Europe’s Alarming Push to Isolate Israel

By Alan Dershowitz, NEWSMAX

March 11, 2014

When President Barack Obama warned of “international fallout” if Israel fails to embrace the latest U.S. Middle East peace proposal, Newsmax asked noted author and Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz to comment on the growing talk of a European boycott against Israel.

Why are so many of the grandchildren of Nazis and Nazi collaborators who brought us the Holocaust once again declaring war on the Jews?

Why have we seen such an increase in anti-Semitism and irrationally virulent anti-Zionism in western Europe?

To answer these questions, a myth must first be exposed. That myth is the one perpetrated by the French, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Swiss, the Belgians, the Austrians, and many other western Europeans: namely that the Holocaust was solely the work of German Nazis aided perhaps by some Polish, Ukrainian, Latvian, Lithuanian, and Estonian collaborators.

False.

The Holocaust was perpetrated by Europeans — by Nazi sympathizers and collaborators among the French, Dutch, Norwegians, Swiss, Belgians, Austrians and other Europeans, both Western and Eastern.

If the French government had not deported to the death camps more Jews than their German occupiers asked for; if so many Dutch and Belgian citizens and government officials had not cooperated in the roundup of Jews; if so many Norwegians had not supported Quisling; if Swiss government officials and bankers had not exploited Jews; if Austria had not been more Nazi than the Nazis, the Holocaust would not have had so many Jewish victims.

In light of the widespread European complicity in the destruction of European Jewry, the pervasive anti-Semitism and irrationally hateful anti-Zionism that has recently surfaced throughout western Europe toward Israel should surprise no one.

“Oh no,” we hear from European apologists. “This is different. We don’t hate the Jews. We only hate their nation-state. Moreover, the Nazis were right-wing. We’re left-wing, so we can’t be anti-Semites.”

Nonsense.

The hard left has a history of anti-Semitism as deep and enduring as the hard right. The line from Voltaire, to Karl Marx, to Levrenti Beria, to Robert Faurisson, to today’s hard-left Israel bashers is as straight as the line from Wilhelm Mars to the persecutors of Alfred Dreyfus to Hitler.

The Jews of Europe have always been crushed between the Black and the Red — victims of extremism whether it be the ultra-nationalism of Khmelnitsky to the ultra-anti-Semitism of Stalin.

“But some of the most strident anti-Zionists are Jews, such as Norman Finkelstein and even Israelis such as Gilad Atzmon. Surely they can’t be anti-Semites.”

Why not? Gertrude Stein and Alice Toklas collaborated with the Gestapo. Atzmon, a hard leftist, describes himself as a proud self-hating Jew and admits that his ideas derive from a notorious anti-Semite.

He denies that the Holocaust is historically proved but he believes that Jews may well have killed Christian children to use their blood to bake Passover matzah. And he thinks it’s “rational” to burn down synagogues.

Finkelstein believes in an international Jewish conspiracy that includes Steven Spielberg, Leon Uris, Eli Wiesel, and Andrew Lloyd Webber!

“But Israel is doing bad things to the Palestinians,” the European apologists insist, “and we are sensitive to the plight of the underdog.”

No, you’re not! Where are your demonstrations on behalf of the oppressed Tibetans, Georgians, Syrians, Armenians, Kurds, or even Ukrainians? Where are your BDS movements against the Chinese, the Russians, the Cubans, the Turks, or the Assad regime?

Only the Palestinians, only Israel? Why? Not because the Palestinians are more oppressed than these and other groups.

Only because their alleged oppressors are Jews and the nation-state of the Jews. Would there be demonstrations and BDS campaigns on behalf of the Palestinians if they were oppressed by Jordan or Egypt?

Oh, wait! The Palestinians were oppressed by Egypt and Jordan. Gaza was an open-air prison between 1948 and 1967, when Egypt was the occupying power. And remember Black September, when Jordan killed more Palestinians than Israel did in a century? I don’t remember any demonstration or BDS campaigns — because there weren’t any.

When Arabs occupy or kill Arabs, Europeans go ho-hum. But when Israel opens a soda factory in Maale Adumim, which even the Palestinian leadership acknowledges will remain part of Israel in any peace deal, Oxfam parts ways with Scarlett Johansson for advertising a soda company that employs hundreds of Palestinians.

Keep in mind that Oxfam has provided “aid and material support” to two anti-Israel terrorist groups, according to the Tel Aviv-based Israeli Law Group.

The hypocrisy of so many hard-left western Europeans would be staggering if it were not so predictable based on the sordid history of Western Europe’s treatment of the Jews.

Even England, which was on the right side of the war against Nazism, has a long history of anti-Semitism, beginning with the expulsion of the Jews in 1290 to the notorious White Paper of 1939, which prevented the Jews of Europe for seeking asylum from the Nazis in British-mandated Palestine. And Ireland, which vacillated in the war against Hitler, boasts some of the most virulent anti-Israel rhetoric.

The simple reality is that one cannot understand the current western European left-wing war against the nation-state of the Jewish people without first acknowledging the long-term European war against the Jewish people themselves.

Theodore Herzl understood the pervasiveness and irrationality of European anti-Semitism, which led him to the conclusion that the only solution to Europe’s Jewish problem was for European Jews to leave that bastion of Jew hatred and return to their original homeland, which is now the state of Israel.

None of this is to deny Israel’s imperfections or the criticism it justly deserves for some of its policies. But these imperfections and deserved criticism cannot even begin to explain, must less justify, the disproportionate hatred directed against the only nation-state of the Jewish people and the disproportionate silence regarding the far greater imperfections and deserved criticism of other nations and groups — including the Palestinians.

Nor is this to deny that many western European individuals and some western European countries have refused to succumb to the hatred against the Jews or their state. The Czech Republic comes to mind. But far too many western Europeans are as irrational in their hatred toward Israel as their forbearers were in their hatred toward their Jewish neighbors.

