Jews and Blacks: Everything the Goyim Want to Know But Are Afraid to Ask
What explains continued Jewish support for black causes long after blacks have unequivocally turned against their erstwhile ally? Or, in modern psychobabble, "Why does she still stay in the abusive relationship?" Moreover, how might this Jewish co-dependency be undermined? Is there a handy twelve-step program for this disorder? Given that the entire contemporary civil rights political agenda (affirmative action and related "color sensitive" evils) might collapse into a mere nuisance without Jewish money, brains and dynamism, these are hardly trivial questions.
The Historical Record
To begin with, let me read into the record two facts as one submits court documents. Exhibit A is the Jewish contribution to black well being. This monumental bestowal properly requires a massive tome. Jews have already assisted as prominent leaders and financial benefactors. The Julius Rosenwald Foundation virtually single-handedly bankrolled the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund (Rosenwald's generosity likewise once helped educate 25 to 40% of Southern black children!). Decades back the Jewish philanthropists Jacob Shiff and Felix Warburg were similarly munificent. More than half the lawyers and freedom riders assisting Southern black civil rights activists during the 1960s were Jewish. Martin Luther King, Jr., James Farmer, among many others, all relied on Jewish advisors (and Jewish gelt [money]). The Jewish Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Congress, and the American Jewish Committee (among numerous other Jewish organizations) have been "movement" stalwarts. Elected Jewish leaders have uniformly been pro-civil rights, while ordinary Jews are the most racially liberal demographic group. The Wall Street Journal recently noted that nearly all high-ranking black executives worked in Jewish run corporations. And on and on. Perhaps only Israel has drawn more fervent support in the pantheon of Jewish causes!
Exhibit B is wretched black anti-Semitism. The facts are again plain--even Ivory Tower academics admit it. Repeated national polls show blacks more anti-Semitic than whites, even when statistically adjusting for socio-economic status. A 1992 survey revealed that blacks were often twice as likely as whites to endorse anti-Jewish stereotypical, e.g., Jews favor shady business practices or have excessive economic power. More telling is explicit Jew-hating permeating black popular culture. The virulent anti-Jewish messages of Public Enemy, Professor Griff and other rap artists evidently do not offend black audiences judging by the millions of records sold. Damning Jewish Ghetto merchants (even long after they have sold their stores) is apparently an honored black tradition. That both Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan have risen to respected mainstream figures among ordinary blacks (and NAACP, as well) despite praising Hitler's killing of six million Jews speaks louder than any poll.
Overshadowing these outcroppings is the character of this antipathy. It is not confined to ill-educated, destitute blacks easily seduced by gutter rhetoric, through it surely thrives in such environs. Shockingly, it is more pervasive among educated African-Americans who, at least in principle, should be aware of their debts as well as the foolishness of alienating willing allies. Black intellectuals, and we are not just talking of Leonard Jeffries, openly despise Jewish support, even occasionally seeing it as an anti-black plot. Talk of "Jews running the slave trade" or "Jewish merchants sucking the blood from black communities" is often a "scholarly" given. One is reminded of Gladstone's retort when informed that a Londoner spreading terrible lies about him. "Why," he replied, "I never once did the man a favor?"
Anti-Semitic professionals among wannabe black leaders often seem obligatory. As Benjamin Ginsberg's The Fatal Embrace convincingly argues, professing "fervent commitment" to youthful Ghetto Brothers, nothing outshines open Jew-baiting. In a bizarre psycho-logic, Jesse Jackson (let alone Louis Farrakhan) gains "authenticity" by biting the Hymietown hand that feeds them. Meanwhile, black leaders "knowing better" must resist anti-Semitism circumspectly lest they be accused of selling out to "the Man." The "attack a Jew, gain stature" nexus means that all the dialoguing, "education," let alone Jewish generosity, will come to naught. Black anti-Semitism is not a passing lumpenproletariat disorder.
