Before I go any further: This post is not about the merits or demerits of kosher slaughter. Commenters discussed that aspect of the case in the earlier thread, but this essay is solely about the meta-issue. If you want to argue about whether kosher slaughter is good or bad, humane or inhumane, do it somewhere else.
Today’s discussion focuses solely on whether opposition to ritual slaughter is inherently anti-Semitic.
To refresh your memory: Geert Wilders, the politician who leads the PVV, is on record in support of a ban on kosher and halal slaughter in the Netherlands. Some Jewish groups have taken Mr. Wilders’ stance as an expression of anti-Semitism. Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, an Austrian-born Israeli writer, was quoted by Reuters as saying this:
“Are you going to support a guy [Geert Wilders] who is at forefront of the anti-Semitism movement in Europe?,” he said.
More information on Dr. Gerstenfeld’s position has become available since I posted my essay last week. According to Tundra Tabloids, he says he was misquoted.
This is what Dr. Gerstenfeld told TT (my emphasis):
The journalist of Reuters promised me that before publishing he would send me the text of my quote. He later apologized that this was not possible because of time pressure.
I have informed him that the quote was not correct and should have read:
“are you going to support a guy who is at the forefront of the anti-Semitism movement in Europe on one major issue?”
I agree that this addition makes an important distinction. And I can sympathize with someone who has been misrepresented by the perfidious mainstream media.
Unfortunately, the same problem still exists, albeit in a reduced fashion.
To associate Geert Wilders, even partially, with “the anti-Semitism movement in Europe” is to do him a grave disservice. Mr. Wilders has expended immense political capital through his support of Israel. Given the political climate in Europe — which stacks the deck against Jews — his position affords him no measurable advantage, and may even have cost him votes.
Therefore we may be certain that Mr. Wilders supports Israel as a matter of principle, rather than as a cynical political ploy. To frame his stance as having anything to do with “anti-Semitism” is unjust and unwarranted.
It’s possible to be opposed to ritual slaughter without being anti-Semitic. Many of the leaders of the animal rights movement who oppose ritual slaughter are Jewish — are they also anti-Semitic?
To cry “anti-Semite” in such circumstances is to debase the currency of the term. The real anti-Semites are the robed and bearded zealots who stalk, harass, and beat up Jews in Amsterdam, Paris, Brussels, Oslo, Berlin, and Malmö. Why waste time and energy going after a proven ally of Israel, when the deadly enemies of the Jews continue to rampage with impunity across much of Western Europe?
This is madness.
On being misrepresented by the MSM
Dr. Gerstenfeld deserves our sympathy for being misquoted by Reuters.
This is par for the course. Over the past few years I have seen the same thing done with wearisome regularity to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Fjordman, Tommy Robinson, and numerous others who have had the misfortune of brushing up against the agents of the leftist media smear machine.
For that reason Dymphna and I declined to respond to any reporters or editors who attempted to contact us during the Breivik madness last year. There was no percentage in talking to them — no matter what you say, they can always slant it, distort it, quote it selectively, and spin your words to make you look like a despicable evil ideologue.
So who needs it? Let them talk to each other.
18 comments:
I am deeply uninterested in how different butchers work; so long as I can nip over to ASDA and get myself some chicken breast or some burgers whenever I feel like it, I'm a happy camper.
What dismays me in this instance is that some Jewish people would try to turn other people against Geert Wilders and even try to stick unpleasant labels on him.
I just hope there are plenty other Jewish people who recognise that Wilders supports Israel at the end of the day, and let's all face it, with Israel and the rest of the world facing the problems they do in the short and medium term future, that is all that really matters.
It is anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, and anti-Muslim to oppose ritual slaughter or circumcision. Geert is dead wrong on this issue. If he loses support, it will be his fault.
There is no valid reason - other than total ignorant self-centeredness or anti-Jewish and/or anti-Muslim bigotry to oppose kosher/halal slaughter. The usual excuse advanced is concern over the suffering of animals; however, study after study has demonstrated that kosher/halal slaughter causes less pain to the animal than those preferred by the animal rights activists. On the other hand, their preferred methods result in the animal dropping without involuntary twitching; this results in less distress to the animal rights activist who is watching.
"Many of the leaders of the animal rights movement who oppose ritual slaughter are Jewish — are they also anti-Semitic?"
Actually, yes. It is quite possible for a Jew, especially a non-observant Jew, to be antisemitic. In fact, some of the most vicious antisemites in history were nominally Jewish.
In this case, I will be charitable and presume that Wilder is simply a moron; but if he has friends who are not, possibly they can educate him. Opposition to kosher/halal slaughter is functionally antisemitic and anti-Muslim, no matter what the opponent thinks his reasons are.