As author Amos Oz once aptly observed: the walls of his grandparents’ Europe were covered with graffiti saying, “Jews, go to Palestine.” Now they say, “Jews, get out of Palestine” — by which is meant Israel.

Who do these western European bigots think they’re fooling? Only fools who want to be fooled in the interest of denying that they are manifesting new variations on their grandparents’ old biases.

Any objective person with an open mind, open eyes, and an open heart must see the double standard being applied to the nation-state of the Jewish people. Many doing so are the grandchildren of those who lethally applied a double standard to the Jews of Europe in the 1930s and 1940s.

For shame!

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He is a graduate of Brooklyn College and Yale Law School. His latest book is his autobiography, “Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law.”

July 15, 2014 | 76 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

50 Comments / 76 Comments

  1. Soldiers’ anthem
    ‘We will yet return to Gush Katif’

    A group of IDF reserves awaiting deployment into the Gaza Strip become a mini YouTube sensation with controversial song

    Some of the Israeli reserves soldiers stationed on the Gaza border are calling for Israel to resettle the Gaza Strip — in song.

    Israeli soldiers are discouraged from expressing political opinions in uniform, but this group of reserves waiting along the Gaza border for the imminent ground invasion doesn’t hold back in a satirical number posted to YouTube, which has echoes of a Sephardic liturgical tune.

    The song calls for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “kick out all the Ahmed Tibis,” a reference to Arab-Israeli Knesset member Ahmed Tibi.

    Later, it asks center-left Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, “what have you left for Hanin Zouabi,” another Arab-Israeli Knesset member, who is known for her anti-Zionist views.

    Perhaps most controversially, the song declares that “We will yet return to Gush Katif,” the Gaza settlements Israel evacuated in 2005. “We’ll kick out the Arabs,” the song continues.

    So far, the song has garnered almost 25,000 views.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neXGk8KIMmo#t=79

  2. yamit82 Said:

    Army officer says situation too unstable to allow 500 activists to cross into Strip

    I wonder who the 500 activists were; 11 buses could likely only carry them and not additional “aid”

  3. yamit82 Said:

    Zoabi handcuffed as Arab Israelis in Haifa protest Gaza offensive

    the soviets used to send their undesirables to siberia: I recommend she be sent to gaza to become a human shield

  4. rsklaroff Said:

    [‘nuf said!]

    As you NEVER ONCE spoke to any question or point that I posted, or to Yamits links, I refer you to my post to Dweller on the subject.

  5. dweller Said:

    I found the proposition a dead end; it’s that simple.

    My “proposition” was:
    to “consider the idea” that there might be a genetic link to european anti semitism.

    your proposition was:
    there is no genetic link to european anti semitism.

    discussion over,
    its even simpler!

  6. dweller Said:

    You confuse “censoring” with dismissal.

    You people have no interest in any discussion of the subject but merely had a knee jerk reaction to block its consideration. Sklaroff spoke to no points or dierect questions that I raised to him. You ignored my points raised and ignored yamits 3 posted links. it appeared that when you did not find the phrase anti semitism in the links you conclude it was dismissable. That was not the point of my raising the subject. I never claimed there was a link but that consideration should be given in the light of recent research that there might be links. How can a point be proven when no research has been done. After all the current explanations have received plenty of air time but genetics, the new research , has received no consideration. I am not interested in making points with the 2 of you,if dismissal, without any support or speaking to any points I raised, was your only purpose then all of our time is wasted. I am interested in understanding the 2000 year serial habit and this conversation added nothing to that.

  7. honeybee Said:

    Can being a bull-headed, obstinate, and augmentative aggressive Jewish male be genetic ??????????

    No more than the nagging of most women and their obsession with shopping and excessive spending. 😛

  8. @ dweller:
    (continued from last post)

    GENETIC OR BIOLOGICAL. Close relatives of persons with delusional disorder have increased rates of delusional disorder and paranoid personality traits. …. Increased incidence of these psychiatric disorders in individuals closely genetically related to persons with delusional disorder suggest that there is a genetic component to the disorder. Furthermore, a number of studies comparing activity of different regions of the brain in delusional and non-delusional research participants yielded data about differences in the functioning of the brains between members of the two groups. These differences in brain activity suggest that persons neurologically with delusions tend to react as if threatening conditions are consistently present. Non-delusional persons only show such patterns under certain kinds of conditions where the interpretation of being threatened is more accurate. With both brain activity evidence and family heritability evidence, a strong chance exists that there is a biological aspect to delusional disorder.
    http://www.minddisorders.com/Br-Del/Delusional-disorder.html#ixzz37vqil7XA
    The cause of paranoia is unknown but genetics are thought to play a role. http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Paranoia_symptoms
    Bipolar disorder is a complex disorder that likely stems from a combination of genetic and non-genetic factors. … …What is known is that bipolar disorder sometimes has a genetic component and can run in families.
    http://www.webmd.com/depression/guide/bipolar-disorder-manic-depression
    There are many theories, however, about the possible causes of paranoid personality disorder. Most professionals subscribe to a biopsychosocial model of causation — that is, the causes of are likely due to biological and genetic factors, social factors .., and psychological
    http://psychcentral.com/disorders/paranoid-personality-disorder-symptoms/
    What will happen to genetic testing over the next decade?
    It is likely that the major genetic factors involved in susceptibility to common diseases like diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease, cancer and mental illness will be uncovered in the course of the next 5 to 7 years.
    http://www.genome.gov/10506784

    thes are not posted to be a “proof” of a genetic link to anti semitism but rather that some similar behaviors are now demonstrated to have genetic links. Furthermore, establishing a genetic link does not exclude the other factors but simply adds one more.

  9. dweller Said:

    NOBODY I know of has ever called it an ‘attitude.’

    “attitude” was Sklaroff’s word to describe anti semitism. If you check you will see that I usually used quotation marks when using the word as I quesitoned the assumption that anti semitism was an “attitude”
    bernard ross Said:

    Why do you assume that anti semitism is an “attitude”? What does it even mean, scientifically, to have an “attitude”.

