I think antisemitism is too vast a topic for a monocausal explanation, although economist Thomas Sowell also suggested Jewish success as a cause of antisemitism. It would at least explain why Asians, like Jews, are increasingly seen as “white adjacent” or just “white” by the contemporary Western left, even though Asians, like Jews, have suffered discrimination and persecution. And the DEI/”anti-racist” assumption that in a “racist” world, all success is illegitimate and the product of “privilege” generates a cult of mediocrity (Claudine Gay?) in which successful people, Jewish or otherwise, can’t help but be hated.
That said, I prefer more philosophical/religious explanations, but maybe that’s the point: we find explanations that fit our pre-existing worldviews without really explaining the phenomenon.
I think it's probably significant that, given the small and concentrated nature of the world Jewish population, most non-Jews will never meet a Jew. It's doubtful that Chaucer or Shakespeare ever did. This allows Jews to function as a metaphor or symbol without reality intruding.
I don’t know if this was deliberate, but your choice of reader for We’re Going on a Bear Hunt, Michael Rosen, is one of the UK’s leading “As a Jews” (“As a Jew, I condemn Israel blah blah blah”). Maybe he internalised a lot of antisemitism.
Thanks, Daniel. Through the centuries, antisemitism has targeted Jews regardless of whether or not they were socioeconomically successful--so I think the success is perceived to be their mere existence. Antisemitism quite clearly "serves" (in a rather self-destructive way) the emotional needs of the antisemite to feel hate toward the Jews--which makes it hard to define because the precise manifestation of antisemitism will always shift according to what a given culture is willing to encourage and accommodate. And yes, the Jews are a metaphor for many people. Antisemitism appeals to the imagination, and some people feel that they can indulge in it without much consequence. I had no idea about Michael Rosen's attitude. Thanks for letting me know. I think at the core of such an attitude is the naive belief that Israel can be used to "solve" the problem of antisemitism--personally for the Jewish person who condemns Israel.
Michael Rosen wrote one of my favourite books from my childhood, "The Golem of Old Prague", and it annoys me that that now seems a little "tainted." It is telling that the book is about the the Golem being made to defend the Jews of Prague, but getting out of control and having to be destroyed. To some diasporist Jews, like Rosen (who I think is a keen proponent of Yiddish, a language without a state or military), any kind of Jewish power is dangerous and has to be neutralised for the good of the Jews themselves.
Thanks so much for mentioning The Golem of Old Prague. I have just ordered this book online, and it should arrive by mid September. What you are saying about this interpretation of Jewish power is thought provoking. On the other side, there are those who say that the Jews are the canary in the coalmine and that when they are powerless to defend themselves, so will many other peaceful people be.
I think antisemitism is too vast a topic for a monocausal explanation, although economist Thomas Sowell also suggested Jewish success as a cause of antisemitism. It would at least explain why Asians, like Jews, are increasingly seen as “white adjacent” or just “white” by the contemporary Western left, even though Asians, like Jews, have suffered discrimination and persecution. And the DEI/”anti-racist” assumption that in a “racist” world, all success is illegitimate and the product of “privilege” generates a cult of mediocrity (Claudine Gay?) in which successful people, Jewish or otherwise, can’t help but be hated.
That said, I prefer more philosophical/religious explanations, but maybe that’s the point: we find explanations that fit our pre-existing worldviews without really explaining the phenomenon.
I think it's probably significant that, given the small and concentrated nature of the world Jewish population, most non-Jews will never meet a Jew. It's doubtful that Chaucer or Shakespeare ever did. This allows Jews to function as a metaphor or symbol without reality intruding.
I don’t know if this was deliberate, but your choice of reader for We’re Going on a Bear Hunt, Michael Rosen, is one of the UK’s leading “As a Jews” (“As a Jew, I condemn Israel blah blah blah”). Maybe he internalised a lot of antisemitism.
Thanks, Daniel. Through the centuries, antisemitism has targeted Jews regardless of whether or not they were socioeconomically successful--so I think the success is perceived to be their mere existence. Antisemitism quite clearly "serves" (in a rather self-destructive way) the emotional needs of the antisemite to feel hate toward the Jews--which makes it hard to define because the precise manifestation of antisemitism will always shift according to what a given culture is willing to encourage and accommodate. And yes, the Jews are a metaphor for many people. Antisemitism appeals to the imagination, and some people feel that they can indulge in it without much consequence. I had no idea about Michael Rosen's attitude. Thanks for letting me know. I think at the core of such an attitude is the naive belief that Israel can be used to "solve" the problem of antisemitism--personally for the Jewish person who condemns Israel.
Michael Rosen wrote one of my favourite books from my childhood, "The Golem of Old Prague", and it annoys me that that now seems a little "tainted." It is telling that the book is about the the Golem being made to defend the Jews of Prague, but getting out of control and having to be destroyed. To some diasporist Jews, like Rosen (who I think is a keen proponent of Yiddish, a language without a state or military), any kind of Jewish power is dangerous and has to be neutralised for the good of the Jews themselves.
Thanks so much for mentioning The Golem of Old Prague. I have just ordered this book online, and it should arrive by mid September. What you are saying about this interpretation of Jewish power is thought provoking. On the other side, there are those who say that the Jews are the canary in the coalmine and that when they are powerless to defend themselves, so will many other peaceful people be.
I don't think those interpretations are contradictory in terms of fact, just in terms of value i.e. is being weak morally positive or negative.