Focusing the power of the State to regulate what a Jew eats is tyrannical. When a law focuses mostly on a single group, it is hostile to that group.
If I pass a law requiring every single fish that a Dutchman eats to be examined, stunned, examined again by a veterinarian before it can be gutted, you'd call me a lunatic.
The people who sponsored this law are silly controllers except they plan to use the police to barge into my backyard.Aren't you ashamed by even posing the question?
emanuel appel
So the Liberals are out in force to take a shot a one of the most despised men in Europe and anyone who agrees with him.
Jack:
Christians don't ritually slaughter animals and in fact it is looked down upon as barbaric and seen as a throw back to paganism if not devil worship.
Of course being against ritual animal slaughter makes most Christians, vegans, Buddhists, Jains, secular animal rights people evil anti-semitics by your measure.
So keep digging. It's amusing.
Also opposing circumcision doesn't make a person anti-semitic. It's called freedom of choice. I know that some people have problems with that. So deal with it.
Fuzzyface:
Too bad you don't have the same sort of anger towards Muslims who are turning your people into punching bags in Europe and openly want your ethnicity extinct. But that would require you to confront people who are politically correct and therefor untouchable. And worse part they have a tendency to get really violent with Jews. No, you don't have the nerve for that. Now Wilders is a different story. He is a target for every liberal and statist(both Jew and Goy)in the U.S. and Europe and his own government wants him gone. Easy target.
As a life-long Catholic, I am unaware of any role that ritual slaughter has in Christianity - except that the display of the crucifix remembers and honors the Godly sacrifice inherent in the ACTUAL slaughter of Jesus the Son of Man who sadly but willingly allowed himself to be slaughtered by the mob and who then arose from death so that each individual might freely choose to be saved.
Of course, Westerners can oppose both kosher ritual slaughter - and also male circumcision - without being anti-Semitic - although many Jews reflexively accuse Jewish and non-Jewish opponents of both rites of being anti-Semitic.
It is my view that infant male circumcision appears to offer significant measurable public health benefits to society at large, whereas kosher ritual slaughter appears to offer religious benefits to Jews.
Of course, Westerners - especially Jews who are actively targeted by Muslims - positively MUST oppose halal ritual slaughter for many reasons that I will list below.
Egghead
Here is WHY non-Muslims should care about the introduction of any halal food into the West.
I read a great anti-halal essay that explained that halal food contributes to four significant problems - independent of animal cruelty or religious issues.
The first problem is an employment fairness issue. Halal slaughter requires that Muslims perform all halal rituals. The end result is that Muslims begin to "take over" food production jobs of a nation. The idea that Muslims - who wish to eliminate non-Muslims - control any aspect of non-Muslim food production is disturbing.
The second problem is a terrorist funding issue. All halal products require the monetary purchase of halal certification from a major Muslim entity - and some of that money inevitably supports terror efforts against the West.
The third problem is a Muslim immigration scam. Evidently, halal slaughter requires Western nations to import halal butchers from Muslim nations. The scam is that the halal butchers QUIT as soon as they receive their Western immigration status - requiring the constant importation of halal butchers from - you guessed it - Muslim nations.
The fourth problem is that - where Western countries have banned guns but allow knives - halal butchers can use their butchering skills as very effective human murderers. In essence, the importation of halal butchers is the importation of devout Muslims who would make extremely effective foot soldiers in a fighting war.
In the meantime, halal butchers use their butchering skills to commit violent crimes in the West - halal human slaughters which go unreported by the main stream media.
Halal Murder of Humans
GoV - Halal: It's Just Not Kosher (Be sure to read the comments.)
Jewish identity can be strengthened in other ways, e.g. making learning Hebrew compulsory, wearing a beard, etc.
That said, I have no problem with throat-cutting animals, and I do not consider circumcision to be child abuse.
I like what Jesus said on the subject of "unclean" foods:
"It is not what GOES INTO a person's mouth that makes them 'unclean', but what COMES OUT of it."
I don't care if a Muslim, Jew or Hindu wants to eats specific things slaughtered in special ways, but each society that they move into also has a right to enforce its own cultural standards.
If Judaism's or Islam's or Hinduism's rules for ritual food prep clash with The Netherlands'local ethical and sanitary decisions, then the Jews and Muslims and Hindus who find these restrictions on their own rituals intolerable should move to Haifa, or Cairo or New Dehli, respectively.
Each nation has the right to create and defend its own regulations, from border control to animal treatment at slaughterhouses, and it would be anti-Dutch to try to circumvent them.
If you can't adapt, depart.
Anonymous wrote:
Too bad you don't have the same sort of anger towards Muslims who are turning your people into punching bags in Europe and openly want your ethnicity extinct.
When did I say I didn't? It's just that in this particular case, we happen to be on the same side.