    In order to promote discussion I continued to use his term, though inaccurate. Anti semitism remains undetermined as to its nature and therefore it is foolish to dismiss and exclude possible causes, especially in the light of modern genetic research which has demonstrated genetic relevance in the causation of many mental diseases and disorders heretofore considered to have no such links.
    dweller Said:

    Alcoholism is an addiction; that’s confirmed. Some hold that it’s also a “disease,” to which members of some cultures may be more susceptible or less.

    Alcohol is one of many addictive behaviors. there is the physical addiction but also the psychological addiction. Addictive behaviors are considered to have a genetic basis as well as environmental,etc.

    While there is debate over whether there is one “addictive personality,” there seem to be people who are particularly vulnerable to develop an addiction to certain substances or behaviors. The causes of this addiction proneness, or addictive personality, are best examined through looking at biological, psychological, and environmental (social) factors.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addictive_personality#Biopsychosocial_Causes

    Unless the nature of anti semitism is known then the causes are also elusive and discusion and research should be engaged as it is an important topic for Jews. I gave alcoholism as an example of a behavior which was considered at one time to be a matter of choice or “attitude” and now is considered to have a genetic link.
    Ross Said:

    “We did not know with alcoholism until the studies were done.”
    Dweller said:
    We still do not “know”; beyond its addictive capacity, the claims are no more than hypothesis.

    with studies and research we know more than we did before and this is what I am proposing wrt european jew hatred. Tons of studies have been done wrt social, psychological, cultural, religious factors but none have been done wrt genetics since the new genetic research of the last few decades. Since this research has shown that behaviors thought to be social, mental, etc. can be genetically linked I am proposing that studies and research be done. One cannot quote such studies as none have been done and obviously considering such ideas is ot PC and especially frightening to some Jews as a result of eugenics etc.

    The Washington Post, for example, reported that the recent discovery that a particular mutation common in Ashkenazim doubles the risk of colon cancer has “stirred deep anxieties within the Jewish community…Some said they are worried that reports of such findings may have a negative impact on the image of Jews among non Jews.”
    http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Bioethics/Genetic_Issues/Genetic_Screening/Genetic_Anti-Semitism.shtml

    Ross Said:

    “European anti semitism has the appearance of being an addiction…”
    Dweller said:
    I’d welcome something more than polemic on the subject. Hard evidence would be nice for a change.

    What is your basis for using the word polemic to describe the reasoning I posted behind my desire for genetic links to be considered? I would also welcome hard evidence as no studies have been done of this nature using modern genetics.
    yamit82 Said:

    2000years of European Jew hatred and some 20 million murdered Jews for starters.

    This repetitive,serial, chronic 2000 year pattern AND STILL ONGOING AT THIS MOMENT begs for explanation and there is no scientific reason to exclude genetic links. Such a pattern spanning many generations is usually explained by cultural transmission and/or genetics. Cultural transmission has been thoroughly investigated leaving still many unexplained factors such as today’s virulent strain. However, there appears to have been a ban on genetic research, I presume due to its political incorrectness as demonstrated by your, and sklaroff, immediate reaction of dismissal without any consideration of the points raised. As this is such an important subject to Jews I think it is foolish not to explore previously unexplored avenues. Modern genetic research has opened whole new paradigms and perspectives. I would expect inquiring minds to be open to new thinking. One cannot compare recent discoveries with eugenics or remain dogmatically opposed to research in this area. Anti semitism appears to me to be akin to addictive behavior, delusional behavior, paranoid personality, mental illness, mental disorder,etc. This whole realm is now considered to have possible genetic links as shown on my links below

    Current research is focused on identifying genetic changes that have a small effect on disease risk but are common in the general population. …….Changes in many genes, each with a small effect, may underlie susceptibility to many common diseases, including cancer, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and mental illness.
    http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/mutationsanddisorders/predisposition

    (continued on next post)

  10. dweller Said:

    I’d welcome something more than polemic on the subject. Hard evidence would be nice for a change.

    Do you have any hard evidence that it’s not true or factual or partially factual???

    2000years of European Jew hatred and some 20 million murdered Jews for starters. The European christian Jew hatred is so pathological that it encompasses those christians who have never met or seen a Jew and in countries with no Jewish population. Compared with non European countries where Jew hatred is virtually unknown. Never met a Japanese, Vietnamese or Chinese who had any apparent proclivity for hating Jews because they were Jews.

    Only European christians have such pathological hatreds.

  11. @ bernard ross:

    “Genetic Influence on Social Attitudes: Another Challenge to Psychology From Behavior Genetics”

    “Useless unless there are explicit applications in the article[s] to antisemitism, judeophobia, judenhass, judeopathy, etc, etc.

    — and this seems not to be the case, as I found not a WORD of such in any of the articles offered, or in any of those articles’ bibliographies.”

    “on the contrary, the fact that genetic links have been found for other ‘attitudes’ e.g. alcoholism, etc. demonstrates that so-called ‘attitudes’ can be genetically related.”

    Apples & oranges. Alcoholism is an addiction; that’s confirmed. Some hold that it’s also a “disease,” to which members of some cultures may be more susceptible or less. But until now, NOBODY I know of has ever called it an ‘attitude.’

    “European anti semitism has the appearance of being an addiction…”

    I’d welcome something more than polemic on the subject. Hard evidence would be nice for a change.

    “We did not know with alcoholism until the studies were done.”

    We still do not “know”; beyond its addictive capacity, the claims are no more than hypothesis.

    “Xty is not a race — and being a universalistic religion, seeking converts quite indiscriminately — it actively embraces all sorts of genetic backgrounds.”

    “christianity is not a race but it is most identified with Europe who are mostly identified with the caucasian race.”

    You’d have a fine time making that case with mizrachi Jews, whose families endured the tender mercies of Islam.

    “As anti semitism survives highly christian Europe and today, in secular europe, the rabid anti semitism surpasses all logic.”

    I’d say that pretty-much puts the nails in the coffin holding your proposition of Jew-hatred as genetic.

