The Universalist Holocaust
By Daniel Greenfield
SultanKnish.Blogspot.com
There are two basic human responses to an
assault. I will protect myself or I will make the
world a better place. The first deals with the risk
of an attack. The second with your feelings about
the world. The first leaves you better able to cope
with an attack. The second makes you feel better
about the world that you live in.
The Jewish response to the Holocaust fell into
these two categories. Never Again and Teach
Tolerance. And the two responses were segmented by
population.
Never Again became the credo of Israel and Teach
Tolerance became the credo of the Western Diaspora.
There were many Israelis who believed in teaching
tolerance and many Western Jews who believed in
self-defense, but for the most part the responses
were structural because the divide between
Nationalists and Universalists predated the
Holocaust.
The Holocaust was a transformative event, but only
to a degree, the responses to it came out of earlier
debates that had been going on for several
generations. Before the Holocaust, the pogroms had
led to the same fork in the road between a
collective struggle for a better world and national
self-defense. The current debates about Israel
revisit that old argument.
To the Nationalists, the Holocaust was not an
unexpected event. Nationalist leaders like
Jabotinsky had warned that it was coming. To the
Universalists however, it was an inexplicable event
because it challenged the entire progressive
understanding of history as a march to
enlightenment. Violent bigotry was a symptom of
reactionary backward thinking, not something that
modern countries would engage in. There might be
anti-semitism in Berlin, but there wouldn't be mass
murder. That was for places like Czarist Russia, but
not for the enlightened Soviet Russia or Weimar
Germany.
The Holocaust dissolved that mirage of a better
world. It was a mugging in broad daylight on the
biggest street of the biggest city in the world. Its
message was that the world had not changed and that
human beings had not magically become better people
because Berlin had a subway and phone calls could be
made across the Atlantic.
The Holocaust did not heal the divide between the
Universalists and the Nationalists; it deepened it.
The Universalists still insisted that a better world
was coming and that the Holocaust made it more
urgent for us to work toward it, while the
Nationalists saw the world as a cycle of
civilizations that had to be survived, with no
respite, except for the religious who awaited a
final transformation of the world and everything in
it.
Israel was the issue, but the real issue was what a
Jewish State symbolized; a turning away from the
great dream of the Brotherhood of Man for another
reactionary ethno-religious state. To many liberals,
Israel's existence is coded with the dangerous
message that Jews are no longer committed to the
great humanitarian revolution and the dream of a
better world. That they would rather cling to a
narrow identity and a narrow territory than melt
into a borderless brotherhood of man.
Zionism led to a schism on the left, a raw angry
split slowly being won by the Anti-Zionist camp
which has been plugging away at the same bad
universalist ideas that Jewish liberals occasionally
drag out of the trash can and display like some new
discovery. The Zionist left tried to bridge the gap
through bad economics and wishful thinking. The
Peace Process was its last gasp.
Western Jewish liberals have always been vaguely
ashamed of Israel. They used to understand the need
for it and the desire for it in their gut, even as
their ideological minds struggled against it. As
time passed and the dust and ashes settled, that
unspoken gut feeling faded, because things you do
not say and cannot rationally defend are hard to
pass down to future generations.
The Holocaust museums were built, the books were
written and tours conducted into Anne Frank's attic,
but the understanding of what these things meant was
not passed down. The only lesson was to make the
world a better place by teaching everyone to be
tolerant so that history would not repeat itself. As
if any amount of courses and slides on tolerance
could stop history from repeating itself.
There are nice Jewish boys and girls who have
read Anne Frank's diary, visited Auschwitz and come
away anti-semities. Of course they don't of course
call themselves that. They call themselves human
rights activists, they board flotillas, they boycott
Israeli products, smash Jewish store windows, hug
terrorists and rationalize suicide bombers. And it's
not entirely their fault. The lessons that they drew
from their education is that the underdog is always
right, that people in uniforms are bad and that you
always have to stand up for minorities.
That is the Holocaust in its universalized form.
