Your apology is humbly accepted and the banishment lifted so long as you do understand the seriousness of your imputation of anti-Semitism. It was not the "impertinence" or "temerity" of your questions, but the suggestion that my opposition to Marx has to do with his "genetics" as opposed to his vertical anti-semitism. As Prager clearly explained in his piece, it is not that people such as Chomsky or Soros have no Jewish identity; to the contrary, they end up with a specifically anti-Jewish identity to fill the void.
Even if one looks at it psychoanalytically, Marx's denial of Judaism can be seen as a perverse expression of it. But in his case, the pathology ran deeper, and was truly cosmic in its scope, an upside down version of Tikkun olam. Say what you will, but the revolutionary left has always been populated by a disproportionate number of "anti-Jews," including members of my own extended family. Just try googling "Jewish anti-Semitism." Here's just one random example.
Thank you for leaving a comment at my blog. You are always welcome to comment here.
It is very unusual to have any visitors at this poor, neglected blog, so I have not noticed it until today.
I am truly sorry that my terse comments did not make clear my point, which was never to impute any anti-Semitism to you, but to encourage you to more fully develop your thoughts so that your own brief comments did not unnecessarily become part of someone else's anti-Semitic fantasies.
When I used the word "genetics" I was specifically referring to the change in your original post from asserting that Marx had Jewish parents to the fact that he had Jewish grandparents. I was I thought innocently alluding to the two prevalent stances adopted by people who want to blame their own dysfunctional behaviors on either nature or nurture. If you blame nurture, it's your parents' fault; if you blame nature, it's your grandparents' fault.
It is not that I think your opposition to Marx has to do with his "genetics," but the imputation by many, not you, that Marx's pathological ideology derives from his "genetics." Do you see the difference?
In the case of Marx, in particular, I think far too much has been made of his supposed Jewishness. We can agree, I think, he did not have a Jewish education, he rejected any sort of Jewish identity, and he was certainly anti-Jewish in every sense of the word. His screed on the Jewish question is well known, but his private correspondence is peppered with anti-Semitic comments, too.
The fact that the revolutionary left includes a large number of ethnically Jewish anti-Jews is certainly true, and is not unworthy of examination and discussion. The type of self-reflected hatred that is so common among these distorted individuals is not, however, unique to Jews; there is a similar American anti-Americanism in some quarters of America - particularly among the intelligentsia and in Hollywood (you can argue that these are also two milieux that are disproportionately populated by Jews; in some cases, this American anti-Americanism may be a further manifestation of Jewish anti-Semitism, or a way for non-Jews to adopt the ideological mannerisms they have come to admire in some of their Jewish colleagues).
But I would bet that the internationalist left boasts pathologically self-hating individuals from many different countries and cultures, all of them eager to trash their own particularities in the name of the "common good" that they are always talking about.
When you mention looking at it "psychoanalytically" I think immediately of Freud and his Jewish identity, which was quite different from Karl Marx's!
Freud of course identified himself as a Jew, although often in an oppositional way. (My knowledge of Freud is mainly from the one volume abridgement of Ernest Jones's hagiography, so I may be lacking on some of the details.)
Freud was a member of a Jewish lodge, but the only reason he gave for having a Jewish wedding and not converting to Christianity, was that it would have been too complicated. He did open his clinical office on Easter Sunday, surely not a busy work day in 19th century Vienna.
However, he had no more than a smattering of Jewish education, and his appalling account of the so-called golden rule in Civilization and Its Discontents is completely without any actual understanding of the Biblical commandment and its consideration and interpretation in over 1,000 years of Jewish traditional commentary. His Moses & Monotheism is also without a doubt an attack on traditional Jewish religion.
Some day I would like to read what you have to say about Freud.
And I am pleased to learn that it was not primarily my defense of Hitler's dog that upset you.
2 Comments:
Your apology is humbly accepted and the banishment lifted so long as you do understand the seriousness of your imputation of anti-Semitism. It was not the "impertinence" or "temerity" of your questions, but the suggestion that my opposition to Marx has to do with his "genetics" as opposed to his vertical anti-semitism. As Prager clearly explained in his piece, it is not that people such as Chomsky or Soros have no Jewish identity; to the contrary, they end up with a specifically anti-Jewish identity to fill the void.
Even if one looks at it psychoanalytically, Marx's denial of Judaism can be seen as a perverse expression of it. But in his case, the pathology ran deeper, and was truly cosmic in its scope, an upside down version of Tikkun olam. Say what you will, but the revolutionary left has always been populated by a disproportionate number of "anti-Jews," including members of my own extended family. Just try googling "Jewish anti-Semitism." Here's just one random example.
Bob,
Thank you for leaving a comment at my blog. You are always welcome to comment here.
It is very unusual to have any visitors at this poor, neglected blog, so I have not noticed it until today.
I am truly sorry that my terse comments did not make clear my point, which was never to impute any anti-Semitism to you, but to encourage you to more fully develop your thoughts so that your own brief comments did not unnecessarily become part of someone else's anti-Semitic fantasies.
When I used the word "genetics" I was specifically referring to the change in your original post from asserting that Marx had Jewish parents to the fact that he had Jewish grandparents. I was I thought innocently alluding to the two prevalent stances adopted by people who want to blame their own dysfunctional behaviors on either nature or nurture. If you blame nurture, it's your parents' fault; if you blame nature, it's your grandparents' fault.
It is not that I think your opposition to Marx has to do with his "genetics," but the imputation by many, not you, that Marx's pathological ideology derives from his "genetics." Do you see the difference?
In the case of Marx, in particular, I think far too much has been made of his supposed Jewishness. We can agree, I think, he did not have a Jewish education, he rejected any sort of Jewish identity, and he was certainly anti-Jewish in every sense of the word. His screed on the Jewish question is well known, but his private correspondence is peppered with anti-Semitic comments, too.
The fact that the revolutionary left includes a large number of ethnically Jewish anti-Jews is certainly true, and is not unworthy of examination and discussion. The type of self-reflected hatred that is so common among these distorted individuals is not, however, unique to Jews; there is a similar American anti-Americanism in some quarters of America - particularly among the intelligentsia and in Hollywood (you can argue that these are also two milieux that are disproportionately populated by Jews; in some cases, this American anti-Americanism may be a further manifestation of Jewish anti-Semitism, or a way for non-Jews to adopt the ideological mannerisms they have come to admire in some of their Jewish colleagues).
But I would bet that the internationalist left boasts pathologically self-hating individuals from many different countries and cultures, all of them eager to trash their own particularities in the name of the "common good" that they are always talking about.
When you mention looking at it "psychoanalytically" I think immediately of Freud and his Jewish identity, which was quite different from Karl Marx's!
Freud of course identified himself as a Jew, although often in an oppositional way. (My knowledge of Freud is mainly from the one volume abridgement of Ernest Jones's hagiography, so I may be lacking on some of the details.)
Freud was a member of a Jewish lodge, but the only reason he gave for having a Jewish wedding and not converting to Christianity, was that it would have been too complicated. He did open his clinical office on Easter Sunday, surely not a busy work day in 19th century Vienna.
However, he had no more than a smattering of Jewish education, and his appalling account of the so-called golden rule in Civilization and Its Discontents is completely without any actual understanding of the Biblical commandment and its consideration and interpretation in over 1,000 years of Jewish traditional commentary. His Moses & Monotheism is also without a doubt an attack on traditional Jewish religion.
Some day I would like to read what you have to say about Freud.
And I am pleased to learn that it was not primarily my defense of Hitler's dog that upset you.
Post a Comment
<< Home