JTR Editor's Note: Yes, we know about Jewish philosophy professor Michael Neumann's article about "anti-Semitism," and this web site got him into trouble for posting some of his emails about it to us.

Professor Neumann and Beyond

A View from the Left

by Cleland Lefevre

http://www.ukar.org/neuman/neuman01.html

You may have already read this piece by [Michael] Neumann since it was written in 2002. Just in case you haven't, I re-post the link from [Lubomyr] Prytuluk's website. My two cents on Neumann: Neumann is right to expose the moral flimsiness of the term 'anti semitism', particularly in its modern usage.

Where he goes astray in his argument IMO -- as have many Jews before him -- is when he also resorts to this oft-employed slur to attack critics of Judaism. For example, he argues that stating that "Jews dominate the economy" is "anti-Semitic", which I imagine he genuinely feels because of the seeming 'conspiratorial' overtones in the statement and the implications it holds for Jews.

But he also doesn't actually explain WHY it is "anti-Semitic" to point out the obvious. Instead he simply asserts this as 'fact'.

End of discussion.

I also used to think that drawing a line between criticizing Israel and criticizing Jewish ethnocentrism was the best way to distinguish 'actual, genuine' criticism of Jews -- hence justified criticism of Jews -- from perceivably irrational criticism and hatred of Jews, say, of the Aryan variety -- hence, unjustified criticism of Jews.

No longer, however, since coming across your site and treading through some of the material you've compiled on Jews and Judaism.

To begin with, your research clearly substantiates the claim that Jews dominate the economy. As you also show, Jews dominate Hollywood, academia, the 'arts' (in the broad sense of the term), politics, sport, and have influenced capitalism and (in an important, though generally not positive way) the course of human history.

So the statement 'Jewish domination of the economy' should actually read: Jewish domination of the world.

In fact based on what you've managed to compile at the JTR on the subject of institutions Jews already dominate or have their foot in there isn't probably much left for Jews NOT to dominate and therefore that doesn't in some degree negatively impact non-Jews.

I would go so far as to state that even the most seemingly altruistic actions of Jews -- for example, involvement in Palestinian rights groups -- could be criticized on the grounds that it might still hold negative repercussions for non-Jews in general, and Palestinians and Arabs in particular. I say this since having a Jewish presence in such organizations inevitably narrows the parameters and scope of discussion by making certain topics off limits lest we 'offend our Jewish members'.

I've seen this so often in political organizations where I live that I've shied away from joining groups on the Mideast. For example, every time I've attended a discussion on the Mideast put on by a left-wing organization and someone (without exception, a non-Jew) raises the point of how influential American Jewish organizations are in steering U.S. foreign policy -- e.g. AIPAC -- there is immediate edginess displayed on the faces of the Jewish people in the room and as a result the discussion is ended almost as fast as it started. I would imagine that this happens in any organization in which there is a Jewish presence, irrespective of size.

What I've come to see, and what Neumann and many otherwise decent Jewish critics of Israel either hint at -- yet dismiss or completely miss -- is that because anyone that identifies with Judaism IS in some degree culpable in the slaughter and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, they will inevitably become defensive at the first mention of the Jewish role. Neumann is doing exactly that when he asserts that critics of Judaism are 'anti semitic'.

I state the above also because Judaism IS the main, definite cause of the problems we associate with Israel, let alone the Middle East. It is not simply that many Jews -- whether openly or implicitly -- are somehow reinforcing Israel's existence, as Neumann asserts. But that at the heart of the vast majority of problems facing the world today, there is a Jewish role.

Am I making a sweeping, racialized statement by stating this? Based on what I now know from reading the material presented at the JTR, let alone my improved capacity to identify a Jewish name, I say it is rare to uncover a problem that Jews don't play some part in -- and therefore that my statement is justified.

And the reason is simple: anyone who identifies as Jewish, irrespective of their political affiliations continues to identify with the 'tribal conception of being Jewish', which is part and parcel of the idea of G-d's chosen people handed the task of ruling the world (made explicit in Jewish religious text although kept hidden from the public). In this respect, it not surprising that folks like Neumann who identify as Jews will continue (whether consciously or not) in some capacity to protect Jewish chauvinism from full exposure.

To solve the problems facing the Middle East today, one must first get to its source -- Judaism. To say this is to apply that Jews need to relinquish their identification with Judaism. Jewish edifice, in other words, must be dismantled.

Once Judaism is gone -- once the vast majority of Jews relinquish their claim to the 'tribal identity' -- I believe, we not only commence the process of ridding society of the censorial fraudsters like the ADL who attempt to limit debate on Israel and hence our free speech and freedom, but we rid the world of much of its exploitation and problems that collectively benefits (or at least can be seen to benefit) Jews, including the current occupation (and continuing genocide) of Iraq(is).

Unfortunately, Neumann and like-minded 'members of the tribe' who criticize Israel overlook this point. They believe that acknowledging their Jewish background somehow lends more credibility to their criticism and therefore is an effective strategy in which to mitigate any criticism re-directed towards them from Judeocentric circles. Which they are right in thinking to the extent that your average Joe/Jane interested in the current state of the Middle East is more likely to listen/take seriously a Jewish critic of Israel than a non-Jewish critic of Israel; but which they are also wrong to assume won't come back full circle to nip them in the butt, as it did with Neumann for debating your website and which will inevitably to do anyone who employs this tactic (see: the current 'hate' legislation in effect across North America and Europe or that is currently in the process of made into law).

In other words, Neumann's approach is (ironically for Neumann) a double-edged sword since it reinforces the notion that Israel/Zionism -- not Jews/Judaism -- is the source of the problems facing the Mid-East. As a result, debate is narrowed to primarily criticizing Israel/and Zionists, while the actual culprits (Jewish organizations and the vast majority of Jews who implicitly or tacitly support them) are left off the hook.

While Neumann does venture beyond simply being critical of Israel, he will continue to have his hands tied if he insists -- as he does in this article -- that somehow pointing to Jewish exploitation more generally (repeating the age old cliches about Jews that have come to be associated with bigotry in this age of political correctness) is beyond the realm of acceptable criticism (i.e., is "anti-Semitic") - hence, the inclination/unwillingness (?) on his part to associate the problem (the oppression of the Palestinians) with its source (Judaism).

Cleland Lefevre is a pseudonym we created for this author. We also created the title here. The text is his. What we also didn't create (and I hope he forgives us for mentioning this, but it's part of his intellectual and moral heroism) is that this person has what is known as a "Jewish" parent.

February 12, 2004