    @ bernard ross:

    “Both respondents appeared more interested in censoring discussion than in engaging the points offered, including your 3 links.”

    You confuse “censoring” with dismissal.

    “It was obvious that the other wanker was merely trying to exhibit his opinion and as usual, he actually said nothing in many words.”

    What PresentCompany means is that I said nothing he wanted to hear. And the “many words” consisted of precisely two sentences.

    “It was a foolish conversation because I was not asserting or claiming that there was a link but rather that it is an idea to be considered and investigated…”

    I found the proposition a dead end; it’s that simple. And I daresay, Dr Sklaroff did as well (though I’m sure he can speak for himself).

    “… as so far there has been no explanation that is not flawed or inconsistent.”

    That doesn’t, ipso facto, leave the field open to ANY notion that wants to put in an appearance.

  12. What you misconstrue as an effort to “censor” is best perceived as a request for data that, alas, for reasons explained supra, remains unsatisfied.

    The challenge you have yet to overcome is the inability to ID a physiologic intermediary when loosely depicting an allegedly “diseased” predisposition to an idea, manifest @ one point-in-time, in contrast to research–for example–in alcoholism [which invoked “GABRA2” in one study].

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/199792.php

    If, indeed, your self-disciplined approach to such colloquy as this is to respond to specifics, then you may wish to start by defining how you would conceptualize the alleged adoption of a political posture [on one snapshot in time] in anything other than attitudinal terms.

    In contrast with your postulate, numerous studies have defined “How Alcohol Is Metabolized in the Human Body”]; if you can even define an enzymatic correlate with any sort of prejudice, assuredly, a visit to Stockholm awaits you.

    http://www.hamsnetwork.org/metabolism/

    I am not merely stating any opinion [of disagreement or of disparagement]; rather, I am–by implication–prioritizing the need to avoid obfuscation when tackling adherence to a dangerous public-posture.

  13. rsklaroff Said:

    Bernard,anything is “possible” in your world;

    you reversed what transpired: it is “impossible” in your world
    rsklaroff Said:

    in mine, there has to be more than theoretical support for a concept to allow for such a specific [almost mutually exclusive] claim to be supported,

    What is the “mutually exclusive claim” which you say that I made. I made no claim that was mutually exclusive. Furthermore,I did not claim that there is a genetic link. I called for some consideration of the idea which is something completely different than a theory or a hypthesis to be proven. I merely stated, and which you repeatedly ignored, that:

    recent DNA develoments demonstrate that there are behaviors once considered “attitudinal”(e.g. alcoholism) that are now considered genetically linked.
    Do you deny this, as you never expressed a denial of this point?
    I also stated that DNA studies show that genes may carry a predisposition towards a disease.
    Do you deny this, as you never expressed a denial of this point?
    that anti semitism may be an addictive disease, as alcoholism is now considered to be.
    Do you deny this, as you never expressed a denial of this point?

    rsklaroff Said:

    particularly noting the strong impact of environmental forces in such a complex, evolving world

    Do you have a citation for this assertion? I assume you are asserting that anti semitism is a product of environmental forces.
    rsklaroff Said:

    which cannot be assumed to be static.

    One thing HAS proven to be reliable, predictable, dependable and over 2 millenia perhaps even relatively static: european anti semitism.

    Frankly , as I stated before, I am not interested in a discussion where you simply state your opinion of disagreement without speaking to the points I raised or offering relevant rebuttal. Such conversations I find time wasting and unless you are speaking to the points I raised then I see no reason for discussion on the issue. When I respond to posters I usually make it relevant to their post and speak to their specific points. I wonder why you ever replied to my post. You gave me nothing to discuss in your reply that was relevant to my post.

  14. @ yamit82:
    Thank you for your 3 interesting links on the subject I put forward for consideration. Unlike the other 2 respondents on the subject you spoke to the issue by adding information for consideration and discussion. The other 2 were time wasters who simply stated an opposing view with no supporting evidence or reason other than their generic and fashionable opinions. I notice that after talking about supporting links that sklaroff never responded to the 3 that you posted and it was obvious that the other wanker was merely trying to exhibit his opinion and as usual, he actually said nothing in many words.

    It is obvious that recent developments in DNA demonstrate that behaviors considered “attitudinal” have been shown to be genetically linked e.g. alcoholism for one. If it can be shown in one case there is no reason to assume, in the absence of credible studies, that it cannot occur in another case. There is also no reason to assume that anti semitism is not an addictive disease with genetic linkage. As in other diseases generically linked it does not mean that all with the gene contract it but that they have a higher rate of contracting the disease than the norm.

    Both respondents appeared more interested in censoring discussion than in engaging the points offered, including your 3 links. I find such conversations to be a waste of time. One would think a physician would have some interest in such subjects rather than to dismiss it because he never read anything about it, like the links you offered as a starter.

    It was a foolish conversation because I was not asserting or claiming that there was a link but rather that it is an idea to be considered and investigated as so far there has been no explanation that is not flawed or inconsistent. The incredible repetition of anti semitism in europe over a 2000 year period, and still occurring when we thought it was over, may even have a cyclical aspect that I don’t believe has been studied. Certainly it should be an interesting subject for Jews. The most recent eruption of anti semitism is rationalized but the hysterical extent of it appears driven by something else that remains unknown to us all.

    Science is not meant to be an idol to be worshiped and it does not pass judgement on that which is as yet unproven and unknown. The vast area of knowledge still remains scientifically unknown and unproven. This alone should spark the interest of intelligent people to discuss new or unfashionable ideas. Over the years since college days I have had many discussions whereby new ideas are discussed. I am not used to bores unable to think out of the box and only able to repeat what they have been told.

    And further, it appears obvious that the bible provides some answers which deserve scientific investigation as you have already demonstrated here many times.

  15. Bernard,anything is “possible” in your world; in mine, there has to be more than theoretical support for a concept to allow for such a specific [almost mutually exclusive] claim to be supported, particularly noting the strong impact of environmental forces in such a complex, evolving world [political views]…which cannot be assumed to be static.