Never Again made the Holocaust a teachable moment
for Jews. Teach Tolerance made it a teachable moment
for all mankind. The Nationalist and the
Universalist draw two opposite lessons from the
Holocaust. The Nationalists focus on resistance
while the Universalists focus on persecution. The
Nationalist aspires to be a ghetto fighter while the
Universalist aspires to be a good German.
The Universalist version of the Holocaust is a
lesson on how we must all aspire to be good Germans.
Its natural lesson is that our governments, at least
the non-progressive ones, are embryonic Third Reichs
which are only one flag-waving leader away from
opening concentration camps. The only way to stop
another Holocaust is to destroy nationalism,
patriotism and the modern state.
And so there are plenty of young Jewish and
non-Jewish boys and girls who smash Jewish store
windows and throw stones at Jewish soldiers out of a
desire to be good Germans. If they manage to destroy
Israel and all its Jews, then they'll be the best
Germans of them all.
This Universalist doctrine does not mention the
English boys, who were being good Germans before the
time when those words meant anything, by gathering
at anti-war rallies. It does not mention the leftist
intellectuals who insisted that the Allies were no
better than the Nazis. People might draw sordid
conclusions about their modern peers who insist that
America is no better than Al-Qaeda or that Israel is
no better than Hamas.
The Holocaust did not divert most Jewish
Universalists from their course, no more than prior
events did. For every Herzl who realized that the
Universalist vision was bunk there were many others
who went on preaching the same tired mantras of a
new dawn for the human race. And they are still
holding on to the podium and denouncing Zionism as
an obstacle to the progress of mankind.
The debate over Israel is only one of many such
fights between Universalists and Nationalists of
every creed and from every nation. It is a struggle
between those who believe that nations, religions
and cultures have innate worth, and those who
believe that they are obstacles to the great jello
bowl of togetherness.
Even the good Universalists don't really understand
the Holocaust because they don't believe that they
are living within history, but at some tail end of
history before a new era of global awareness. They
call left-wing anti-semitism the "New
Anti-Semitism". The Holocaust was also a new event
to them, rather than part of the continuity of
Jewish history which had seen massacres in every
age.
To them there is no Pharaoh, Haman, Chmelnitsky, no
sack of Jerusalem, poisoned wells and bodies burning
in the public square. Everything is new to them and
they are always being surprised by all the old
things that keep showing up.They are forever being
surprised by events because they have no context.
They are certain each time that the world has become
a better place, and there is no need for a Jewish
State. History to them is always ending, and yet it
never seems to end.
Israel did not emerge out of the Holocaust, it
emerged out of a history in which the Holocaust was
only another link in a chain of events. To say
otherwise is to reject history, which is a thing the
Universalists habitually do. The only way for them
to continue repeating their folly is to kill
history, so that everything is always new and so
that no one learns anything from the past except to
repeat their homilies.
The Nazi Holocaust failed, but the Universalist
Holocaust is still ongoing. Every time a leftist
gets up to denounce Israel and to look forward to
the day when it disappears, the Universalist
Holocaust grinds on. And they have no shortage of
Jewish assistants who are eager to complete the
task, believing that a humanitarian utopia waits on
the other side of the gas chamber door.
The Jewish Universalists lost faith in G-d, but they
did not lose faith in humanity. They still believe
with all their hearts that if they strum the guitar
loud enough and sing, "Imagine", that a better world
will appear behind that door. Disbelieving in
history, they have forgotten that the last time that
door was opened in Russia, there was barbed wire and
bitter cold on the other side.
Jewish Nationalists understood what was coming last
time. They understand what is coming this time. Yet
no matter how many times they are proven right, the
beautiful dreamers refuse to listen to the history
which proves them wrong. They're still waiting for
the European Union, the United Nations, for the dead
hand of history to let go and the better world to be
born out of the ashes of the old.
We all die, sooner or later. It is what we leave
behind that ventures into the uncertain future that
gives us life. History is the road map that charts
where the past lives that made ours possible have
gone and shows us where the lives that we make
possible may go. The Universalist Holocaust would
burn those maps and kill our future for their better
world. .