The Little Zionist

This Yom Kippur I was offered an argument in favour of ‘miscegenation’ ie marrying out, by a nice boy who had already done so. Now for some unfortunate reason he’d been reading the chabad website, which advises that he who marries out is doing Hitler’s work. This could not possibly be the case he told me because Hitler would’ve hated miscegenation more than anything else. According to Hitler’s rules although one tainted by the blood of a Jewish grandparent is considered Jewish enough to be gassed, the effect of a single Jewish great-grandparent is negligible.

Fairly perceptive a system of classification in a way: someone who has a Jewish grandparent will often specify this when asked “Are you Jewish?”; someone with a great-grandparent probably wouldn’t even know. By the fourth generation any Jewish influence (negligible even in the bacon-guzzling, beer-swilling and safely baptised third generation) is well and truly wiped out. To deny that in begetting an ‘ambiguously Jewish’ child (one classed as Jewish by the Reform movement only), and to bring him up without any real sense of being Jewish, ends in a fourth generation of banal bacon-guzzers is deluded in the extreme.

One needs only the brainpower to stretch the imagination beyond the second or third generation to apprehend that the ‘miscengeation’ being lauded here is in fact deadly for the chain of tradition - masorah - which it obliaterates. The term ‘miscegenation’ is cleverly chosen, because those who have opposed true miscegenation have often done so in flatly racist terms expressing fear that ‘pure’ genes will be polluted. The real problem reasonable people express when they oppose marrying out is not one of genotype, but of the cutting off of the chain of masorah, and the death of a religious tradition far superior to the wet anglicanism of our little island. So, nice try applying the term ‘miscegenation’, but anyone with any sense will realise this (mis)use to be an unsophisticated attempt to appeal to our instinctive dislike of racism, and to a currenty hegemonic left-wing orthodoxy that also renders supporting ‘palestine’ the default position.

http://www.jonathanfreedland.com/articles/archives/000329.html

Banal senseless fluff from Jonathan Freedland. My favourite bits:

“their desire to have what we Jews yearned for so long, a homeland of our own where we might govern ourselves — is nothing more than a collective plot to deny Jewish suffering. So those Palestinians living under curfew and hemmed in by checkpoints aren’t angry about this hardship or desperate to throw off a 40-year occupation.” This ancient people is indeed desperate to throw off the shackles of the Zionist oppression and return to its natural state as a self-governing, politically distinct entity.

“They snap up copies of her book Londonistan, in which Britain — a rotting, decayed island awash with amorality — is on the brink of an Islamist takeover.” ‘Look at crazy old Mel’, says Freedland incisively.

“London is not the Warsaw ghetto, that Europe is not an inferno and that there is no need for the big US bodies to come to Anglo-Jewry’s rescue.” This country is indeed a fantastic place to be Jewish, just as tolerant as America.

“They have also had to explain that the US method of doing business — offering heavy financial help to pro-Israel MPs, for example — would not play well here.” The Jews are rich people who use their money to garner political support. This is bad.

I really struggle to believe that Freedland could happily publish this banal article under his own name. How can he not find it humiliating that people are reading his dull dull dull rubbish?

Yesterday I edited a Wikipedia article for the first time. I looked up Melanie Phillips, thinking that I could remove anything nasty and untrue put up by Melaniephillipswatch types. I’d had a conversation in that glorious Cambridge establishment The Maypole a week or so ago about the Phillips article, and it was mentioned that Phillips’ Jewishness had been emphasised rather too much. The friend who mentioned this to me said he had removed ‘Of [[Jewish]] descent’ as he thought the information to be of spurious relevance. So when I looked up Mad Mel yesterday, this phrase had reappeared as the first sentence in the ‘Education and career as a journalist’ section - before the actually relevant information that she ‘read English at St Anne’s, Oxford, before training as a journalist on the Evening Echo’ etc. etc.

Someone obviously thinks that the information is so important, and relevant to MP’s education and journalistic career, that they have reinserted the same phrase several times - I’m currently on my second edit of the page.

I also removed ‘and Puritanical’ from the bulletpoint - She is socially conservative (to be found under Poltical Views). And added this sentence and link ‘Melanie Phillips offers a cogent argument that the ‘liberal’ left that regards her as essentially right-wing and illiberal has been perverted, and has come to represent libertarian rather than truly liberal thinking. In this important article Phillips declares that she is a ‘progressive’ and defender of liberal democracy. The article is available here.’