  16. yamit82 Said:

    Many attitudes ‘in our genes’ Everything from liking rollercoasters to attitudes to the death penalty is influenced by our genes, say researchers.

    Yamit Said:

    “…’It is an eternal law, Esau (the non-Jew-Edom (christianity)) hates Jacob (the Jew).’ This is the eternal law – it is immutable.”

    It would be interesting to determine who are Esau’s descendants. What people forget is that Science is a method of enquiry which does not exclude biblical precepts from being fact. E.G. mitochondrial DNA appears to lead back to one woman for the entire human species. certainly a G_D capable of creating a “software” such as DNA would be capable of writing any program into that software. i would expect that if he wished to create an immutable eternal behavior of a specific ethnic or racial group then DNA would be the likely place for science to look. The fact that we do not understand the purpose of such programming would not preclude its existence. Perhaps we are all a computer game. 😉

  17. dweller Said:

    Useless unless there are explicit applications in the article[s] to antisemitism, judeophobia, judenhass, judeopathy, etc, etc.

    on the contrary, the fact that genetic links have been found for other “attitudes” e.g. alcoholism, etc. demonstrates that so-called “attitudes” can be genetically related. There is no scientific reason to assume that there is NO genetic linkage. Alcoholism is now seriously considered to be a disease with genetic links. It is also considered to be an addiction. European anti semitism has the appearance of being an addiction and we may in the future, as with alcoholism,discover that there is a linkage. We did not know with alcoholism until the studies were done.
    A genetic pre disposition towards a disease doe not mean that everyone with the gene will develop the disease. Jews have predispositions at a higher rate than europeans to certain diseases and there is no logical reason to assume that europeans do not have higher rates for other diseases than Jews. Jews show higher rates than europeans to sickle-cell anemia Only studies and time will tell. However, if one can only follow yesterdays fashion and yesterdays PC narratives then new discoveries are made more difficult.

    dweller Said:

    Xty is not a race — and being a universalistic religion, seeking converts quite indiscriminately — it actively embraces all sorts of genetic backgrounds.

    christianity is not a race but it is most identified with Europe who are mostly identified with the caucasian race. Perhaps anti semitism is more related to europeans than christians. Perhaps the religion is secondary to the european culture or european genes. After all, christianity is on the wane in Europe bu anti semitism iis not only rising but is rising greatly in the secular population of europe. In genetics there are no fine lines but predispositions can still be seen in differences between races and ethnic groups. As anti semitism survives highly christian Europe and today, in secular europe, the rabid anti semitism surpasses all logic. Secular europeans have become the most virulent anti semites. I include anti Israel and anti zionism in this as there is no logical basis for the insane claims of europeans which border on the the blood libels of baking christian blood into matzoh. They are almost hysterical in their libelous claims of apartheid and baby killing.
    I am not saying it is genetic but I would not be surprised if the 2000 year habit was linked. I do believe that we should not allow the PC fashions of yesterday to obstruct tomorrows discoveries as it did under Ptolemaic astronomy.

  18. rsklaroff Said:

    Also, Dershowitz embodies “permission” to be a self-professed Zionist and a BHO-supporter; that’s why he is so “dangerous

    He’s dangerous because stupid people listen to what he has to say, and he says a lot of BS.

  19. None of the aforementioned justifies the claim that “recent DNA studies point towards a possibility that it can be linked to genetics, e.g. alcoholism.”

    The problematic word is “possibility.”

    Therefore, there is no need to analyze further the multiple steps between whatever has been elucidated and the propensity to be anti-Semitic.

    Also, Dershowitz embodies “permission” to be a self-professed Zionist and a BHO-supporter; that’s why he is so “dangerous.”

  20. rsklaroff Said:

    3. The origins of the Shoah are both multifaceted/multidisciplinary and intuitive/superficial.

    The purpose of the Shoah was theft !!!!!!!

  21. @ yamit82:

    “Genetic Influence on Social Attitudes: Another Challenge to Psychology From Behavior Genetics”

    Useless unless there are explicit applications in the article[s] to antisemitism, judeophobia, judenhass, judeopathy, etc, etc.

    — and this seems not to be the case, as I found not a WORD of such in any of the articles offered, or in any of those articles’ bibliographies.

    “…’It is an eternal law, Esau (the non-Jew-Edom (christianity)) hates Jacob (the Jew).’ This is the eternal law – it is immutable.”

    Curiously, no matter HOW often you pull out this hoary old chestnut and roll it around on the floor, you NEVER do show how you arrive at the conclusion that

    A. Edom = Christianity; OR that

    B. This ‘Law’ is ‘immutable’ (let alone, ‘eternal’).

    We know, for example, that Edom certainly is NOT genetically Christianity, since Xty is not a race — and being a universalistic religion, seeking converts quite indiscriminately — it actively embraces all sorts of genetic backgrounds.

  22. @ bernard ross:

    Genetic Influence on Social Attitudes: Another Challenge to Psychology From Behavior Genetics.
    Includes Articles citing this article:
    Introduction: What is a ‘gene’ and why does it matter for political science?

    The social brain paradigm and social norm puzzles

    Many attitudes ‘in our genes’ Everything from liking rollercoasters to attitudes to the death penalty is influenced by our genes, say researchers.

    Jewish Sages seem to have been ahead of the scientific pack thousands of years ago when they opined:

    Judaism says it unequivocally:

    “It is an eternal law, Esau (the non-Jew-Edom (christianity)) hates Jacob (the Jew).” This is the eternal law – it is immutable.

  23. @ bernard ross:

    The heritability of attitudes: a study of twins.
    Olson JM1, Vernon PA, Harris JA, Jang KL.

