Jews and Blacks: Everything the Goyim Want to Know But Are
Afraid to Ask
Robert
Weissberg
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.
The Schwartza
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.
Conclusions
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.
