements were all populist causes. Inherent and commendable within all these movements was that peculiar prejudice common to all those good men and women intolerant of political and religious tyranny.
And in their fight against antisemitism, isn’t the repudiation of all anti-Jewish hatred the end result—the populist movement—these scholars are driving for? Because if we do not intend to make the repudiation of anti-Jewish hatred a populist movement, whatever are we working toward in the meantime? The blasé attitudes of the majority of Western academia are, in my opinion, the only reason for their convenient refusal to publicly identify the religion of Islam—before it was ever “hijacked” by Islamist extremists and radical Muslims; before Zionism was ever espoused by the Arab League as a justifiable reason to murder Jews—as the primary instigant of contemporary antisemitism in the world today. You cannot halt cancer without neutralizing its aggressive cells; you cannot hold back the sea without building dikes; and you cannot eradicate antisemitism, at least from Western democracies, without controverting its primary sources.
Dorothy Rabinowitz writes, “The Obama administration’s propensity for denying reality has been a conspicuous feature from its beginnings, never more so, perhaps, than in the White House aversion to making any connection between Islam and terrorism.” The same can be said about the Western academe and their aversion to making any connection between Islam and contemporary antisemitism. And without making this connection, a populist movement against antisemitism will never be realized. In the meantime, such aversion is unfortunate for the non-Jew, but even more unfortunate for the Jew.
After all the books written about the Holocaust—after all the articles, and essays, and excruciating testimony from survivors and villains—we have another intended genocide gathering steam under our noses and yet we refuse to formally rebuke the religion at the forefront of this malefic onslaught. Blaise Pascal wrote, “To leave the mean is to abandon humanity.” Hence, for Western scholars to pretend today that, in light of a myriad of examples proving otherwise, the “middle way” somehow includes their shameless obfuscation of the fact that the religion of Islam is very much culpable for contemporary antisemitism, to refuse to come right out and say it, is now become an issue of morality. How deserving of honours, really, are their efforts when their toil continues to be inefficacious in removing the stain of anti-Jewish hatred from the heart of man? What are they doing, exactly, so that “…in this world pregnant with threats at least this threat will be nullified?”
Paula Boddington says
A thoughtful piece and there are so many examples of this. Living in Oxford, I went into town on Saturday to see for myself the English Defence League march and rally protesting against the abuse of young girls by gangs of largely Muslim men, and the counter-rally by the Unite Against Facism. It was only when I looked at the EDL’s own material on the web that I even realised it was an anti-jihad movement against Islam’s incompatibility with human rights and UK laws. The UAF, along with the rest of the UK media, simply portrayed them as ‘racist’ and ‘thugs’ and claim that they are against ‘Islamophobia’ (without defining it of course) and also against antisemitism. But they don’t address the fact that the EDL are against Islamic ideology precisely because it is antisemitic (and anti-gay, anti-Christian, anti-unbeliever, anti-woman and anti democratic). Maybe there are elements in the EDL who are racist, but I am just going on what they say about their aims. I can’t see any word from UAF about how they reconcile their support of Islam with their work against antisemitism. Moreover, it was the so-called ‘anti facists’ who I saw running down the street with banners proclaiming ‘Smash the EDL’ (why ‘smash’? why not ‘argue’ if you have reason on your side?) and chanting ‘Nazi scum, nazi scum’. ????? Do they even know that the EDL are against antisemitism, and are willing to point out uncomfortable facts to show this? Unfortunately the massive police presence meant that few if any members of the public could even hear the EDL mention the point that there is antisemitism within Islam, and all that the crowds shopping in the city centre could see that there was a group of ‘Islamophobic thugs’ and a ‘nice’ group protesting who must be in the right, because they are ‘antifacist’. The ‘antifacists’ seem to prefer slogans to detailed reason and argument. I make these points not to support the EDL as a group, just to show how poor the debate about all this is and how badly it is presented.
el-cid says
Paula, during the tenure of Tommy Robinson when he appeared on the media it appeared to an outsider from the UK as if it was a British farce like Monty Python.
Mr. Robinson would make a careful considered argument, and others in the discussion would call him names and NEVER engage on the issues. Mr. Robinson was calling for serious dialog to deal with real problems in the community. He always spoke politely and forcefully, and was always met with derision.