    Abstract

    The genetic basis of individual differences in attitudes was examined in a survey of 195 pairs of monozygotic twins and 141 pairs of same-sex dizygotic twins. A principal components analysis of the 30 attitude items in the survey identified 9 attitude factors, of which 6 yielded significant heritability coefficients. Nonshared environmental factors accounted for the most variance in the attitude factors. Possible mediators of attitude heritability were also assessed, including personality traits, physical characteristics, and academic achievement. Analyses showed that several of these possible mediators correlated at a genetic level with the heritable attitude factors, suggesting that the heritability of the mediator variables might account for part of the heritable components of some attitudes. There was also some evidence that highly heritable attitudes were psychologically “stronger” than less heritable attitudes.

  24. @ bernard ross:

    Are beliefs inherited?

    Research shows some attitudes are rooted in genetics, though environment is still key.

    a handful of studies show not only that attitudes are partly, though indirectly, heritable, but that attitudes with high heritability influence people’s actions more strongly than those with weaker genetic bases. Indeed, highly heritable attitudes, such as political persuasions, may even steer our choices of the social “niches” we carve out for ourselves, such as where and with whom to live, according to one line of psychological research.

    The team examined data on 29,691 subjects–including 14,761 adult twins and their parents, spouses, siblings and adult children–and concluded that the route to transmitting attitudes within families is complex, probably reflecting a mixture of assortative mating influences and direct parental transmission. The team also found that family environment played a greater role in attitude formation than in personality variables, strengthening the notion that personality has a stronger genetic component than attitudes.

    Real-life applications

    While the jury’s out on how genes influence attitudes over time, it appears they may account for which attitudes affect our lives the most. The University of Georgia’s Tesser has conducted a number of studies showing that attitudes found in previous studies to be highly heritable are stronger, more accessible and more reinforcing than those with lower heritability.

    In a 1998 study reported in Personality and Individual Differences (Vol. 24, No. 1), Tesser and colleagues even demonstrated that people react physiologically if they are primed to change highly heritable attitudes–indeed, their heart rates increase and they show higher skin conductance.

    As a whole, Tesser’s studies suggest that highly heritable attitudes may drive such high-stakes decisions as who to marry, how to earn a living and where to live. “You want to be around people who agree with you,” Tesser says, “and even in very abstract terms, the probability of returning to places that agree with you are higher for more highly heritable attitudes.”

  25. @ rsklaroff:

    “Dershowitz remains dangerous for, it must be recalled, he supports making Judea/Samaria judenrein…”

    Dunno that ‘dangerous” is quite the right term for it — but yes, there’s no denying that he’s an opponent for most of us here as to the matter of J/S (and for me, anyway, an opponent as to a whole slew of other, mostly social, issues as well).

    However, aside from acknowledging the value of his above, March 11 essay, my remark was focused entirely on his outlook, expertise & acclaim as a defense attorney and an ardent, dedicated & effective advocate for the rights of criminally Accused persons.

    I’m particularly concerned that as soon as the news broke that those kids had ‘confessed’ to the murder — and that they’d been denied access to counsel — the story promptly disappeared.

    @ rsklaroff:

    “As a physician, I do not recall ever reading any scholarly piece suggesting attitudes can be genetic; the roots of European anti-Semitism may be multifaceted, but sustaining a genetic mutation is a new one on me.”

    It’s hardly the first time genetics has been commandeered by those with axes to grind to explain an outlook, proclivity, feeling, position, etc (or, for that matter, to explain a personal trait formed or reinforced by shared culture or history). . . .

    As you are aware, after the Enlightenment it became strictly outré (not to say, gauche) for scholars, diplomats & pundits to explain their judeopathy in terms of Religion. Yet the predisposition persisted, so they sought a racial explanation, complete with the then-new, clinical-sounding name for the same antique bugaboo: antisemitism.

    — Contrary to what is commonly assumed today, the name wasn’t a negatively charged epithet at the time, but rather, a self-assumed handle for its intellectually-pretentious purveyors; like “anti-Zionist” today.

    I would suggest to you that what is really NEW here is not the resort to genetics to explain antisemitism, but rather — and notwithstanding its utter discrediting for some decades now — the reverse (and indeed perverse) USAGE of it by Jews THEMSELVES.

    I daresay, as a seriously-held belief (let alone, a working hypothesis), a genetic explanation for Jew-hatred holds no purchase on the consciousness in-&-about the Tribe — it’s just one more nonempirically anchored element floating out there in the ether (and ever-at-the-ready for impressment into the service of the walking wounded) — but for vigilance’s sake, it oughtn’t be ignored.

  26. @ honeybee:

    “If the murder had been a stateside case, this sort of thing would be right up [Dershowitz’] alley.

    I realize that there’s a fine line between influence and meddling in the Justice system of another country — but an allegation of something as serious as premeditated murder ought to entitle an Accused to better treatment than those kids seem to have been getting, so far.

    — One man’s opinion, of course.”

    “Ahhhhhhhhhh, such modesty from a butinsky, Sweetie !”

    How does it constitute ‘butting in” to make a simple observation?

  27. rsklaroff Said:

    You made an assertion which you haven’t documented;

    Here is the “assertion” which I made:

    However, with today’s new scientific discoveries, especially that related to DNA, one should consider the idea that the European predisposition, or preponderance, towards anti semitism may be “genetic”,

    I am mystified that you completely ignore what I write when you reply to me. I did not assert any theory and a proof thereof. I merely stated that “one should consider the idea”. I stated the basis for such consideration and you replied that you had never read of any linkage between genetics and “attitude”. I replied giving examples for you to investigate whereby behaviors/diseases linked with “attitude” were being considered in the mainstream to be genetic. To illustrate those linkages I gave examples which should prove extremely simple to google: Homosexuality, alcoholism,….you ignored and did not comment on these…
    I further offered examples of “attitudinal” behaviors that affected physical conditions and gave stress as an example….
    I cited discoveries linking brain chemicals to emotions, etc. you made no comment.
    Discoveries exist showing linkage between physical locations in the brain and emotoins and thoughts…any comment?
    I stated that there was no scientific reason to assume that anti semitism was an “attitude” rather than a disease similar to alcoholism…you ignored without comment.
    I asserted that DNA studies have demonstrated an ability to point towards predisposition towards diseases….you made no comment…….
    I stated that there is no reason to assume that DNA does Not affect “apparently” non physical diseases, similar to alcoholism…..you did not rebut, you made no comment, you ignored……
    I put questions to you wrt recent developments in DNA and you ignored them………

    rsklaroff Said:

    ote how I was able to compose a reply without going ad-hominem

    You composed a reply with no relevance to my posts, you ignored my reasons for considering the idea and offered no rebuttal. Therefore, ad hominem was the only relevant issue as you made no argument and ignored mine. Which you continue to do.
    You state opinions with no support whereas I did the opposite.
    rsklaroff Said:

    The origins of the Shoah are both multifaceted/multidisciplinary and intuitive/superficial.

