There are those who have obsessions with all things Jewish. The most comedic version is the Elmer Fudd antisemite. They usually repeat classic Communist talking points about Zionist control of the government, media, banks, Universities and so forth. They walk around in an incoherent blather and are essentially mentally disturbed.
There is another group that deludes themselves with feigned alleged expertise over who and what we are as people. No doubt some of these people consider themselves well intentioned, but tend to see the Jew as affirmation of their personal bugaboos rather than as a vibrant people.
My people do not share racial hangups of any kind. A Jew from Ethiopia is equal in status to a Jew from Russia or anyplace else. Jews have always welcomed converts as equals, but expressly forbid missionary activity. Children of mixed marriages with a Jewish mother are recognized no matter who their father is.
There is a seriously deluded so called self proclaimed "expert" who seems to think he is an expert on Jewish matters. He misquotes a book he has either not bothered to read or has more than likely confused with another widely read book. The actual author of the book in question would likely be scratching his head trying to deduce where this mistake was made.
It is very wrong and probably antisemitic to focus exclusively on the Jewish role in larger events
and unpopular policies. This is the case with the Black power lunatics who talk of exaggerated and often Imagined roles of Jews in the African slave trade. This is also the case with those who talk of neocon cabals and lastly this is the case of those who talk of the Jewish role in the Obama administration. Has the role of any other ethnicity been discussed on any of these matters. The entire premise of such a discussion is bigoted itself.
Racism is not part of the Jewish tradition. We find talk of blood and racial supremacy odious for very obvious reasons. A person who claims this expetise should be able to grasp this fairly simple concept. This person should also understand the historic reasons why calling a Jew in the Obama administration a Nazi would anger real Jews. Amazingly, this person oddly claims that pointing out his gaffes causes antisemitism.
The logic of a people who were exterminated for racialist reasons objecting to this vulgar ideaology eludes this author. Racial power types of any sort are offensive to Jewish people.
The authors understanding of Jewish concerns is rather limited by his intellectual shortcommings and infantile world view. He incorrectly sees in the Jew a false affirmation of his vulgar pathologies rather than as a vibrant people. Jews like any other people need to be viewed
within their own traditions as opposed to the narrow prism of a misguided and objectionable world view.
This author correctly points out I do not understand his community. However, we do not write about that subject nor feign expertise in an area that we are unfamiliar with. Unlike this author my lineage as far back as is traceable is 100% pure on both sides. My family evolved into modern Orthodoxy from a less religious but clearly Jewish tradition. I did attend Yeshiva and was raised within the traditions of the community. I do practice the faith and it is the height of
arrogance for a person untrained in law to make false assumptions about my personal faith based upon the way I interpret law.
The basic problem with this individual is his infantile world view. When Beakerkin looks at the law the Jewish vantage point is but one of many perspectives. I am also a law enforcement officer trained in how to interpret and enforce a series of complex laws. Of course the prime consideration is my oath of office to uphold the Constitution and protect my country from enemies both foreign and domestic. I also view such matters as an American Patriot and a resident of my beloved NYC. My world view is very much mainstream within the NYC GOP tradition. Were I to go to another state like Texas it would probably be not congruent within the GOP tradition and culture there. The author seems to think that none of these other perspectives would influence how a whole person would look at the world.
This is also the difference between a person who is very much in touch with life and the real world and a passive participant in life. When I think of my work and the people from all over the world I meet it is as an active participant in life. When I discuss my love for Sunbeam, my family, friends and travels as a NYC type it is a healthy representation of a very normal whole life enriched by all of the experiences and people, pagans and poultry I meet along the way. It is obvious that the authors monastic and isolated world is more than likely to blame for his rather
apparent intellectual short comings.
I would rather offer an outstretched hand to lift a person who has clearly fallen up. However, it is apparent until this person realizes they have hit rock bottom and have become a circus clown or a human cartoon there is no help I can offer.
I want to conceed a point to a valued friend, the Editrix. Horrowitz was a victim of a horrible world view based upon flowery words with deadly consequences. The author in question is basically a dullard who is a prisoner of his hatreds and a very detached monastic life
with very little genuine human contact. Your assesment that he is more than likely to wallow in ignorance produced by hate and stupidity is correct on a logical level. There is a spirit of American optimism ( Reaganesque) that is open to people seeing the light and stepping out of darkness. We will hold the door open for the chance that this person will grasp our vision, but understand the likelihood of that occuring is highly doubtful.