|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Robert Spencer’s new book, ‘Antisemitism: History and Myth’, is being released on March 18. Pre-Order it: NOW.]
I’ve read more than my share of books about antisemitism. I even reviewed one of them here at FrontPage twelve years ago. Resurgent Antisemitism: Global Perspectives was a collection of nineteen essays edited by Alvin H. Rosenfeld, a professor of Jewish Studies at Indiana University. “Most of the essays,” I wrote, “illuminate the current situation for Jews in a specific corner of the world.”
Much of the book was impressive. But several of the contributors defended Muslims from the charge that their religion preaches antisemitism, or argued, lamely, that Muslim antisemitism has nothing to do with Islam, or professed, absurdly, that Muslim antisemitism dates back only as far as the early twentieth century, when Islamic leaders became enamored of Hitler. There’s something perverse about experts on antisemitism who consider it part of their professional obligation to whitewash Islam.
On my bookshelves I find other works on the subject. The subtitle of Jødehat (Jew-Hatred) by Trond Berg Eriksen, Håkon Harket, and Einhart Lorenz translates into English as The History of Antisemitism from Ancient Times to the Present, but only the first twenty or so pages cover the ancient world. (The book, originally written in Norwegian, has also been published in other languages.) And Clemens Heni’s Antisemitism: A Specific Phenomenon focuses mostly on twentieth-century Germany.
These and many other books have offered useful takes on this grim topic, coming at it from various perspectives and with different emphases. But even in the company of the most valuable works on the subject, Robert Spencer’s new book Antisemitism: History and Myth is a standout. And it could hardly appear at a timelier moment.
Spencer begins by recounting the horrific atrocities of October 7, 2023, and their aftermath. It has been a time when one might have expected decent people everywhere to rally around Israel, a highly advanced democracy that suffered the worst antisemitic massacre since the Holocaust. Instead, antisemitism has skyrocketed. Muslims and leftists around the world have demonstrated loudly and lustily in support of the jihadist butchers. The images of mobs disrupting traffic, waving Hamas flags, committing acts of vandalism, and pushing around lone Jews has been deeply disturbing. The sight of Western cops allowing this savagery to occur while arresting law-abiding Jews simply for being in the vicinity of the protests has been appalling.
Watching such conduct, millions of good people have surely asked themselves, and not for the first time, where is all this evil coming from? What are its roots? How has it survived, seemingly intact, from primitive times into an era that we like to think of as civilized? Why does it refuse, century after century, to go away?
Robert Spencer is, of course, best known as the author of a series of superb books about Islam. He has made his reputation as an expert on that religion – its holy books, its culture, its political ideology, its history, its founder (who may or may not have existed), and its devotion to sharia and the practice of jihad. In the first chapter of Antisemitism, Spencer notes that after the massacres of October 7, he was surprised to see people whom he’d previously “trusted and respected” taking an attitude of moral equivalency toward Hamas and Israel.
One of those people, whom he describes as a “former friend,” charged Spencer with “inconsistency,” maintaining that “as a longtime foe of jihad violence and Sharia oppression,” Spencer “had been unafraid to look into Islamic texts and teachings and to track the connections between them and contemporary jihad activity” but complaining that he “was now too afraid of disapproval from Jewish friends and patrons to perform the same investigation of Judaism. If I did carry out such an investigation, one longtime associate insisted, I would see that what I was dismissing as antisemitism was justified and reasonable suspicion and that to dismiss it as such was tantamount to dismissing concern about jihad as ‘Islamophobia.’”
Hence this book, which is every bit as thoroughgoing, as rich in scriptural exegesis and historical detail and colorful personalities and dramatic conflicts as any of Spencer’s works on Islam. He takes us, first of all, back to ancient times – to an era when expanding empires were accustomed to adding the gods of their conquered peoples to their pantheons, but unprepared to deal with a monotheistic people who refused to let their God be treated as one more local deity on an already crowded shelf.
It was because of the Jews’ repeated refusal, in ancient times and afterward, to give up their traditions and customs and assimilate into multinational societies that they attracted more hostility than more pliant groups; but it was this same “stiff-necked” quality (to quote the Book of Exodus) that enabled Jews to survive to the present day even as “their ancient enemies in the Hebrew scriptures, the Canaanites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hittites, the Hivites, the Jebusites, and the Perizzites, have long since vanished from the scene, absorbed into other peoples.”
