The New York Times published an op-ed on Saturday in which the author described Hebrew as a symbol of “far-right Israeli militarism,” smearing an entire language and the people who speak it.
The op-ed is not itself antisemitic. It is titled “Yiddish Is Having a Moment,” and is written by Ilan Stavans, a professor at Amherst who describes himself as having been born and raised in the Mexican Jewish community.
Still, the sweeping portrayal of Hebrew — the language of the Bible, revived over a century ago in a modern context — as the language of extremists suggests a deep prejudice, whose source may be decades-old sectarian splits in the Jewish community.
For centuries, Yiddish — typically, a Germanic language written in Hebrew characters — was the daily language of Jewish communities throughout Central and Eastern Europe, and fostered a rich secular literature and culture. With the rise of the Zionist movement in the late 19th century, some Jews began speaking and writing in Hebrew. They were opposed by religious Jews who felt Hebrew should remain confined to holy purposes, and by some on the political left who believed that Jews should work for the liberation of the world’s proletariat, not their own state.
The split was ended, tragically and decisively, by the Holocaust, which wiped out millions of Jews across Europe. However, it has been revived in recent years by left-wing anti-Zionists, who see Yiddish as an alternative to what they decry as the hegemonic cultural influence of Hebrew within a Jewish community deeply attached to Israel.
In describing Hebrew as a language that “symbolizes far-right Israeli militarism,” even if just for some, the Times is taking sides in an obscure academic and cultural debate and propagating a crude and absurd stereotype in doing so.
This is a standard liberal tactic.
ReplyDeleteHere in Canada, we have a similar issue. Canada had a flag called The Red Ensign from 1986 to 1965. In 1965 it was changed by the Liberal government to the current Maple Leaf. Many people opposed this change because the new flag is essentially an ad for the Liberal party which was governing at the time. It also erased the British origin of the country which was on the original.
Today, however, government publications mention that "sometimes" The Red Ensign is now associated with far right extremists - in other words, if you fly it instead of the Maple Leaf, you're a secret Nazi.
On target
DeleteSure, some examples: 1. Love thy fellow as yourself. 2. Man created in the image of G-D. 3. Nation shall not raise a sword against another.. 4. In siege of a city, you shall not destroy trees Etc. a thousand examples more.
ReplyDelete65 countries speak English because of colonialism, 25 speak Arabic mostly due to forced conversion. One nation speaks Hebrew and prays in Hebrew.
To Thomas 6:11 pm
DeleteThere are much more than 25 arabic-speaking countries.
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2023/08/kyle-deschanel-the-rothschild-who-wasnt
ReplyDeleteThe reporter is very sloppy to incorrectly report that this beheimeh is eynikkel of the rosh yeshiva ztvkl
So for the NYT yidish speakers are acceptable when they are the akademish lutvak feinshmecker crowd; but actual real daily life yidish speakers are to be vilified and attacked with canards and every stereotype in the book. Got it. Thank you again nyt/izvestya for giving the komisars their marching orders for the benefit of the red brigade useful idiot shock troops who make the lives of the yiden a living hell on earth
ReplyDelete