In recent years, the main locus of anti-Semitism has swung, slowly but perceptibly, from right to left. In this purposefully provocative book, Gilder, the author of
WEALTH AND POVERTY and several other modern conservative classics, lays a finger on one potential reason why: Jews, by their success in all manner of fields -- in particular, by their success in turning Israel into a miniature technological dynamo -- have provoked envy and resentment in those less adept in straddling the cutting edge of change. Gilder's "test" posits that how one feels about Israel mirrors how one feels about exceptional individuals in any walk of life. Do you resent their success, or do you subscribe to Gilder's "golden rule of capitalism," that "the good fortune of others is also one's own"? By a logical extension, one's attitude toward Israel reflects how one regards human freedom. In the years after World War II, many liberals supported the establishment of Israel because of the fresh memories of the Holocaust, which cast Jews as victims. Now, the left has found other victims to succor, and a thriving Israel has become one of the "haves," and, therefore, a target.
Gilder's book breaks into three parts. The middle portion, with its lengthy description of how Israel shook up its slumbering socialist economy and encouraged venture capital to invest in the country, can be skimmed over by those not overly interested in contemporary technological developments. Even if "Israel Inside" doesn't interest you, you should still read the historical matter covering such important figures as John von Neumann and Albert Einstein. Parts one and three lay out the lineaments of Gilder's "test" in measured but straightforward language. I happen to believe that Gilder's argument holds water for the most part, though making it stick "on the ground" in the Middle East would be difficult; so many interests have a stake in the rather squalid
status quo, and ethnic and religious disputes far predate the development of modern capitalism. Granted that its relentless focus on the importance of economic development leaves many other issues unexplored, Gilder's thesis is sound enough to be taken seriously by anyone interested in the maintenance and extension of political and economic freedom.
I agree, but my opinion is biased
ReplyDeleteHi Chris,
ReplyDeleteSorry for lurking - I've been following your blog for a while (found it through Joe's, if I remember correctly).
I can only speak for myself, not everyone on the left, and I find that Gilder's profile just doesn't fit me. I admire creative, smart, honest, well-meaing successful people (after all, I hope to be one myself - presently looking into grad school), so it just doesn't work, to me.
Your post is thoughtful, but I'm truly disheartend by the way you seem to equate disagreeing with or criticizing the policies and actions of Israel as a state with anti-Semitism. I just wish that it would've been possible for the modern Israel to have been established in a different, unsettled geographic location, so that the whole conflict with Palestine could've been averted.
I truly do not mean to argue, but just want to try to explain my persrpective, and address some factors that I feel you've overlooked. I'm sure you'll still disagree at the end of the day, but sometimes I can't resist the "Hey, wait, but ..." urge when it hits me.
I was actually going to comment once before when you posted about the questionable direction Boom! is taking with the Disney license (something that I basically see the same way as you), but ended up deciding that it would be too strange to show up out of nowhere. Now, I wish that I had, because I would've liked to have started on a less controversial note.
Ryan,
ReplyDeleteThanks for checking in.
"Your post is thoughtful, but I'm truly disheartend by the way you seem to equate disagreeing with or criticizing the policies and actions of Israel as a state with anti-Semitism. I just wish that it would've been possible for the modern Israel to have been established in a different, unsettled geographic location, so that the whole conflict with Palestine could've been averted."
Well, as you may know, early in the history of the Zionist movement, there were plans afoot to try some other location, in Africa, Canada, and so forth. The Holocaust cemented the decision to found Israel. Having recently read and reviewed A SAFE HAVEN, it's hard for me to believe that the Jews could have been persuaded to change their minds.
Note that I do comment that Gilder's thesis leans rather too heavily on the economic issue. Obviously the founding of Israel stirred up a lot of animosity that no amount of economic development in Palestine could possibly dissolve. I do believe, though, that criticism of the policies of Israel (when coupled with a lack of outrage over the policies of Islamic states) is used by some as a COVER for a more genteel version of anti-Semitism. Just as the attacks on "neo-conservatives" during the W years were sometimes coded assaults on former Jewish liberals who'd had the temerity to switch sides during the latter stages of the Cold War.
Chris
Chris,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the reply!
Well, as you may know, early in the history of the Zionist movement, there were plans afoot to try some other location, in Africa, Canada, and so forth.
Sadly, I didn't know that - my history isn't as up to snuff as it should be.
Having recently read and reviewed A SAFE HAVEN, it's hard for me to believe that the Jews could have been persuaded to change their minds.
The implications of the name that was chosen for the "Birthright" program give me the sense that you're probably right about that. (Though I wouldn't hold it against anyone for partaking in a Birthright trip - if I qualified, I may well go for it myself. I actually have a friend who, along with his sister, participated in one They're areligious - their attitude toward it was basically, "If it means a free vacation, then why not?!")
I do believe, though, that criticism of the policies of Israel (when coupled with a lack of outrage over the policies of Islamic states) is used by some as a COVER for a more genteel version of anti-Semitism.
Thank you - that's the exact kind of elaboration and connection-drawing I was hoping for!
Perhaps it's more of an ideological issue than a racial one, though? That actually seems to me exactly what Gilder's getting at. (If I'm not mistaken, he's saying, "Liberals don't like Israel because they don't like capitalism" - is that a fair interpretation? Doesn't that make the anti-semitism angle somewhat null?)
Just from your summary of the book, I find it something formidable to consider. His "liberal psychological profile", as you've conveyed it, has even evoked a bit of personal soul-searching.
Ryan,
ReplyDeleteAgain, thanks for your thoughts. I'd recommend you read the book to absorb Gilder's argument for yourself. Another book with similar themes -- WHY ARE JEWS LIBERALS? by Norman Podhoretz -- has just come out, and I may get to that one eventually as well.
Chris