From the earliest times, Jews were accused of human sacrifice and idol-worship – even though such practices were forbidden by the Jewish faith. Long before there was such a thing as a tsar, they were targeted by pogroms. Flaccus Avillius, the governor of Egypt under Tiberius, made a public spectacle of the crucifixion, torture, and execution of Jewish elders, after which, in the words of a contemporary, “came the dancers, and the buffoons, and the flute-players, and all the other diversions of the theatrical contests.”
With the Christian Era came a powerful new charge: the Jews had killed Christ. There ensued centuries of Jew-hatred and abuse, apropos of which Spencer asks this savvy question: “If the Jews killed Christ, and that was an act of supreme criminality, then how can it simultaneously be affirmed that he died as the result of the sins of all people and in order to renew and redeem them?”
Spencer proceeds to lead us through the writings of the church fathers St. Augustine, John Chrystostom, and Ambrose of Milan, all of whom had blistering things to say about Jews. He recounts the anti-Jewish actions of the early Christian emperors – expulsions, bans on interfaith marriages, forced baptisms of kidnapped Jewish children.
A millennium after Christ, the Crusaders took the time to wipe out Jewish communities on their way to the Holy Land. In England, King Richard I “forbade Jews from attending his investiture and had some who came to him bearing gifts flogged for their gesture of goodwill.” Now and then, here and there, powerful men made half-gestures of humankindness, declaring that Jews, while oppressed and denied equal rights, should nevertheless be treated with a degree of decency.
Eventually the blood libel came along: the allegation that Jews ritually “murdered Christian children in order to drain them of their blood and mix it into Passover matzoh.” Spencer reports that “several medieval popes…condemned the accusations as baseless.” Yet the libel persisted through the centuries.
Was the Protestant Reformation a positive development for Jews? Nope. Luther hated them, outdoing many popes with his stratagems to crush the Jews – burn their synagogues, destroy their prayer books, silence their rabbis. As for that absurd thesis, widely repeated by scholars, that there was no antisemitism in Islam before Hitler, Spencer blasts it to smithereens. One would, needless to say, have to be utterly ignorant of the contents of the Koran to believe that antisemitism was not central to Islam from the beginning.
Although the French Revolution resulted in the lifting of some restrictions on Jews, prejudice remained, as demonstrated by the Dreyfus Affair. And soon enough Marx came along. Famously, he saw all religions as the opiates of the people – but found Judaism particularly offensive. “What is the object of the Jew’s worship in this world?” Marx wrote. “Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.” The Jew, then, was the very personification of everything Marx sought to obliterate.
To be sure, Marxism-Leninism departed from this view: Lenin forswore antisemitism; Trotsky himself was Jewish. Stalin, for his part, vacillated on the matter. In any event, rather bizarrely, so many Jews became Marxists that Marxism came to be seen as “a Jewish plot to gain global hegemony.” Among those who embraced this hypothesis was a certain Austrian who made antisemitism the cornerstone of his own new faith.
There’s much more here – an invaluable discussion of the Talmud, a fascinating history of the misrepresentation of Jewish belief. There’s a quote from Thomas Jefferson that was new to me: “It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” And one from Himmler, who congratulates himself for his devotion to the Final Solution: “this is an unwritten and never-to-be-written page of glory.”
It’s impossible to argue with Spencer’s conclusion: throughout history, Jews have been “far more sinned against than sinning.” Yes, there have been periods of relative peace and tolerance, but the ancient hatred always returns. Early in his book Spencer quotes from Tom Lehrer’s 1965 song “National Brotherhood Week”:
Oh the Protestants hate the Catholics
And the Catholics hate the Protestants
And the Hindus hate the Muslims
And everybody hates the Jews…
It seems appropriate to close this review with a line from another dark lyric by another great Jewish humorist, Mel Brooks: “The Inquisition’s here, and it’s here to stay.”
hatred of jews and israel will eventually come to a standstill when their messiah intervenes on their behalf at the end of the 7 year tribulation predicted in the book of revelation . the jews and the state will be on the verge of annihilation when GOD destroys all who come against the land and the remaining jews that are left at the end of 7 years of unimaginable horror . 2 thirds of the worlds population will have perished [ ill let you do the math ] by the time their messiah appears . israel is the canary in the coalmine and is part of the long war against god . prepare for worse and then even worse .
Forgive me, but this is why I have always hedged or blanched over Christianity, and Christians. No matter what happens, good or bad alike, only the End of the World as we know it, will make them happy. Kind of like liberals.