In order to make his message even more clear, he quit the EDL to distance himself from those in the EDL who were “skinheads” and yahoos. He tried to align with Quillium, He made it clear that he accepts the reality of Islam in Britain, but that there are problems faced by the community TOGETHER. It didn’t help. He got no traction or sympathy from the media or any government.
Mr. Robinson was slandered and punished severely by the government. He was sent to prison on a trumped up charge (“white collar” crime related to mortgage “fraud” where no one lost a penny), and placed with dangerous thugs.
His family continually gets threats.
Now, I believe he is out. Judging from his website, he must be under some kind of “house arrest” that does not allow him to speak out.
The current polarization in Europe and Britain serves the Islamic Fascist movement well since they win the position of “victim” but are in fact the perpetrators. Everyone knows this. Ask any member of the government in private if they would let their teenage daughter take a cab driven by a Muslim. Hah.
Tommy Robinson was a populist voice who was seeking to bring the Muslim community into the British fold. Sometimes I think his “crime” was being a lower class political voice in a class-oriented society. As the old book says, a prophet has no honor in his own land.
mortimer says
Yes, why use the word ‘smash’ at all? Is that not hate speech? Will UAF be charged for hate speech now?
Isn’t ‘smash’ a word that thugs use? Doesn’t this make UAF ‘thugs’? Isn’t UAF projecting their own thuggishness?
ECAW says
The anti-fascists are indeed difficult to tell apart from ordinary fascists. Their style is shown quite well in this exchange in the Guardian comments columns between Arraiga2 and myself starting at 10:24. He starts off boasting about his brown shirt type tactics in dealing with the EDL, lectures me about antifa philosophy (cough) and when he finally realises what I’m actually asking him he deploys the usual chants of Islamophobia, racism and bigotry and quits the field. I thought it was quite funny:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/talking-english-defence-league-afzal-amin#comment-49404332
gravenimage says
There are many Fascist groups styling themselves as anti-Fascists. The same thing is going on with ANTIFA on the Continent.
pongidae rex says
I’m not sure how you spell ‘Arbeit macht frei’ in Arabic, but that is the future of Europe and England. Those who have the babies own the future.
mortimer says
They are discouraging white males in every way possible…in education, in employment, in promotion. Women and visible minorities are giving precedence in all those areas, even if they lack merit…they are being given an official and unofficial handicap which the elites will deny. How can there be any more white babies if white males don’t get well-paying jobs and create families? Why should ‘diversity’ push white males into the trash can of history?
Do Feminists truly want white males to disappear? Do they want a genocide of white males and the disappearance of the white race entirely? It appears the cultural Marxists want exactly that.
Volumetric says
This is a cliched fantasy. These men are not likely to disappear. They dominate every field of inventive human endeavour. Still. Still after all these years. For whatever reason, but that’s a question for sociology. When Steve Jobs died the question was Who would be the next “Steve Jobs” -an Asian, perhaps, it was suggested but no one thought to suggest that it might be a woman. And why not? Surely men are just useless and do, and have done, nothing useful in the world. Yeah, sure.
el-cid says
Thank you, Michael, for a very thoughtful piece and thank you Robert for indulging my need to comment here as this is very close to my heart.
The marginalization and murder of my family in Europe started the same way–people who were otherwise not “antisemitic” did not stand up against the constant incitement in the press against the Jewish community and the continuous slanders.
Words matter. The message matters.
Brian Hoff says
Than you are acting like Nazie when you demonize Islam like you do with your hatered of Islam.
Firebug says
Obvious troll is obvious. You should go have a bacon sandwich sir.
Western Canadian says
And another example of what 1400 years of inbreeding once again confirms that the most devout of muslims is the least intelligent, least educated, least trustworthy of all human beings…… Since Nazism and islam arw two sides of the same debased coin, you cannot be one well decrying either.
Typical stupid devout muslim.
Western Canadian says
arw = are, and well = while.
Off to bed I go…… finally.
Joseph says
Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
gravenimage says
Thanks for quoting Niemöller, Joseph.
Francis Merde says
I want the World to have an abortion.
Joseph says
And I beg to ask, “on what planet do you live?” I hope you realize what you are saying.
gravenimage says
This World Pregnant With Threats
……………………………….
