Re: Why did they do that to the Jews?

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:47:46 +0000 (UTC), Eliyahu <lrooff@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Jan 30, 1:30 am, real-not-anti-spam-addr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (D.M.
Procida) wrote:
Don Levey <Don_S...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The prime act could be any arbitrary act of one party against another,
for any cause. Then that act needs to be justfied, and the easiest and
safest way of doing that is to come up with some justification that you
can persuade yourself to believe in without having to try to hard.

I can almost imagine that the history of Jewish persecution by the
Romans could be traced back to a street scuffle between a Jewish boy and
a Roman boy (if these were parties in the Balkans, they'd probably
remember the names of the kids and the time it happened).

One of the things that helps ensure these cycles are perpetuated is that
the parties remain clearly identifiable. It's impossible to keep hating
and acting against a party if who they are changes substantially over
time.

In the Balkans, the parties are identified very distinctly, and
identified in opposition to each other (a Serb is someone who isn't a
Croat). They make nice binary oppositions of each other.

In the case of the Jews, a very distinct tribal identity has been
maintained over many centuries. The Jews are easily identified. They
make a convenient target for persecution and libel.

Interesting ideas. There are many Jews who (to some degree or another)
deny the identity of the Palestinians as a separate and unique people;
how does that fit in with what you're saying?

The separateness and apartness of the Jews from their host populations
(or the separateness of Balkan populations from each other) is what I
suggested might be responsible for the *perpetuation* of injustice
against them (or conflict between them). It's what makes it possible for
it to go on so long, outliving governments, nations, empires and
populations.

Are you claiming that the only way to prevent persecution is for
people to do everything they can to assimilate and be just like the
majority population? I would argue to the contrary, that what it
needed is for majority populations to accept that minorities can be
different than they without it being a reason to persecute them. Look
at the Amish and Mennonite populations in the US. They're not only
accepted, but admired by most of us, and they do everything they can
to remain distinct and separate.

There is one significant difference, though. The Amish and the
Mennonites are essentially self-sufficient, albeit with their
antiquated farming methods, whereas we *need* to interact with the
majority population by participation in the professions, commerce, the
educational system etc.. At least that's how I see it.

Eli

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why did they do that to the Jews?
    ... make a convenient target for persecution and libel. ... The separateness and apartness of the Jews from their host populations ... to remain distinct and separate. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Why did they do that to the Jews?
    ... The separateness and apartness of the Jews from their host populations ... needed is for majority populations to accept that minorities can be ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
  • Re: Why did they do that to the Jews?
    ... (or the separateness of Balkan populations from each other) ... Are you claiming that the only way to prevent persecution is for ... I think that diverse cultures are rich and healthy, ... societies can accomodate and recognise difference without fearing it. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)