Commenter Blackman wasn’t talking about Christianity.
Aren’t you the one who said they only feel comfortable around other Jews and stays away from other groups of people? Good thing you’re not the spokesperson for the Jewish folks
It’s a good thing you aren’t the spokesperson for anyone.
He was not talking about Christianity, but he was talking about a particular view of the end times (eschatology). There are 4 views of Christian eschatology. We Christians do not agree about them, but consider them to be secondary or even tertiary issues. These non-essential issues are areas for vigorous discussion / debate, but they do not divide us.
I think you misunderstand the Christian’s view of the End Times. We are not looking forward to the end of the world, we are looking forward to the return of Jesus. He will return to put an end to the most catastrophic series of wars and disasters in the entire history of mankind.
To those Christians who believe that Christ will remove them from the earth before the seven year Tribulation period ( the series of catastrophes), watching the prophicies about the End Times come to pass is exciting. To those Christians who are less sure of the timing of Christ’s return it is more concerning.
Even so, very few Christians are looking forward to the disaster of the Tribulation.
The idea that the end of the world must come, and all things will grow much worse before Messiah is recognized by both modern Jews and the rest of the non-Christian world is NOT a universal Christian belief.
Christians generally fall into one of four categories of eschatology. The branch that makes you blanch is called “premillennial dispensationalism.” It is very popular in the USA and especially among those Christians who consider themselves “Christian Zionists.”
If you are interested, here is a web page describing each of the 4 eschatological schools:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/mill.cfm
Postmillennialism is almost diametrically opposed to premillennialism, with a very optimistic view of the future. Most Jews who are Christian are also post-millennial, even though that camp has very few (if any) so-called Christian Zionists.
The end of this world predictions are like a finite number series. With each additional number the series end becomes more apparent.
10 – 8 – 6 -4 – 2 – ?
As for the return of Jesus …
What if Jesus is like the Dalai Lama?
A Jew who keeps returning as a Jew and gets murdered every time??
Perhaps he was murdered on October 7th, for example. How could he possibly bring peace?
Humor aside, the question of the need for another sacrifice after the sacrifice of Jesus is discussed in the New Testament chapter called “Hebrews.” Its intended audience was early Jewish believers. It also discusses your exact thought: Will Jesus return again to be sacrificed as the Passover Lamb?
Here is the first chapter of Hebrews on BibleHub. I am linking you to the Legacy Bible translation because it does not have ads (yet). As you read, you can click on any verse and the reference passages from both Tanakh and New Testament will pop up from which you can see how Scripture interprets itself (as opposed to reading commentaries).
https://biblehub.com/lsb/hebrews/1.htm
I fail to see your relevant context here.
Very much Looking forward to speaking with Mr. Spencer about the book on our podcast next week at CutJibNewsletter (dot com)
The actual words to National Brotherhood Week are:
Oh the Catholics hate the Hindus
Hate the Muslims
Hate the Protestants
And they all, every one of them
Hate the Jews
— Far more accurate as to the various conflicts
I have NO idea why it is constantly misquoted, it’s not that difficult
The original version is different from Tom Lerher’s later interviews with the press regarding the pessimism of this song…..as well as that of his other songs.
The original recording, sold at the Harvard newsstands, was an orange gatefold vinyl release of 2 EPs, with 4 sides total, with 3 songs on each side. It is now a pricey collector’s item, due to the fact that only a few hundred were pressed, and people played the fuck out of it on the old equipment of the day.
Those got passed around, and became popular in the northeast, so a second run of a few thousand was financed by I don’t know who, but those are also now relatively rare, but not so pricey, because they were by then being purchased be a growing legion of fans, many of whom were Jewish, including my uncle from Philly, who hipped my father (in Louisville) to it, and I grew up on it and had most of it memorized ….. to the delight of my classmates and the disapproval of my teachers.
……and so it goes
The W I D E pressing which most are familiar with is a single 33 1/3rd vinyl job, and there were many available in the mid 60s.
________
I noticed that Tom Lehrer self-censored a couple of his songs by the time I purchased them on CD.
“In Old Mexico” (originally from a subsequent vinyl recording) — for example — no longer contains the aside “How I long to get back to the land of the WetBack and forget the Alamo” .
Imagine …….Tom Lehrer trashed Southerners in “”I Wanna Go Back To Dixie” and thAT was O.K., but trashing other cultures was not.
Oh well.
I have it ALL in my noggin, and my kishkes, and will until I die ……or have a stroke.