Very evocative title. The parallels are not exact, of course, but it seems this is what 1938 must have felt like.
More:
How much of the concentration camp world is dead and will not return, like slavery and the dueling code? How much is back or is coming back? What can each of us do so that in this world pregnant with threats at least this threat will be nullified?” –Primo
……………………………….
Who would have envisioned a full-scale return of slavery and sex slavery in the Muslim world, in places like Sudan and the Islamic State even a few years ago?
More:
After all the books written about the Holocaust—after all the articles, and essays, and excruciating testimony from survivors and villains—we have another intended genocide gathering steam under our noses and yet we refuse to formally rebuke the religion at the forefront of this malefic onslaught.
……………………………….
This is so true. Besides the ongoing Jihad against Israel and Iran’s threats to wipe her off the map, we have seen a slew of Muslim attacks on Jews: assaults and kidnappings of individual Jewish people, and attacks on Synagogues, Jewish community centers, and Kosher markets and delis.
Notice that few people say “Never Again” anymore?
Excellent—but very disturbing—piece from Michael Devolin.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Maybe it’s just me, but the prose of this essay
looks like the result of a machine translation
in which someone ticked off the options for
[X] Post-graduate grammatical complexity and
[X] Teutonic obfuscation.
“That much of the Western world is waking up to
the fact that Islam the religion is becoming dangerously
and obtrusively problematic does not mean that
an escape from our past somnolence in our failure
to publicly recognize this danger is deserving of
comdemnation.”
I have read this sentence four times, and I still
can’t figure out what it is trying to say.
“Escaping from past somnolence” must mean
waking up to a danger. So remaining asleep
ought not to be condemned? How do you figure?
Can someone please translate this sentence into
straightforward English?
“Non-violence by itself does not mean that it’s
[non-violence is] something that doesn’t hurt
someone else.”
“Someone else”? Someone other than whom?
Someone other than the non-violence practitioner?
Who could possibly believe this quote?
Non-violence *means* not hurting anybody.
“that peculiar prejudice”. *What* peculiar prejudice?
“Islam … as the primary instignant of contemporary
antisemitism in the world today”
What is an “instignant”? My dictionary doesn’t know.
And doesn’t list “instigant” either.
The commenters here speak much more
straightforwardly than does the author of
the essay they are commenting on.
(ECAW, I’m sorry, but I cannot find the dialog with
Arraiga2 that you speak of. The time stamps jump
from 25 Mar 2015 10:10 to 13:06; I can’t find any
10:24.)
ECAW says
Mark – That’s odd. Here it is (by the way, I too find Mr Devolin’s essays challenging – so unlike the pellucid prose style of our own blessed RS. I hope I won’t be accused of a malevolent motive here):
Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 10:24
Anyone involved in fighting the EDL over the last 5 years knows that it wasn’t talking to them that made their numbers drop, it was the amount of kickings they took. There was a point where they could get 3000 boneheads on the streets, and that was reduced to their paltry numbers by a concerted campaign of attacking their periphery physically.
Bradford, Bolton, Manchester, Leeds, Luton, Brighton, Bristol. I won’t mention most of their defeats in the streets, but there’s a flavour..
The Tommy Robinsons of this world are beyond reform, but the kids who head along like its an away game who want to play the big game are easily disuaded by a meeting with the antifa, whether that be on a demo or at their door in the middle of the night.
As Woody Allen said, it’s hard to satirise a guy with shiny boots, physical force is always better with Nazis.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 10:51
Is the irony of what you say beyond you? Clearly it is you and your chums who were the Nazis in these meetings. No wonder you saw Nazi salutes from the other side of the police lines. They were saluting you!
Arraiga2 ecawblog
24 Mar 2015 11:16
It’s a nice thought, that countering Nazis with violence makes one no better. It’s an argument that has been trotted out from Cable Street to Lewisham and beyond.
A good anti-fascist movement includes a vast majority who politically oppose fascists, and a minority to are willing to physically confront them. My mother goes on these demos, but I wouldn’t expect her to be at the front, much I’m sure she’d love to give a Nazi a towelling. You do, however, need to have those people there who are willing to use violence.