Traditional Explanation of this Odd Relationship
The scholarly literature abounds with theories explaining this Jewish affinity. All make perfect sense...until about thirty years ago when this kinship became dysfunctional, if not pathological. For those seeking a religions justification, one need look no further than the Torah with its emphasis on righteousness, performing of good deeds, charity, and respect for the less fortunate. Rachmones--compassion, pity--is absolutely central to Judaism, and who is a better recipient than the long-suffering African-Americans? Add Jewish traditional association with the central state, the ambitious, benevolent Monarch granting protection in exchange for commercial vigor. The modern incarnation would be New Deal-Great Society bureaucratic liberalism with its promise of shielding all the downtrodden, regardless of creed or coloration. Some Jews undoubtedly subscribe to a domino theory of repression--once "they" get the blacks, the Jews are next, so let's fight the battle now. There is also the "kinship of suffering" hypothesis so popular among first or second-generation Jewish immigrants struggling against a common enemy, the white gentile. Here helping blacks simultaneously helps Jews. Lastly, those Jews desperately seeking escape from their own Jewish angst might find the black cause a key step towards building a white bread Utopia unbothered by racial or ethical distinction.
All contain ample truth, and perhaps explain lingering habits. What is puzzling is that objective conditions (as the Soviets liked to say), makes a mockery of today's affinity. There should be a mass exodus, but, alas, a liberating Moses has failed to arrive. Jewish-Black politics has become bitterly zero-sum, occasionally violently confrontational as the Crown Heights riot illustrated. The black assault on merit punishes Jews (and Asians) well beyond college admissions or civil service jobs. Jews by the thousands have had their life-chances diminished "thanks" to gains by undeserving African-Americans (often, ironically, assisted by misguided Jewish activist). Surely Jews in "changing neighborhoods" cannot welcome urban incivility--crime, panhandlers, vandalism and blight--so endemic to African American communities. Black rampant anti-intellectualism, most concretely displayed in the physical destruction of urban schools, in and of itself, should forever distance Jews from this putative "soul mate." And truth to tell, try imagining two more adversarial cultures measured by family life, educational attainment, hedonistic indulgence, and nearly all else defining "culture."
Perhaps the only valid justification for not annulling this marriage is both parties share an infatuation with the modern bureaucratic state. In that African-American Utopia or programs, outreaches, mentors, role models, counselors, interventions and all the other do-goodism statist paraphernalia, Jews gain civil service jobs and a modicum of power. A few Jewish intellectuals also find blacks useful soldiers for advancing their compulsive subversion of Western Civilization (e.g., cultural relativism, post modernism, and untold other Jewish contrived "insights"). Nevertheless, overall, if this partnership were taken to family court, even the most hidebound judge would grant an immediate divorce.
To grasp fully why this dog does not bark, one must dig deeper, namely how Jews (at least those over 40) typically "conceptualize" African-Americans or, to use the Yiddish term, Schwartza. This, the goyim seldom know, but it is central to explaining relationship longevity. Leo Rosten's The Joys of Yiddish, tersely defines "Schwartza" as "a black person." This is seriously misleading by omission; "Schwartza" comes with immense, highly nuanced cultural baggage. It is not a synonym for "black" or "Negro," though these terms might appear inter-changeable to outsiders. Once properly understood, this deeply embedded "conceptualization" helps account for Jews still tolerating black misbehavior, even anti-Semitism.
Let's begin positively--the term has nothing to do with the "N word" or related derogatory slurs. Nothing! A little affection might even be sporadically detected. Elderly kibitzing Jews would be genuinely horrified if a friend inserted "nigger" or "coon" to achieve lexiconic variety. To be sure, and this cannot be over-estimated, exceedingly few Jews like blacks personally; nearly all will go to great lengths to avoid living among them. The Jewish-black intermarriage rate is trivial. Still, this personal aversion should not be confused with commonplace ethic hatred.