    I referred to european anti semitism which is a 2000 year serial and chronic habit of a collective. The habit spans religious and secular periods. The shoah is one example but cannot point to the repetitive habit. it is the serial habit which begs to consider genetic links as current explanations are flawed. So far, cultural transmission appears to be the fashionable choice according to traditional perspectives. However, recent DNA studies point towards a possibility that it can be linked to genetics, e.g. alcoholism.
    Google keywords alcoholism and genetic to see examples of genetic linkage. You must do your own homework on the other issues If you have interest. However, one issue proves a possibility.

    Deal with my specific comments and examples or stop wasting our time.

  28. I will distill:

    1. You made an assertion which you haven’t documented; it is not up to me to do your homework and, thus, if you can’t justify your claim, you should withdraw it.

    2. Although I wrote dozens of resolutions @ AMA semi-annual meetings [and subset-entities] in the 90’s and thoroughly knew the Policy Compendium, I do not adhere to anything anyone else [person or organization] says or writes “by reference.”

    3. The origins of the Shoah are both multifaceted/multidisciplinary and intuitive/superficial.

    Note how I was able to compose a reply without going ad-hominem; you may wish to co-adopt this attitudinal approach.

  29. rsklaroff Said:

    You talk around the issue and, in the process, promulgate inaccurate statements [starting with the AMA-reference];

    Not inaccurate simply because you disagree, it has been my experience and you offer nothing in rebuttal, not even your own experiences. rsklaroff Said:

    you can postulate and conjure metaphors, but you have not provided a reference to support your meandering thoughts.

    YOu have the mistaken impression that I am responsible for your education and exposure. I suggested to “consider the idea” and you dismissed it out of hand without any scientific basis or evidence other than citing your own lack of knowledge. It matters not to me if you cannot even google the examples I gave. You may desire to be lazy or feel secure in ignorance, I cannot explain your lack of interest in DNA developments nor in the scientific process which starts with “thinking”.

    I cannot, nor have any desire to , spoonfeed you as if I have a need to convince you of something. If you choose to remain in ignorance it is your choice.

    Of course, you did not speak to anything that I said but instead, in typical fashion of provincial ignorance, chose to dismiss my comments out of hand without any thoughtful consideration or rebuttal. You demonstrate my statements as accurate with regard to the similarity between doctors and lawyers wrt arrogance, provincialism and ignorance of anything outside their practice. However, a physician who is not up to date is a danger to us all.

    we agree on dershowitz but I see some similarity of him with you regarding arrogance, provincialism, ignorance….

    rsklaroff Said:

    The presumed contradiction regarding the origin[s] of anti-Semitism was purposeful; on the one hand, they run deep into philosophy, economics, politics, religion, sociology, etc. BUT on the other hand they are transparently based upon the basic human emotions of envy, ignorance, etc.

    I have no idea what this statement means and I do not see how it responds to my query requesting you to elaborate and give support to your apparently contradictory statement.

  30. @ Bernard Ross

    You talk around the issue and, in the process, promulgate inaccurate statements [starting with the AMA-reference]; you can postulate and conjure metaphors, but you have not provided a reference to support your meandering thoughts.

    The presumed contradiction regarding the origin[s] of anti-Semitism was purposeful; on the one hand, they run deep into philosophy, economics, politics, religion, sociology, etc. BUT on the other hand they are transparently based upon the basic human emotions of envy, ignorance, etc.

    I’m glad we agree about Dershowitz.

  31. rsklaroff Said:

    Dershowitz remains dangerous for, it must be recalled, he supports making Judea/Samaria judenrein;

    Dershowitz exhibits traits I have found common among lawyers: arrogance, provincialism and ignorance of anything outside of their specific practice or study. I have rarely found a lawyer with the slightest bit of cultural knowledge outside of Law. The problem is that their arrogance leads them to believe otherwise, especially successful or lucky lawyers.

    Dershowitz’s past demonstrates that he has poor judgement coupled with a lack of humility that his poor judgment should have elicited. Hence, we are plagued to suffer his continued ignorant wanking, sometimes he may be right but probably only after making his mistakes. even a broken clock is correct twice a day, but we do not rely upon it.

  32. @ rsklaroff:
    remember my original suggestion, which is not offered as a proof:

    bernard ross Said:

    However, with today’s new scientific discoveries, especially that related to DNA, one should consider the idea that the European predisposition, or preponderance, towards anti semitism may be “genetic”,

    especially the words in bold

  33. rsklaroff Said:

    The roots of European anti-Semitism are both deeper and more superficial than anything related to the Catholic Church

    Please elaborate upon this assertion, which appears contradictory.

  34. rsklaroff Said:

    As a physician, I do not recall ever reading any scholarly piece suggesting

    this would not be surprising. I have found over the last few decades that US physicians only have the time to read that which is ratified by the AMA. Thinking out of the box and speculating on recent discoveries appears to elude them. Those in research tend to have a wider grasp of developments. However, this would still not explain one’s lack of knowledge on a subject as paradigm altering as the discoveries involving genetics and DNA. Studies involving DNA have been changing prior perspectives.
    rsklaroff Said:

    I do not recall ever reading any scholarly piece suggesting attitudes can be genetic;

    Why do you assume that anti semitism is an “attitude”? What does it even mean, scientifically, to have an “attitude”. That statement demonstrates both the absence of knowledge( I have never read) and a perspective which obstructs scientific thought. You must disavow unproven assumptions in order to make progress.

