anti-Semitic Rhetoric Research Articles

Modernist Polemic: Ezra Pound v. "the perverters of language"

"I take it in retrospect that my tendency to action had effects," Ezra Pound asserted in his radio broadcast on the vorticist journal BLAST, "and that the vast majority of the small minority into contact with which I came, was uneasy, disturbed, horrified in fact: for that sign of action was also some sort of a harbinger." 2 His repeated reference to action, and to the effects of an active presence in literary language, was anything but incidental. The avant-garde satires that he had published in June 1914 were indeed a harbinger of increasingly polemical poems, and his Hell Cantos (numbers 14 and 15), drafted in the spring and summer of 1922, inaugurated an extreme style of poetic invective in which words were crafted as weapons and images designed to wound. Taken together in their own historical moment, the Hell Cantos represent the highest stage of development in Pound's discursive battle with modernity's monopolists following his retreat [End Page 463] from London in January 1921. 3 As he refined his efforts to express his "impersonal indignation" at those forces that had effectively exiled him—and that he felt were obstructing, obfuscating, and obscuring what was best in postwar culture and society—the polemical poetic that had begun its evolution with BLAST ultimately came to test the limits of aesthetic representation. 4 These poems, through their almost visual and certainly visceral effects, are the first to conform fully to the etymology of polemic's Greek root, polemos, as "war." And yet Pound did not wage war (only) on the now-familiar political and economic targets, nor had his mode of assault yet been marred by fascistic or anti-Semitic rhetoric. Rather, he directed his counterstrike against

The Lion and the Star: Gentile-Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919-1945 (review)

Reviewed by: The Lion and the Star: Gentile-Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919–1945 Sidney M. Bolkosky The Lion and the Star: Gentile-Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919–1945, by Jonathan C. Friedman. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1998. 292 pp. $34.95. Jewish history is sprinkled with examples of intense assimilation, perhaps beginning with the Babylonian captivity and including the interaction between Jews and non-Jews in Spain before 1492. None of them seems to rival the “symbiosis” of Germans and Jews in the modern era. German Jews themselves touted their identification as Germans. Non-Jews like Gotthold Lessing and even Goethe wrote and spoke about their colleagues of “the Mosaic persuasion,” and that identification has come under considerable scrutiny by historians, fascinated by the irony of that presumed bond occurring in the country that produced the Holocaust. In The Lion and the Star: Gentile- Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919–1945, Jonathan C. Friedman joins German historians known as Alltaghistoriker, historians of everyday life, and focuses a microscopic look on the relationships between Jews and non-Jews in the German communities of Frankfurt am Main, Gießen, and Geisenheim, symbolized by the Hessian heraldic lion. He judiciously incorporates traditional archival sources, memoirs, church and synagogue records, a plethora of secondary works, and what appear to be carefully selected oral histories (he is an historian on the staff of the Survivors of the Shoah Foundation). Friedman at his best provides an intimate and sensitive analysis of varieties of Jewish life in those three places. There is no mystery to the major motif of the book: non-Jewish indifference and apathy allowed antisemitism and then genocide to take their courses and facilitated their growth into increasingly violent measures. Friedman traces the socio-economic and demographic history of the Jews of the three cities from 1919 to the end of World War II, finding that German-Jewish history conforms to a rhythm composed of German- Jewish belief in the realization of their socio-cultural acceptance by German non-Jews, followed by the gradual and reluctant realization that Germans had essentially ignored them as antisemitism increased. Friedman reviews the literature on German-Jewish identity and the so-called symbiosis between Deutschtum and Judentum. The failure to break that pattern during the Weimar Republic established the basis for popular [End Page 138]acquiescence to an increasingly vindictive and violent antisemitism. That palpable apathy seemed to be a critical component needed to activate the decision for the “Final Solution,” the annihilation of the Jews of Europe. At the start of each chapter Friedman offers a synoptic assessment of the literature on the particular questions he raises. His discussion of the vicissitudes of Jewish life during the Weimar Republic includes an account of the history of that tragic epoch and the events that determined the courses of Jewish lives. His comparative analysis of the three communities reveals that Frankfurt, with the second largest Jewish population in Germany, more readily tended to adopt antisemitic rhetoric and behaviors and more rigorously enforced racist laws. Geisenheim seems to have had the least rancorous population and remained the most liberal of the three. Relationships between Jews and non-Jews remained essentially shallow, in the main, not out of deep-seated antisemitism, but from a lack of interest. In the end, Friedman argues, Nazi success derived in part from their ability to exploit first widespread indifference and then the deeply disturbing popular unrest accompanying the Great Depression and its antisemitic backlash. As he completes the chapter on the history of anti-Jewish politics, Friedman states clearly his position on historical determinism in German history: “it is clear that National Socialism emerged in the context of a particular time and place.” Drawing upon socio-political works, he concludes that Nazism attracted Germans in Hessen for a variety of reasons, one of which may have been antisemitism. Contributing factors to the rise of Nazi electoral success, then, included the Depression, unemployment, and the pervasive diffidence among a Gentile populace who cared essentially not at all for the plight of their Jewish neighbors. Most reader interest will move to the Third Reich and the “Final Solution.” In a...

