One might have thought that when the reality of the Holocaust became public knowledge, widespread revulsion would have eliminated antisemitic behavior permanently. Instead, while antisemitic expression was suppressed for a number of years, we now experience a serious rise in the phenomenon. The incidents vary from murder (Pittsburgh) to political policy (the British Labour Party) and, of course, abuse on the Internet and desecration of Jewish sites.
Coronavirus has generated its own antisemitic tropes and, therein lies a pointer. This is not new. It is exactly what happened during the Black Plague in the 14th century, which indicates that the problem is innate in the psychology of that group of non-Jews. While this may be an uncomfortable area to explore, it is dangerous to ignore it.
While an attitude may be learned, this is only part of the story. To be accepted, it has to fit the individual’s personality and emotional characteristics. Attitudes are held with varying intensity by different people. This led Richard Griffiths to observe in Fellow travellers of the Right – British enthusiasts for Nazi Germany 1933-1939 that some people who were otherwise quite antisemitic were appalled at the Nazis’ treatment of Jews.
This variability also permits an antisemite to disclaim the accusation by offering the argument that he/she is only hostile to Israel or its government. Such people may be unaware that this is a cloak. They do not explain why it is so important to criticize the Israeli government when there are so many other governments involved in genuinely serious human abuse. Furthermore, their attitudes are expressed in a highly emotional way and this indicates a drive from the “gut” rather than reason alone.
Since they assume the right to decide what is, and is not, antisemitism they do not understand that this is the same assumption of superiority over inferiors, Jews in this case, which colonial masters assumed over their subjects in times past.
Since their beginning, human beings have been in competition for scarce resources. If two hunter-gatherers found themselves in competition for resources which are inadequate to keep them both alive the best survival strategy is for one to kill the other. Presumably the survivor has aggressive gene complexes which determine his/her success. Consequently, we harbor these gene complexes as evidence of evolutionary success.
But, to survive, an individual has to protect the immediate family, a partner and offspring, because it is the offspring who carry the parent genes into the next generation and a partner makes these genes. For this, an individual requires an altruistic gene complex. Modern humans have been endowed with a mixture of aggressive and altruistic gene complexes; a result of evolutionary survival.
When resources are plentiful, altruism is a better survival strategy than aggression since the resources can be shared and mutual help exploits them best. This, in time, led to the development of hunter-gatherer groups or bands which in turn lead to an us (in-group) and a them (out-group) situation; the origin of what we today call racism.
With society’s development the in-group expanded from the local band, to the early agricultural community and then more advanced agricultural communities, city states (sum civis Romanus), the medieval lordship and the monarchy until the modern nation state. We currently call that last identification patriotism, although we tend to view nationalism, which is the patriotism of others, negatively; that is, a threat to the in-group’s survival.
Unfortunately for us Jews, we have been an identifiable out-group since the Roman dispersal 2,000 years ago, although history tells us that there were dispersed Jewish communities before that. It is the gene determined “feeling” that the out-group and, consequently in this case Jews, is a threat to survival which leads repeatedly to attempts, with varying degrees of success to destroy us.
One must also recognize that neither India nor China has a significant history of Jew hatred. It seems that if the in-group is very large and the out-group is very small, the out-group is not noticed. An analogy is a dilute solution.
One cannot eradicate basic psychology, but one can suppress the negative results it generates. Our deficiency in numbers and lack of geographical concentration compels us to adopt a civilized approach, which means education. But the nature of the education must be directed at an appropriate target. Antisemites will not listen to us; as far as we are concerned their minds are closed.
While the majority of the public are not interested, we must remember that we have friends who give us strong support. The aim should be to provide them with material which they can use to influence public opinion and marginalize the antisemites.
Documenting the Jewish contribution to society is necessary for historical factual information. We must also show that antisemitism is irrational and failure to recognize this is a sign of “stupidity.” Some of the worst antisemites have been intelligent and educated people but that did not prevent them from behaving with lethal stupidity.
The educational objective should be to provide our supporters as well as ourselves, with ammunition to deter others from joining that bandwagon by demonstrating that such people despite their intelligence, behave in stupid ways. We must also discredit those who wave a “left wing” or “progressive” flag against Israel. What they propose to replace us is inconsistent with what these terms really mean. It is important to demonstrate that a histrionic, emotion-filled performance is not honest criticism. And firm legislation with strict penalties is vitally necessary to prevent the more committed of our enemies from the self-indulgence of parading their hostility both in print and by using electronic communication.The writer is a retired physician who lives in Beersheba.