Second, "Schwartza" always implies a cognitive inferiority. This mental picture is true even for pro-civil rights Jews, regardless of contrary protestations or refusal to use the "S" word. Adding "dumb" to Schwartza is somewhat superfluous, reserved only for egregious stupidity. Invisible baggage likewise included gullibility, emotional excitability and a weakness for here-and-now conspicuous consumption. Violence, especially inter-personal alcohol induced mayhem, is also associated with "Schwartza." The correspondence with traditional Southern folklore is hardly accidental. To repeat, none of this is fundamentally pejorative--this "fact of life" denotation is no different from 2+2=4 and was surely daily reinforced by childhood contact with black cleaning ladies, handymen, and school-related experiences. This learning undoubtedly predated the racial liberalism acquired during adolescence.
Third, and crucial, at least in my generation, it was always believed that any Jew could ultimately outsmart any Schwartza, save being confronted with a demented gunman. Despite immense cultural chasms, Jews held themselves innately capable of finessing blacks, thanks to their superior wits, verbal talent, and mastery of black psychology. The unmatched success of Jewish Ghetto merchants (and, ironically, Jewish civil rights activists in leadership positions) proclaimed this truth. Even today, Jews may secretly brag about their success in beguiling blacks in contentious inter-personal relationships.
Where personal manipulation might fail, the storehouse of survival tactics sufficed exceedingly well. Black pathologies are bearable, especially since most black mayhem is self-inflicted. Jews might even profit from these disorders as merchants or nanny state therapists. Threatened Jews can flee deteriorating neighborhoods, enroll their children in private school, hire security guards, co-opt black leaders financially, or otherwise escape. These adjustments are hardly cost free, but they can be borne and are culturally acceptable. Jews see no conflict between righteously defending black criminals as "political prisoners" and living in fortress style buildings. Jews permanently "at-risk" from black disorders are rare.
There is a notable irony here. On the one hand, Jews dread blacks physically. This enduring cowardliness cannot be over-estimated in explaining outward Jewish political cravenness. They dutifully pay the Danegelt though, unquestionably, they realize that this only emboldens the Dane. Yet, simultaneously, they also realize that even the worst black disorders are surmountable. Jews have historically faced far, far worse, and flourished.
And now to raise some eyebrows. Ultimately, public affirmations aside, for most Jews the goyim (technically, white goyim since Schwartza, like the Chinese, are never categorized as goyim) still pose the greatest potential threat. Trust me--contrary fact-based arguments fall on deaf ears. Forget that Richard Nixon steadfastly helped Israel during the Yum Kippur War. Ditto for all the gushy kindness publicly showered on Israel by Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwall and other Fundamentalist luminaries. The yearly Brotherhood dinners in which earnest Reformed Rabbis and enlightened Episcopal Ministers appeal for "mutual understanding and tolerance" are immaterial. Disregard everything else, too, no matter how assuring. Down deep, Al Sharpton or Steve Cokely (the Chicago mayoral aid insisting that Jewish doctors inject black babies with AIDS) and judged less dangerous than Gary Bauer.
And why, you should ask? It's obvious. Historically Jews have long experienced erstwhile "friends" who took great delight in genocide. This 2000 year-old sorrowful fact is, I would argue, indelibly etched into every Jew's subconscious. Centuries will pass before this fear evaporates. Call it paranoia, if you want, but this occurs over and over and over--it is the very essence of our history. W W I I events in Germany, the Ukraine, France, Romania, Hungary, Poland and so on are all of a piece--you can't trust the goyim in calamities though, assuredly, many will give their lives to save us. The slaughter under Marxism, despite Jews in leadership positions, was just as bad. All that it takes is a few, and the goyim can't be relied on, especially the ambitious, smart ones. Jews of my parent's generation who worshiped FDR cannot forget that he turned back thousands of Jewish refugees, many of them ultimately perishing. This ambivalence towards "friends" is the woeful Jewish baggage. I have personally heard this "good goy turns bad goy" narrative repeated from those who barely escaped with their lives. The ostensible "exemplary goy" metamorphosing into the opportunistic Gauleiter comes with mother's milk.
