Skip to main content

A fair hearing for Satan ... or the much maligned "anti-Semite"

From Comments to "Anti-Israelism and Anti-Semitism: The Invidious Conflation" 9/2/2018

Comment by ATM

If the same logic were applied uniformly and if Nazi Gernany still existed we would be prevented from criticizing their policies, because criticizing the Nazi government would be racist against the Arian race.
And so we are cooped into enabling fascist ideology which is not Israel, Judaism, or Zionism but extreme right nationalism moving in the direction of fascism, hiding behind labels that should not protect it."

And my response:

Exactly, and here's a bit of edgy irony. We hear the term anti-Semitism and anti-Semite bandied about promiscuously by people who declare with puffed-up moral outrage that ***THEY*** are not anti-Semites. Fine. But isn't it at least a little bit presumptuous to have someone who declares most strenuously that they are not one of ***THEM*** to be the authority on the nature of ***THEM*** -- to control the definition of those they condemn. That is, to never allow one of ***THEM*** -- a declared anti-Semite -- to offer their own self-definition?
Mark Twain once wrote the following:
"I have no special regard for Satan; but I can at least claim that I have no prejudice against him. It may even be that I lean a little his way, on account of his not having a fair show.
All religions issue bibles against him, and say the most injurious things about him, but we never hear his side. We have none but the evidence for the prosecution, and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English; it is un-American; it is French. Without this precedent Dreyfus could not have been condemned.
Of course Satan has some kind of a case, it goes without saying. It may be a poor one, but that is nothing; that can be said about any of us. As soon as I can get at the facts I will undertake his rehabilitation myself, if I can find an unpolitic publisher. It is a thing which we ought to be willing to do for any one who is under a cloud. We may not pay him reverence, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents.
A person who has for untold centuries maintained the imposing position of spiritual head of four-fifths of the human race, and political head of the whole of it, must be granted the possession of executive abilities of the loftiest order. In his large presence the other popes and politicians shrink to midges for the microscope. I would like to see him. I would rather see him and shake him by the tail than any other member of the European Concert."
So I say, "Shall we not hear the other side of the matter from a bona fide "anti-Semite", or at least his "unpolitic" advocate? Not, I fear, on AW.C.

    • Comments

    Post a Comment

    Popular posts from this blog

    Right to exist, right to self-defense.....not!

    The following is a post I made to The Algemeiner, an online Jewish publication, in response to "Golda Meir was no J-Streeter", http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/09/08/golda-meir-was-no-j-streeter/#comment-4474211. Like many Jewish publications The Algemeiner has a limited tolerance for the truth when the truth is critical of Israel and its supporters, and so, not surprisingly, the comment was deleted by "moderation". I reprint it here for your consideration. ************************** Make no mistake, I’m an American and a Jew. For those of you thoroughly infected with the Judiasm-destroying poison of Zionism, here is the antidote to your Kool-aid dreams. Drink deeply and wake up to reality. We often hear the phrase “Israel’s right to exist” and along with it, “Israel’s right to self-defense.” Hear them endlessly, by propagandists who repeat them endlessly. But endless repetition does not make a thing true. The phantom “legiti...
    Post a Comment
    Read more

    re censorship at antiwar.com

    Really, Thomas? Who is the drama queen here? You're embarrassing yourself with this name calling. My comment disappeared. What am I to think, you're on a coffee break? So I posted the link to my backup, my all-but-invisible, low-traffic,... make that no-traffic,... blog. The "rules" you cite give the Jews a free pass on their complicity in the Zionist project. It's ok to criticize Zionism or Israel, but not the Jews that make their crimes possible. That appears to be the rule, and it amounts to Antiwar.com caving to Jewish/Zionist intimidation. It may be discretion -- as in "discretion is the better part of valor" -- but absent the lethality of bullets-and-bombs-combat, it's cowardly. It was cowardly then, as it is cowardly now. That said, it ***IS*** Justin's website and he gets to decide on when "discretion" -- strategic restraint -- is called for. I've had this issue since before you were moderator. Someone Jewis...
    Post a Comment
    Read more

    Political Self-Immolation

    "What is relevant is Donald Jr's INTENT. In his email response (I am paraphrasing, but you can verify) he says, if the offer of dirt on Hillary is true, I love it! The intent behind this statement is loud and clear." I agree with you that this is the heart of the matter, and like you I am surprised that the so few of the anti-Trump people have zeroed in on this crucial element. Good on you for bringing it front and center. Let's take a look. Trump jr gets an email that says, "We've got dirt on HRC from the Russian govt, and we want to share it with you as part of Russia/Putin's effort to help Trump win the presidency." (This may not be absolutely the precise wording, but this will be the most aggressive/damning "parsing".) Then Trump jr says, "I love it, bring it on." This will be spun as Trump jr declaring his willingness and his INTENT (your caps) to collude, and as the very first substantive act in the process of collusi...
    Post a Comment
    Read more