The lion and the star: Gentile-Jewish relations in three Hessian communities, 1919-1945

The Lion and Star: Gentile-Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919-1945Jewish history is sprinkled with examples of intense assimilation, perhaps beginning with Babylonian captivity and including interaction between Jews and non-Jews in Spain before 1492. None of them seems to rival of Germans and Jews in modern era. German Jews themselves touted their identification as Germans. Non-Jews like Gotthold Lessing and even Goethe wrote and spoke about their colleagues of the Mosaic persuasion, and that identification has come under considerable scrutiny by historians, fascinated by irony of that presumed bond occurring in country that produced Holocaust. In The Lion and Star: Gentile-Jewish Relations in Three Hessian Communities, 1919-1945, Jonathan C. Friedman joins German historians known as Alltaghistoriker, historians of everyday life, and focuses a microscopic look on relationships between Jews and non-Jews in German communities of Frankfurt am Main, Giesen, and Geisenheim, symbolized by Hessian heraldic lion. He judiciously incorporates traditional archival sources, memoirs, church and synagogue records, a plethora of secondary works, and what appear to be carefully selected oral histories (he is an historian on staff of Survivors of Shoah Foundation). Friedman at his best provides an intimate and sensitive analysis of varieties of Jewish life in those three places.There is no mystery to major motif of book: non-Jewish indifference and apathy allowed antisemitism and then genocide to take their courses and facilitated their growth into increasingly violent measures. Friedman traces socio-economic and demographic history of Jews of three cities from 1919 to end of World War II, finding that German-Jewish history conforms to a rhythm composed of German-Jewish belief in realization of their socio-cultural acceptance by German non-Jews, followed by gradual and reluctant realization that Germans had essentially ignored them as antisemitism increased. Friedman reviews literature on German-Jewish identity and so-called symbiosis between Deutschtum and Judentum. The failure to break that pattern during Weimar Republic established basis for popular acquiescence to an increasingly vindictive and violent antisemitism. That palpable apathy seemed to be a critical component needed to activate decision for Final Solution, annihilation of Jews of Europe.At start of each chapter Friedman offers a synoptic assessment of literature on particular questions he raises. His discussion of vicissitudes of Jewish life during Weimar Republic includes an account of history of that tragic epoch and events that determined courses of Jewish lives. His comparative analysis of three communities reveals that Frankfurt, with second largest Jewish population in Germany, more readily tended to adopt antisemitic rhetoric and behaviors and more rigorously enforced racist laws. Geisenheim seems to have had least rancorous population and remained most liberal of three. Relationships between Jews and non-Jews remained essentially shallow, in main, not out of deep-seated antisemitism, but from a lack of interest. In end, Friedman argues, Nazi success derived in part from their ability to exploit first widespread indifference and then deeply disturbing popular unrest accompanying Great Depression and its antisemitic backlash.As he completes chapter on history of anti-Jewish politics, Friedman states clearly his position on historical determinism in German history: it is clear that National Socialism emerged in context of a particular time and place. Drawing upon socio-political works, he concludes that Nazism attracted Germans in Hessen for a variety of reasons, one of which may have been antisemitism. Contributing factors to rise of Nazi electoral success, then, included Depression, unemployment, and pervasive diffidence among a Gentile populace who cared essentially not at all for plight of their Jewish neighbors. …

Muhammad's Midrash: Elijah Muhammad's Biblical Interpretation in Light of Rabbinic Midrash

The nation of islam is well known for its anti-Semitic rhetoric. What is little known, or at least little acknowledged, however, is that the Nation of Islam and Judaism possess a number of striking similarities. Although some of these parallels may be attributed to the influence of Christianity and traditional Islam on the Nation's development, or even to direct or indirect contact with Jewish traditions, themselves, others must be traced to the fertile religious imagination of the movement's prophet and former leader, Elijah Muhammad.