And what, pray tell, about the Schwartza? Are they not also potential Cossacks or Iron Guards? Here's the punch line: they're incapable of such well-organized horror unless directed by nefarious whites. Yes, they can briefly terrorize Crown Heights, chase Jewish teachers out of Ocean Hill-Brownsville, or even torch Freddy's Fashion Mart in Harlem. A full-scale pogrom is far beyond their capacity, however. Anti-Semitic outrages are episodes, not enduring campaigns. Can you imagine blacks systematically rounding up thousands of Jews or even keeping tabs on Jewish neighborhoods? This, too, would require a Great Society-like massive bureaucratic intervention program assisted by self-hating energetic Jews. As Karl von Clausewitz reminds us, assess enemies by capabilities, not intentions. If you multiply present-day anti-Semitism by potential for calamities, correcting for escapability, the Schwartza pose minimal risk.
A Political Homeland?
To return to the image of a long-standing marriage gone sour, here's how the current Jewish-black relationship might be depicted. The children (civil rights legislation, full legal equality, the demise of petty segregation etc.) have all grown up and left home. Everything obtainable (and moral) has been accomplished. Yet, the Jewish partner still sticks around, contributing money, energy and brainpower despite mounting psychological and physical abuse. And antagonisms grow worse yearly. The historical explanations for "staying together, if only for appearances sake" are mere covers to deceive the children. The magic has vanished, both parties sleep in separate rooms, conversing only when the truce collapses into turmoil. But, alas, this alliance still meanders along though privately the Jewish partner falls into depressing resignation.
Grasping why Jews "stick with it" despite all the reasons to leave, is easy: there is no place better to go. Imagine that tomorrow morning every Jew in American woke up and shouted "Enough already with the Schwartza! Genug es genug!" [enough is enough] With the scales now fallen from their eyes, the question is: "What now?" Where will they go to reverse this deplorable situation? The marriage metaphor offers a powerful clue: men seldom divorce Ye Olde Wife (no matter how dreary) until a new squeeze appears. If one visited a dating service specializing in "Fresh Ideological partners for Politically Abused Racial Liberal Jews in Remission," disappointment awaits. Consider this landscape of "available others." As per preceding analysis, alternatives are far worse than dutifully sticking with it. At best, freshly enlightened Jews will kvetch [complain] privately but say nothing in public.
A massive shift to the GOP is one occasionally mentioned possibility so Jews can be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Only remotely feasible, and a rotten deal, too. Surrendered would be the tenacious allure of meretricious big do-goodism government (with its tangible benefits to untold Jewish service providers) plus decades of careful Democratic influence cultivation. This would be exchanged for an unreliable promise of meritocracy, refurbishing civil society, and all else that would flow when Washington ceased flattering the civil rights agenda. Hardly enticing, even if politically deliverable. More telling, does anybody sincerely believe that Republicans are committed to discharging their end of this bargain? The palpable record, as demonstrated by indifference to measure such as California's Proposition 209 (and much more), hardly evinces optimism. Jews may be addicted to pie-in-the-sky ideology, but stupid negotiators we are not. Only a steady procession of Ronald Reagan types "standing up to them" might weaken suspicion of GOP cowardice. Such a wholesale partisan conversion, no doubt, would make Middle East "land-for-peace" swaps look comparatively irresistible.
The one nominally conservative sect outside the troubled marriage offering a safe home is neoconservatism. Here, not surprisingly given its Jewish flavor, Jews generally feel welcome--it is avidly pro-Israel, pro-immigration, internationalist, pro-capitalism, attentive to traditional morality, socially compassionate, and critical for our purposes, openly hostile to racial tribalism. Might Norman Podhoretz and his Wise Men deliver Jews out of Democratic bondage into some awaiting Promised Land color-blind coalition? Pure fantasy in today's politics. Not only are neocons persona non grata on the Right for untold non-negotiable programmatic reasons, but, despite its prestige and financial resources, neoconservatism is not a suitable Exodus vehicle. The neocon movement is incapable of mobilizing ordinary Jews. Its apparatchiki would comfortably fit into a few large upper West-side pre-war rent stabilized apartments. Commentary and The Weekly Standard are powerless to propagate the faith among the multitudes. Established neocons crave respectability, and clearly communicating opposition to today's civil rights agenda to ordinary people becomes "racism," the death of coveted respectability. To boot, the movement's public side is too cerebral and "too Jewish" for many secularized, materialistic Jews. I am reminded of a former colleague's wife who complained that the long-winded Commentary letters to the editor (let alone the turgid essays) "gave her a headache." Overall, neoconservatism seems wholly incapable of budging Jews away from old habits.