What happens when you let these boneheads march without physical opposition is demonstrably clear. They smash up Asian businesses, attack gay villages and terrify innocent people. Counter-demonstrations at best give the Nazis a doing, and at worst keep the Police honest, as they have to keep both sides apart.
Without solid anti-fascist actions the Nazis run riot, spreading fear and causing untold violence to communities – most often with a police escort.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 11:28
Didn’t someone say “When the fascists return they will call themselves anti-fascists”?
Here’s a helpful suggestion for you. It’s not true that “Politics is everything and everything is politics”. There really is room in life for psychological insight. Those you hate so much that you won’t even listen to a word they say may well be the repository of those parts of yourself which you cannot bear to accept and therefore project onto someone else.
Good luck with your psychological development when you get started on it. That’ll be 10 guineas thanks.
Arraiga2 ecawblog
24 Mar 2015 11:55
I think you’ll find the EDL would describe themselves as being against fascism as well, if you asked them, so that’s a bit of a moot point.
Winston Churchill, who you’re quoting there, was of course noted for his acceptance of minorities and support of cultural integration…oh wait. I’m sure my ancestors back in Ireland remember him as the guy who defeated the Nazis, single-handedly as we’re told, and not as the guy who sent the openly-racist Black and Tans into enact ethnic cleansing in the 1920s. I wonder what they think of him in India and South Africa too?
As for my psychological development, I’ll probably do fine on my own. I’ll certainly have a better shot of it than taking advice from an EDL apologist.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 12:16
Interesting to talk to a real live antifa. I’ve often wondered at the ease with which people, avowedly against fascism, manage to overlook the aspects of the teachings of their favourite religion which could very easily be described as fascistic. Have you ever investigated the teachings or are they simply irrelevant for you? This is a serious question.
Arraiga2 ecawblog
24 Mar 2015 15:11
So a demographic analysis of active anti-fascists would be the place to start – most are working class, young men, often disillusioned and even more often disenfranchised.
Essentially, a demographic which the media would have you believe is that of the EDL, although from what we found based on their leaked membership lists and personal experience, their actual demographics don’t bear this out, they tend to be much more well-off, or at least from better off areas of Manchester and Leeds, where I was active.
We know first-hand what the Nazis are about, as we are exactly the sort of people they try and recruit. They don’t get anywhere because we live in multi-cultural communities, where their racist arguments don’t work. It was notable that even at their height, the EDL were reluctant to hold demos in Manc/Leeds/London/Birmingham, and preferred more provincial areas (Dudley/Bradford/Luton/Blackpool) where they were more confident of not getting battered.
When they went anywhere near a big city, they had their arsed handed to them and it actively cost them members, because the hangers on who were used to being kept apart at football matches didn’t expect that they’d have to put their money where their mouth was in the streets. We didn’t smash the leadership – that was done politically, work which is of equal if not larger importance than the physical stuff – but we severely thinned the periphery, making it no longer cool, not to mention very dangerous, to be seen as associated with the EDL.
I hope that answers your question.
As someone once said “Practice without Theory is blind, Theory without practice is sterile”. Anti-fascists learn their theory through practice.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 15:29
No, that doesn’t answer my question at all. It was this:
I’ve often wondered at the ease with which people, avowedly against fascism, manage to overlook the aspects of the teachings of their favourite religion which could very easily be described as fascistic. Have you ever investigated the teachings or are they simply irrelevant for you?
By the way, disenfranchised means being denied the right to vote. Has that happened to you or anyone you know?
Arraiga2 ecawblog
24 Mar 2015 16:09
I’ll simplify it then. I don’t consider it remotely fascistic to defend the most vulnerable members of society from those who seek to intimidate them. Fascists like the EDL traget Muslims, gays, women and ethnic minoritiy, and anyone who thinks that they’re all about religion I invite to go down to their demos to hear what they say. Hell, follow them on Facebook and you’ll find out.
I also have a degree in Politics, so I consider myself pretty well-informed on the subject, as well as a PHD in living in a multi-cultural area targeted by the far-right.