Addamda / Errata
“National Brotherhood Week” was originally broadcasted on “That Was TheWeek That Was”, and pressed on the subsequent vinyl “That Was The Year That Was”.
There have been other versions since. …
Addenda ( #@+`¢°^©#!! ) autocorrect❗
I take you as the Expert. I just wrote it as I remembered it (along with its song, Tiptoe through the Tulips). What were the actual words? Were there different versions with some better than others?
Thank you for this. My family were exposed to the odd humor of Mr Lehrer at a young age and still enjoy the clever sarcasm and biting commentaries in his cute little songs.
There are many reasons for antisemitism but the number one reason is envy, resentment, and hatred of the good for being the good, the successful for being successful.
Thomas Sowell has said that the Overseas Chinese have been the victims of more pogroms and legal discrimination than even the Jews have because everywhere the Chinese emigrate they quickly, often within one generation, become high achievers, becoming the proverbial top 1% percent of the host society. This makes the native population envious, resentful, angry, and full of hatred for the Chinese.
Since you never really achieved anything in your pathetic life, other than learning to read boring books, I would say you are the most envious, resentful, angry at, well, anyone who has achieved their goals in life.
I also think that it dawns on you, every now and then, what complete zero you are. You think that expounding on something, anything, in your pathetic attempt to change the world into one large pathetic Objectivist concentration camp, actually will happen. But it won’t.
The people you hate, Christians and Jews are simply too busy to focus on what you have to say. So what are you reduced to? Prattling on about that imaginary theocracy, Lutheran Social Services and Martin Luther for the one millionth time, so you can say “Oh what a good boy am I”
You should worry about yourself and stop trying to get attention by hijacking someone’s post.
Maybe you should take your own advice.
Ad Hominems, true or not, rarely contribute to, or advance a discussion.
Ad Hominems…Oooo. Such big words. Aren’t you just so sophisticato.
Has it occurred to you that in this case, I’m not trying to advance a discussion. My guess is ‘no’.
I have come to believe that the reason for anti-Semitism is that Jews introduced monotheism to a world which more or less prefers paganism.
As such, we Jews are seen as party-poopers. We blow the whistle on child-sacrificing s well as other such perverse enjoyments of those who actually manage to survive into adulthood.
Ugly people do not like to have mirrors placed in front of them.
Clarifying History :
Abraham SIRED to two
Semitic sons—the rest is
a savage history of ethnic-
related (( Arab vs. Hebrew ))
MORONISM (( my term ))—
that is, half-brother fighting
half-brother (( AND, no !,
White “Jews” are not Semitic
—absent any matrilineal con-
nection to Abraham.
As Dr. Naomi Wolf likes to remind—her mother
told her she is Jewish because she is olive-
skinned (( not white )).
-Rick
The Story of Abraham is just that, a story, impossible to verify. What IS verifiable is the people who wrote it, the Jews. Later the Muslims SAID that Ishmael was their ancestor. I say, MAKE UP YOUR OWN STORY, DUMMY! This is OURS!
None of the commenters raise the issue of the Chosen People. God Himself per the Old Testament chose the Jews to be His people. He has special condemnation of them when they blaspheme but in the end, there are many verses that promise that there will come a day of redemption. With respect to Christians, there are verses in Romans Chapters 11 and 12 that seem to promise that in the end times, God will save some of the Jews – “The Remnant” — and they will remain of special significance to Him. I am a Christian and a proud Zionist and philosemite. I appreciate Robert Spencer as an important figure and teacher in our time.
Chosen
The job of the Jew is to carry the Torah well
Most don’t ….but at least we usually don’t fail as badly as the late Jeffrey Epstein, who wouldn’t carry the Torah at all.
Pardon me but we don’t think that the Christian God allowing a few sniveling lickspittles to survive as The Remnant is that gracious. A few Christians have been good to Jews but far more have been murderous. The Crusades, the Inquisition and the Holocaust have all been Christian events – as well as hundreds of smaller pogroms, in every Christian country. Theologically, Jesus is a child-sacrifice to their God. That’s the Canaanite religion and we Jews abhor it. Evangelicals could call theirJesus, Yeshua ben Ba’al and be more correct.
Spencer of course is 100% correct in that Jesus gave his life for all. It’s people who can’t real intelligently and who won’t think that lump others into certain camps with the desire to get rid of them (as if they were in God’s place). What is hard for me is they do not see the error of their ways.