And now for disconcerting news, at least to conservatives awaiting Jewish racial apostasy. For those untold Jews on the verge of conversion, shopping the rightward political mall for a new political identity will only bring alarm. Better stick with the decrepit old lady. The GOP may be a disagreeable bargain, and the neocons an exercise in futility, but "real conservatism" in all of its multiple flavors is worse. Even scary, to be honest. Can anyone think of a genuine conservative impulse that was not somewhere anti-Semitic? At best, a few momentary organization-to-organization alliances might confront common issues, for example, support for religious education or resistance to the public validation of homosexuality. For ordinary Jews to enlist as enthusiastic foot soldiers is inconceivable. The lingering DNA-imbedded fear of the innocent appearing goy every willing to profit form Jewish misfortune is irrepressible, and if this goy is a "Right-winger," the fear is a hundred times worse.
The historic conflation of "the Right" with anti-Semitism continues regardless of toned down rhetoric. Sad to say, Jews venturing into conservative territory will in due time encounter "incidents" stirring up deep, often hard-to-put-your-finger-on unease. There is a grim inevitability about this, no matter how sincerely inviting the conservative outreach. Primordial, visceral emotion will trump objective conditions. Mind you, nothing, absolutely nothing, about these incidents may be overly anti-Semitic; much is perfectly, absolutely defensible pedestrian politics and factually correct. Yet, the disconcerting psychological outcome is unmistakable. Impact derives from the combination of what is said coupled with the speaker's capacity. Remember, even the psychotic black anti-Semite is discounted when his or her modest talents enter the equation. If Louis Farrakhan and his minions were rocket scientists (or even failed post card painters) there would be cause for genuine alarm and Jews might flee rightward.
Quite clearly "stylistic" conflicts abound. The wonderful match between Jews and non-Jewish high cultures, even an appetite for the dreaded blond Shiksa [blond gentile female], does not translate into a political affinity at the personal level. Jews tend to be overly talkative, a bit boisterous, prone to boastfulness, aggressively argumentative, smart-assed, intellectually conceited, and clannish, i.e., fascinated by alleged Jewish identities. Small town Protestants, the backbone of traditional US conservatism, are nearly mirror opposites. Most Jews will secretly confess that they feel uncomfortable in echt conservative circles since their instinctive behaviors, all regularly re-enforced as the pre-requisites to worldly success, now subtly engender discomfort. The opposite is equally true. Tom Fleming would assuredly rather fall on his Roman sword than suffer a typical four-hour shamelessly aggressive UJA fund-raising dinner, even if the intent was a Chronicles bail out.
Still, Jews can temporarily tolerate white bread and mayonnaise tuna sandwiches. Apprehension deepens significantly when Jews encounter applause-line rhetoric about "America being a Christian nation," "Hollywood immorality" and similar platitudes peppering conservative convocations. Let us be clear: these statements, in my estimation, are generally factually correct and a serious case can be made that Left-infatuated Jews have disproportionately subverted traditional American values. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (and untold other Stalinist Jews) are not vast Rightwing chimeras. Yet, and this is paramount, these heartfelt conservative utterances are intuitively interpreted as subterranean anti-Jewish hostility among Jews themselves. To repeat: objective truth is irrelevant.