Disenfranchised was used as a synecdoche to describe general othering from the political process, but I’ll bite anyway. I do consider myself denied the right to vote in the sense that voting is rendered completely pointless by the voting system. My constituency, when I was living in the UK, was amongst the safest seats for Labour, so whilst I had the theoretical freedom to vote, it was in practise utterly worthless. You’ll find that the biggest single group of voters is those who do not vote at all, some because they can’t be arsed, but from my experience most because there isn’t anyone worth voting for or any point voting in system designed for the Labour Party to win in the North.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 16:56
Why won’t you answer my very simple question – have you investigated the teachings of Islam? I have to assume that you haven’t but either are embarrassed to admit that you know nothing about the core issue here or are so wrapped up in your political theory that you think it irrelevant.
It appears that for you disenfranchisement means not being given more than one forty millionth of the total say in how the country should be run. Obviously you deserve more whereas I am content with that.
Arraiga2 ecawblog
24 Mar 2015 17:12
Ahh, I’m sorry. I totally misunderstood the question. You’re implying that Islam is my favourite religion? I thought you were implying that aspects of anti-fascism – no platforming for example, were vaguely fascistic on freedom of speech ground. Instead you’re just a standard Islamophobe. I genuinely gave you some intellectual credit. How stupid of me.
Of course I know about Islam. I grew up in one of the mostly densely-populated Muslim areas in Europe. Guess what? It’s fine. Islam is no more dangerous than Catholicism, Judiaism or whatever religion you like. There’s nutters in all of em, and its positively offensive to everyone’s intelligence to blame the whole group for the actions of the most extreme. Look at the victims of Islamism worldwide: they’re almost all Muslims as well.
Anyway, I’m out. I don’t debate with Islamophobes. I’ll keep my good words for those who aren’t clouded by racism and bigotry. You know where to find us if you’d like a different sort of discussion.
ecawblog Arraiga2
24 Mar 2015 18:10
So long then. Mission accomplished – you’ve put me in one of your quarantine boxes, no more thought required. And yes, I was saying that your anti-fascism is not vaguely but very fascistic on the grounds of freedom of speech. You are so obviously right that the laws of the land don’t apply to you – how conceited.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
ECAW, Thanks for this. It turns out that the comments spanned two days, March 24 and March 25, and I was looking at the wrong day. “Disenfranchisement”, to my understanding, means once having been able to vote but then being deprived of this right, as happens to those convicted of a felony in most U.S. States. A 5-year-old child is unenfranchised, but not disenfranchised. I am baffled by the phrase “give a Nazi a toweling”. It sounds like it means to wipe a sweaty National Socialist dry (e.g., after a prizefight); or maybe it’s some kind of British slang.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/towelling
ECAW says
Yes it is but very obscure, perhaps less so among young hard-lefters. It means the same as this:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/duff+up
Brian ozzy says
Arraiga2 ecawblog for a man who professes such a high degree of education you give the appearance of being overly impressed with your own verbal diahorrea. The lack of logic in some of your comments is breathtakingly ignorant. It would seem to me that it is time you took awhile of from your verbal posturings and tried reading the koran and hadiths and then try opening your eyes and take a quick purview of the world around you. You may then notice that literally hundreds of different islamic terrorist groups are murdering and butchering their way across myriad countries obeying their mad islamic holy book dictates.
Then, despite your crass comments about other religions being the same, count up how many other religious terrorist groups are emulating them. What! None at all. How amazing.
You know a few nice muslims! How gratifying. They are as irrelevant as all the nice non nazi Germans were, or all the good peaceful communists, or Japanese, or Chinese were. They were just grist for the cannon fodder of history. On top of that if they are not engaged in jihad against the unbeliever then they are apostate muslims according to the koran, the worst of people who deserve death (who doesn’t, according to the koran) and a great chastisement awaits them. Not for them allah’s brothel in the heavens.
Your type of educated, ignorant, cretin seems to be what the universities and colleges are churning out these days, full of pacific blather. Before you are much older all of you wilfully blind bleeding hearts will be “reaping the whirlwind” of your beliefs.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Thank you, Philip Jihadski, that actually helps. Given your interpretation as the right answer, I see that my trouble lay in deciding what was being modified by the “from” and the “in” prepositional phrases. I wish I had your easy reading comprehension.
RICHTHOFEN says
Hitler drew his inspiration from islam, which he greatly admired – until islam is proscribed, the world, and civilisation, is under constant threat of destruction. They are determined to finish Hitler’s mission