    E.G.: Is homosexuality an attitude? Many in the community say “you are born that way”, what is the evidence for stating that what was considered an “attitude” is now considered to be [possibly?] genetic?
    What about alcoholism, which was considered a symptom of addiction, which itself was considered psychological and/or physical. Google to see studies indicating alcoholism being linked to genes.
    What about stress? why would stress physically affect recuperation of disease? Isn’t stress attitudinal,emotional, psychological,ethereal? Why do drugs influence the psyche, is there a link between the ethereal and the physical?

    Do you accept the current thinking that DNA often indicates predisposition, or preponderance, to specific diseases? Are so-called psychological diseases physical diseases? Is there a fine line in medicine between physical and psychological, physical and attitude? What about all the chemical links found in the brain wrt emotions and thought which are themselves non physical?

    I wonder if Newton, Einstein or Planck decided to abandon their speculations because they had “never read a scholarly piece” indicating the possibility of their ideas? What could be more mind blowing than quantum physics affect upon the physical world.

    rsklaroff Said:

    the roots of European anti-Semitism may be multifaceted, but sustaining a genetic mutation is a new one on me.

    Do not equate your lack of knowledge, and your inability to translate scientific discoveries into meaningful speculation and theories, with fact and reality. Physicians are likely the last ones to know what occurs outside of that issued by the AMA. Like Lawyers, they have a tendency to be provincial and ignorant outside of their specific practice. Ask any physician you know if they have any awareness of daily developments in medicine in Israel. When I ask physicians of recent developments they appear clueless.

    There is no scientific reason to assume that anti semitism is an attitude. There is no scientific reason to assume that there are no physical neurological and /or genetic influences wrt european anti semitism.

    There is every scientific reason to consider new DNA research which indicates genetic predisposition, and/or preponderance, towards disease.

    There is no scientific reason to assume that DNA does not influence apparently non physical diseases.

    Current models of explanation of anti semitism appear to me to be flawed, indicating cultural influences. However, behavior indicates that anti semitism does not only follow cultural patterns.

    Certainly genetic influences could explain much including the totally irrational anti semitism of some Jews, especially ashkenazi Jews.

    We are brainwashed to believe, and be afraid of, such considerations due to these being used against the Jews in the past, and in the present. However, this is an unscientific paradigm.

  35. @ bernard ross:

    As a physician, I do not recall ever reading any scholarly piece suggesting attitudes can be genetic; the roots of European anti-Semitism may be multifaceted, but sustaining a genetic mutation is a new one on me.

  36. @ Keelie:

    The roots of European anti-Semitism are both deeper and more superficial than anything related to the Catholic Church [recalling the Second Ecumenical Council of ’64, when modern Jews were officially absolved by Pope John XXIII].

  37. @ dweller:

    Dershowitz remains dangerous for, it must be recalled, he supports making Judea/Samaria judenrein; he corroborated this stance publicly @ the U of Pennsylvania a few months ago [after I x-examined him before a SRO-crowd], when he sided with J Street over those who would remind him that the concept of trading-land-for-peace has been thoroughly debunked. He clearly placed his support of Obama’s social policies over his concerns with Obama’s Middle East policies.

    For documentation, note the three hyperlinks within the second ‘graph of this essay I wrote two months ago.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/222026766/Action-Items-CXII-Holocaust-Guzzardi-Benghazi-Kerry

  38. too many western Europeans are as irrational in their hatred toward Israel as their forbearers were in their hatred toward their Jewish neighbors.

    the European preponderance towards the disease of anti semitism appears to transcend, or supersede, the religious motives. Secular Europeans are as anti semitic as their religious ancestors. Perhaps it is a culturally transmitted habit that survives its raison d’etre.

    However, with today’s new scientific discoveries, especially that related to DNA, one should consider the idea that the European predisposition, or preponderance, towards anti semitism may be “genetic”, congenital, much as we now know that DNA can contain the preponderance of individual towards various diseases. This would certainly explain the European embrace of the irrational anti semitism which survives Christianity. E.G. alcoholism runs in families and new studies link a gene to alcoholism.

    If it were to be proven, or even seriously considered, the perspective of Jews towards Europeans would likely be altered for the long run. Jews would be less likely to take Europeans “words” at face value in the same way no one would take seriously the rationalizations of an alcoholic. Once one considers that Europeans carry a preponderance towards the disease one would deal with them scientifically, in the same way one deals with other diseases, and diseased. Jews would be less likely to be fooled by Europeans as they are now and would be less likely to act as their perennial enablers.

  39. Why are so many of the grandchildren of Nazis and Nazi collaborators who brought us the Holocaust once again declaring war on the Jews?

    Why have we seen such an increase in anti-Semitism and irrationally virulent anti-Zionism in western Europe?

    Because many years ago the Catholic Church made as its foundation, the “fact” that the Jews were collectively guilty of “deicide” – the killing of God. This easily penetrated and the pagan European psyche and has remained there for almost 2000 years.

  40. This is one kick-ass essay, and I’m glad it was written — yet knowing that its author is Dershowitz, I’m reminded that I’d been thinking about him lately.

    I can’t help wishing that he would find a way (if he hasn’t quietly done so already) to exercise whatever influence might be available to somebody of his stature & outlook to press GOI to allow those young people who ‘confessed’ (to the purported ‘revenge’ murder of the Arab kid) to have free & unfettered access to legal counsel.

    If the murder had been a stateside case, this sort of thing would be right up his alley.

    I realize that there’s a fine line between influence and meddling in the Justice system of another country — but an allegation of something as serious as premeditated murder ought to entitle an Accused to better treatment than those kids seem to have been getting, so far.

    — One man’s opinion, of course.