I don't care if a Muslim, Jew or Hindu wants to eats specific things slaughtered in special ways, but each society that they move into also has a right to enforce its own cultural standards.
When they make sense, sure. But in this case, the "cultural standard" is brand new, arbitrary, and affects nobody except certain religious minorities.
Im dont support circumcision bans or ritual slaughter bans.
I oppose the out of control animal rights groups, though I favor reasonably humane treatment of animals.
I also oppose the numpties supportive of male circumcision bans. They are really only interested in the cultural transmission of religion, and couldnt give a toss about a small piece of skin (which is obvious because the vast majority of these same folks are pro-abortion with all that entails).
Beating around the bush with burqa bans and ritual slaughter bans is just plain dumb in my opinion and it abridges peoples freedom unnecessarily so as to seem universal, when the target is obviously Islam. It's the same foolishness with regards to the TSA searching everybody with no profiling because that would be biggotry, discrimination and racism.
It's the same foolishness with promoting generalized anti-regligious law-laws....instead of targeting Shariah.
Now all that being said...many Jews are just reaping the rewards of moral and cultural relativism, the culture-value neutral state, the Left as Establishment, and non-discrimination (in all things, including and especially immigration policy-see policy based on Jews denied immigration pre-WW2).
Sew the wind...reap the whirlwind.
And before anybody calls me an Anti-Semite, Im a Judeophile...but deeply critical of Western diaspora Jewish political proclivities.
Multiculturalism was supported and promoted by the vast majority of diaspora Jews, who also are supportive of and promote the delegitimization of the Euro-Christian nation-states as Euro-Christian states.
Bah!
EV
Fuzzyface: Is it the standard that is new, or the minorities (otherwise known as immigrants - neigh colonists)?
Western Muslims simply brought more attention to ritual animal slaughter because there are MORE Muslims than Jews. A few people might be able to get away with violating Western cultural norms whereas a crowd of violators attracts more attention to the increasing bad consequences of such violations.
Certainly (theoretically genius IQ) Western Jews should have anticipated this unfortunate (for themselves) consequence when Western Jews politically and socially supported the mass immigration of barbaric Muslims to the complete and total detriment of native Westerners. Jews with relatives in Israel were and are FULLY aware of the Muslim problem and helped inflict that problem on innocent Westerners who were and still are COMPLETELY ignorant of the death cult of Islam.
I recall reading a very perceptive essay or comment (probably at GoV) postulating that the problem seems to be that, even over many generations in Western countries, Jews self-identify and self-segregate as 'the other' instead of 'the native' in the West. Thus, Western Jews support barbaric immigrants over civilized natives as if those Western Jews were immigrants themselves instead of natives.
Egghead
@ Egghead
" . . . even over many generations in Western countries, Jews self-identify and self-segregate as 'the other' instead of 'the native' in the West. Thus, Western Jews support barbaric immigrants over civilized natives as if those Western Jews were immigrants themselves instead of natives."
Egghead, I have appreciated many of your comments over the years and respect your intelligence, but this last comment is just ridiculous.
I remember growing in the Denver where the Jews "self-segregated" and formed their own country club--because their were not allowed into the Denver Country Club. Blaming the victim, aren't you?
Most Jewish immigrants and their children couldn't wait to join the American mainstream--this was the attitude of most of the immigrants in America's past.
Spend any time on a college campus or among our educated elites and you will find a strong belief in multiculturalism and a self-righteous political correctness--no matter what their religious background might be. Traditionally Jews have place a very high value upon education and so they are found among our educated elites in numbers disproportionate to their numbers in the population, and they share the beliefs of this group.
Do note that in America it is the orthodox Jews who trend conservative and who do not like Obama. (Although I note with interest that Jewish liberal support for Obama has been waning although not fast enough to suit me).
Many of the more assimilated Jews have even swallowed Palestinian propaganda about Israel and are embarrassed by Israel. One is tempted to say that their true religion--as with their colleages of Christian background--is multiculturalism.
Last anon: Thanks for your civil input. I believe that the problem is a chicken and egg problem with regard to centuries of Jewish segregation in Western countries.
The theology of the two major Middle Eastern religions of Judaism and Islam focuses on being and staying 'the other' with the stated goal of supremacy over Western Christian populations. (In the same vein, these two religions also obsess that all men are better than all women.)
At the point where Jews and Muslims seriously preach and practice, "We are better than you," and "We can convert your women and marry them, but you cannot convert our women and marry them," that is self-segregation PRIOR to the inevitable discrimination that such self-segregation invites.
Years ago, ethnic religious groups such as Catholic Italians and Catholic Irish immigrated to America, faced extreme initial discrimination, and overcame that discrimination to meld seamlessly with the native population.