I honestly believe that conservatives are habitually oblivious to this impact. I can recall one ultra-conservative (and absolutely harmless) gathering and being lectured on how "certain wealthy, big-city, articulate types" were ruining America. My instinctive, visceral reaction was acute unease. These to me were code phrases, no different form Stalin's "rootless cosmopolitans." Likewise, Jews cannot help but notice the emotional fervor when "real conservatives" denounce "the neocons" often sans details, as if everyone grasped the hidden agenda. Ditto for the unqualified fulminations against immigration qua immigration. This makes Jews exceedingly suspicious. Might it not be possible to denounce just illegal immigration, the entry of criminals or welfare parasites? Conservatives should never forget that millions of today's Jews lost family due to restrictive immigration policies. If anti-immigration conservatives want Jewish support, this stance has to be far more nuanced.
Finally, and most disconcerting, conservatives exhibit a near instinctive infatuation with Quixotic traife (i.e., not kosher) causes and personalities guaranteed to frighten potential Jewish converts. For most Jews, the "political right" historically conjures up rigid racial segregation, nativist demagogues, anti-intellectualism, the militias, or the likes of Gerald L.K. Smith. Alas, a goodly portion of contemporary conservatism seems untroubled by this meshugga [crazy] tradition. This cannot be repeated enough: the Right, however misdirected, still means anti-Semitic kookdom and little else. To insist to Jews that "the Right" might be embraced "on balance" so as to escape the pernicious racial spoils system is a bit like saying "She would make a marvelous wife despite having AIDS." Outsiders cannot imagine the anguish associated with a Jew publicly coming out as "a Right-winger." What will his mother tell "the girls" in the building? My son, the famous reactionary?
We can argue this point forever, but I'd wager that nearly every Jew believes Pat Buchanan to be an anti-Semite Nazi sympathizer. And when conservatives passionately rush to his defense (see, for example, the January 2000 Chronicles), Jews must wonder why, given his obvious political inconsequentiality. Why the proclivity for snide gratuitous remarks about Commentary to clinch the defense? The approving treatment afforded Le Pen's Front National or Jorg Haider's Freedom Party in Austria only exacerbates the unease. When I tell Jews that I gladly associate with an organization endorsing these figures, they are flabbergasted. A Jewish Nazi, they must assume. Imagine parental reaction when I confess contributing essays for a magazine still fighting the War of Southern Independence, still celebrating small town provincialism, and untold other "odd" views? The dreaded inter-marriage pales by comparison.
This has been a disheartening account, but things are not quite so bad as they might initially appear. The naive might still suppose that Jews en mass are still promoting racial foolishness judged by who defends weird racial quota lawsuits or which professors assault politically incorrect research. Moreover, blacks still depend on talented Jews despite their best racial purification efforts. Nevertheless, if one observes closely and talks frankly, nearly all Jews grow more sensible regarding their true interests. Finally, genug es genug. The knee-jerk support has vanished save a few jungle holdouts insisting on personally surrendering their sword to the Emperor. The historical Jewish-black passionate alliance is evolving into an historical relic in Jewish consciousness. This abnormal infatuation certainly possess no allure for orthodox Jews, the fastest growing Jewish community. Crown Heights (and the lingering secret disdain for the Schwartza) now overshadow the Freedom Marches, though these heretical thoughts remain silent--why risk a klop in kopf? [hit on the head] Continued assimilation (hastened by soaring inter-marriage) will no doubt further undermine the historic Jewish-black romance.
Still, those longing for political conversion will be disappointed. Jews may flock in droves to see The Ring (especially performed by renowned Jewish conductors specializing in Wagner) or intermarry with a passion, but getting into bed politically with the Right-Wing goyim is too risky. That painful historical lesson cannot be shaken, and today's conservatives are often all too willing to reawaken--albeit often unintentionally--the fears. This dread even holds for Jews so secularized that they will barely confess their "Hebrew faith." The upshot, then, is political homelessness though, to be sure, a handful of misguided, high-profile Jews remain. Outside of these deviants, however, we wander about, still mouthing racial liberal cliches, though as with the Hebrew prayers at the Reformed service, the words are but empty gestures. We stay with out loathed ally because we suspect that abandonment will make things worse. Such a deal, but it's the best that can be expected.