Originally published 7/11/07, 10:01 PM, Eastern Daylight Time
An article, written by Barbara Kay, appeared reflecting on the present situation in Quebec regarding hostility showed to some Chassidic communities in the province in Canada's National Post.
She argues that the anti-Chassidic backlash that is now being experienced in parts of Quebec should not be labelled anti-Semitism. Ms. Kay, a self-described mainstream Jew, would also not want Chassidim moving into her neighbourhood. It's not a Jewish thing, its just that Chassidim have practices that make them less than ideal neighbours. She understands this anti-Chassidic backlash - although, surely - not condoning the violence that has accompanied it. It is only confusing to call it anti-Semitism.
Ms. Kay's words raise so many issues. Is her distinction a legitimate one? Does this not sound like those who maintain that anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism? Is there not a hint of an argument for assimilation in Ms Kay's words - Jews don't distinguish yourself through your practices? On the other hand, is there some legitimate mussar in Ms. Kay's words. Should the Chassidic community be more aware of their neighbours? Yet, whatever Ms. Kay's issues, can it justify her comments?
The Ntziv in his Introduction to Bereishit in HaEmek Davar, states that the Avot were called yashar, upright, because of how they related to the outside world. To meet the standards of Torah, one must uphold one's standards, maintaining one's principles in a world that may challenge them -- but in doing so one must still maintain a level of civility and caring to the population of the world, even, as the Ntziv states, the disgusting idolaters.
This is what the Avot did. For example, look at Avraham Avinu. He stood up to the king of Sodom and maintained his principles in the face of this evil, yet also had the caring and compassion to pray for Sodom.
This is Tisha b'Av's challenge. Sinat chinum emerges when a principled person maintains an improper hatred for those who challenge his or her principles.
Please read the National Post article. I look forward to your comments.
5 comments:
I actually e-mailed Ms. Kay about her article. Her response was most disappointing. As far as she is concerned, all Chasidim are the same: they're selfish, self-isolating parasites who hate Israel, undercut it ever chance they get and hate all other Jews who aren't exactly like them. In other words, they're ALL like the Neturei Karta.
I tried to explain to her that there is plenty of variability within the chasidic world and that it's unfair to tar them with the same brush. She retorted: No, they're all the same and she's not an anti-Semite just for pointing out the truth.
Ms.Kay's arguments are, unfortunately, reminiscient of those of the German Jews during the years leading up to Hitler's ascension to power. Maybe the Germans hated the Ost Juden because they were different and strange but how could they hate the assimilated German Jews who were just like them?
When the French turn on them, she'll be the most shocked of all. Not the chasidim. They'll have been expecting it.
Assuming drmike's comments above are factual then Ms. Kay is a bona fide bigot! Any time you judge a person by his group is like judging a book by its cover. It's called prejudice. Plain and simple.
Now of course there may be exceptions. A member of the Nazi SS is indeed self-explanatory. Otherwise, any time you have a group and you judge them AS A GROUP and not as individuals you have prejudice issues.
In Teaneck, USA, there was plenty of anti-Orthodox backlash by Jews against the Modern Orthodox. In fact the very community-minded Modern Orthodox community probably riled some Jews more than would the more insular Hassidim. This is Due to the visibility of Modern Orthodox eateries, etc.
In the USA, it is easy to ferret out prejudice. Just substitute the label "African-American" for any group singled out in an article or letter to the editor. The bigotry and prejudice would then be self-evident to all.
For example, instead of: "Chasing the Zionist entity in Tel-Aviv out to the Sea" use "Chasing the African-American entity in Tel-Aviv out to the Sea."
The prejudice in the latter statement would be patently obvious to almost anyone.
FWIW, the last refuge of political correct bigotry and prejudice is against the religious- especially the fundamentalists.
Nowadays, one may not slam gays, Blacks, Hipsanics etc. in polite company in the States. In Canada the list might vary a bit. But you MAY slam the Pat Robertsons, the Jerry Fallwells and even the Meir Kahane's with impunity, Right wing Zionists, such as likkud are almost in the Kahane level.
There are a whole bunch of selfish Hassidim and a whole bunch of selfless Hassidim. Same may be said about White Protestants, too. In fact in my home town of West Hartfrod, CT there was an exclusive enclave for New England Blue-bloods where no Catholics or Jews were welcome. Talk about insular. Frankly it hardly ever bothered me that "birds of a feather flock together." But we digress.
It behooves ALL Observant Jews to be on their best-behavior. All of us are being observed, and some of those Observers are non-Observant Jews who pack a lot of prejudice.
KT
RRW
I just don't think you can expect society to function without a little judging-by-group. What differentiates the African-Americans or gays from the Pat Robertsons, the Jerry Fallwells and even the Meir Kahane's is that the groups in the first set are defined by a genetic feature, those in the second set are defined by a intellectual or political choice.
When people are insulted by the anti-social, and simply rude, actions of Chassidim it IS a statement on Judaism (or what we've let Judaism become)--and one I think all orthodox Jews should take to heart and think about. But, its not a baseless hatred, therefore, its not anti-antisemitism, a hate of Jews simply for the genetic fact of their heritage.
The question emerges when, and let us use the broad term, a culture is disliked. On one hand, it is possible to legitimately dislike a culture. The simplest response, in that case, is to avoid being around the culture. On the other hand, this dislike of culture can extend to the people who embody this culture and avoidance of the culture can extend to avoidance of the people. When is this illegitimate racism? The problem I had with the Kay article was that I understood that she had a negative response to being around Chassidic culture, for whatever reason. That I could understand although it may reflect a narrowmindedness if she did not give the Chassidim and their culture a chance. She then extended it to a value judgement on this culture and the people who practice it. That to me was not acceptable and extended to the label of bigotry that Rabbi Wolpoe described.
The sad truth is that while all these mainstream Jews wish to separate themselves and anti-Semitism from anti-Chassidism, from where do they think anti-Semitism on any level emerged? Jews were different for centuries in Europe. This was inbredded in theminds of Europeans. As DrMike points out, dropping the difference didn't end the anti-Semitism. That may be because anti-Semitism is inherent. That may be because Europe for centuries declared the Jew different -- and they were -- and a short time of no difference isn't going to change centuries of teachings about the negative difference of the Jew. What bothers most about Ms Kay is that, perhaps without even recognzing it, she actually justified Christian persecution of Jews throughout the centuries.
Still, we cannot lose sight of our obligation We are to be different. Our Torah and halacha sets us apart. We cannot easily socialize with others who do not follow the law. Still, we have maintain standards of friendliness, caring and sensitivity.
The problem with jcohn's thesis is that Chasidim are not one monolithic group. The point of Ms. Kay's article is that all Chasidim (except possibly the Lubavitch which she likes which just goes to show) are like the Neturei Karta. There's minimal difference between the groups and they can therefore be judged as one. This is nonsense if you know anything about the Chasidim.
Ms. Kay, like so many secular Jews, has decided what is good and bad according to Judaism. Mostly she has decided that secular liberalism along with a healthy Zioinist spirit, makes a good Jew. The chasidim fail on both counts and those that fail are not entitled to respect.
Post a Comment