We should examine WHY some ethnic religious groups are better able to assimilate. It appears that ethnic religious groups that 1) zealously maintain their own separateness, 2) loudly proclaim their supremacy over the native population, and 3) purposely omit to intermarry with the native population, have a problem with assimilation which also manifests as a problem with discrimination.
It is truly a case of "Be careful what you wish for because you might get it!" If immigrants seek to be separate from (let alone supreme over!) natives, then natives will treat immigrants in the way that immigrants invite with their own religious words and behavior.
The clock is striking midnight on Western civilization due to the cumulative actions of all three Middle Eastern religions - plus atheism. It is well past time that Western Christians begin to question our most fundamental but perhaps flawed assumptions about other religions.
Is it acceptable to criticize Jews/Muslims? If not, why not?
Is every Jew/Muslim a victim? Can one or more Jews/Muslims be aggressors?
Do Jews/Muslims value Western civilization? How do Western Jews/Muslims affect the survival of Western civilization?
If Jews and Muslims fully intend to be 'the (supreme!) other' and then are treated as 'the other' by the Western Christian natives, do Jews and Muslims have a valid complaint?
All questions that need to be asked and answered - with an eye to reality - if Western Christian natives hope to survive and thrive in their own Western countries and to protect Western civilization from complete and utter ruin.
Egghead
@Egghead:
"The theology of the two major Middle Eastern religions of Judaism and Islam focuses on being and staying 'the other' with the stated goal of supremacy over Western Christian populations. (In the same vein, these two religions also obsess that all men are better than all women.)"
Where in the H___ do you get the idea that Jewish tradition teaching preaches "supremacy over Western Christian populations?" I was brought up with a Jewish background and I NEVER heard that.
And don't quote the Old Testament--that would be ridiculous in my opinion. It says in the Talmud that for every statement in the Old Testament there are 70 levels of meaning. The point is that not even orthodox Jews take the Torah (old testament) literally. The only people who seem to take it literally are Christian fundamentalists and you, unfortunately. At least I presume you get the above-stated wacky notion from the Old Testament.
"At the point where Jews and Muslims seriously preach and practice, "We are better than you," and "We can convert your women and marry them, but you cannot convert our women and marry them," that is self-segregation PRIOR to the inevitable discrimination that such self-segregation invites."
First of all, almost every religious group has stated that it is superior or it is the true religlion--comes with the territory I suppose.
Yes I detest the male superiority in the old tradition as do many Jews--so it is being reinterpreted and is changing. There are plenty of women rabbis today (find me Muslim woman cleric or a woman Catholic priest).
Then I don't understand where you get this strange notion of conversion vs. lack of conversion--or whatever. Traditionally, Jews do not prosletize--unlike both Muslims and Christians. There are no missionaries in the Jewish tradition (outside of the Bible and that's ancient history) that I'm aware of. Whereas both Christianity and Islam both seek to gain converts. Traditionally, it's been rather difficult to convert to Judaism--probably somewhat more difficult than becoming a Catholic.
Also, whenever Jews have been ALLOWED to integrate or assimilate into the host population, there is a lot of intermarriage, to the dismay of some of the rabbis who no doubt see their congregations dwindling due to the intermarriage. I've forgotten the figures but there is a very high percentage of such marriages in the U.S.
Nothing makes people "self-segregate" like persecution and anti-semitism.
I guess, by "self-segregation" you mean attending a synagogue rather than a Church. Good Grief!
Last Anon: Cultural assimilation is a highly nuanced issues - and nuance is lost when Jewish people shout, 'Anti-Semitism!" when asked and/or confronted about any Jewish contribution to civilizational conflict (i.e., mass murder).
Both Marx and Lenin had strong ties to Judaism which presumably influenced their thoughts at some level - and both men were seminal in the formation of Communism - a modern form of government that has mass murdered the most amount of humans in the shortest period of time.
Karl Marx
Vladimir Lenin Was Part Jewish, Say Declassified KGB Files
I have read that Marxism is really just the imposition of oligarchy - or supremacism of a small group over a larger group.
Oligarchy
"The American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise (AICE) was established in 1993 as a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship by emphasizing the fundamentals of the alliance — the values our nations share."
Regarding Jewish supremacy over non-Jews:
"The next three blessings in Ashkenazic liturgy are somewhat different from the rest of them: they thank God for not making one a gentile, a slave or a woman."
Apparently, some Jewish groups still say the prayer, and some have softened or removed the prayer. The existence of such a widely known and said 'prayer' indicates a Jewish tradition of teaching supremacy of Jews over non-Jews.
Birkhot Hashahar
Regarding initial self-segregation of Western Jews:
Ashkenazim
Egghead
Post a Comment