Friday, March 17, 2023
From Ian:
Dave Chappelle and ‘the Jews’
Dave Chappelle and ‘the Jews’
The Stylebook ended up retracting the term “the French,” while maintaining the stance that such labels poorly reflect the diversity of such groups.Double standards on racism by the BBC
Humor aside, there is something worth contemplating in the internet’s response to the AP’s gaffe. After all, can’t we rightly say, “the French speak a romance language,” “the French developed Haute Couture” or even “the French enjoy escargots as a traditional delicacy”?
Perhaps this usage is vague and does not represent the diversity of perspectives within French society (some French people may not like escargots). But we all have a certain conception of French culture and life. Is it such a travesty to use a catch-all term for convenience? Such generalizations exist because, frankly, language is a practice in brevity, not accuracy. What is so wrong with trying to get a point across quickly?
This incident led me to reflect on a story from earlier in the news cycle. In Nov. 2022, Dave Chappelle delivered a monologue on Saturday Night Live that was rightly received with concern and criticism. Chappelle’s performance included his thoughts on the Kanye West antisemitism scandal.
Among other antisemitic statements, West had tweeted that he would go “Death Con 3 on the Jews.” During his routine, Chappelle whispered, “There are two words in the English language that you should never say together in sequence: ‘The’ and ‘Jews.’” Chappelle then engaged in a wide variety of antisemitic tropes, mainly centering around the idea that “the Jews” control Hollywood.
“The Jews.” “The French.” Why are these two phrases different? Why do the French revel in being called French and Jews react to Chappelle’s “the Jews” with concern and anger?
The answer is simple: Chappelle did not use “the Jews” as a descriptor. He didn’t use it simply to point out an issue with Hollywood. He used the term as a storyteller. He tapped into familiar themes and ideas to build his narrative. He tapped into the poison that has lured entire societies into genocide and destruction. He used “the Jews” in the same way Nazi-era German signs warned “No Jews or dogs allowed.” He knew what the backlash to his statements would be; in fact, he planned on it. He knew what such statements have led to in the past, but he didn’t care.
One wonders what would have happened if the Stylebook tweet had said “the Jews” instead of “the French.” Would there have been similar viral mockery of the Stylebook? Would Jews have been outraged? Or would the tweet have gotten no reaction at all?
To recap: a few teachers in one Israeli school made disparaging and racist comments about Israeli students of Ethiopian descent. The teachers were fired, the school is launching an investigation and the country’s education minister offered an official apology – in other words, exactly what you’d hope would occur in a normal democratic country following such a racist incident.Ben Cohen: ‘Auf Wiedersehen,’ Roger Waters?
Let’s pivot now to another story, which Berg and his colleagues will – if the past is any judge – almost certainly ignore: Revelations that teachers and schools at UNRWA, the UN agency that runs education and social services for Palestinians, regularly call to murder Jews, and create teaching materials that glorify terrorism, encourage martyrdom and incite antisemitism.
This was revealed a new report by UN Watch and IMPACT-se.
The report identifies 133 UNRWA educators and staff who promoted hate and violence on social media, and another 82 UNRWA teachers and staff affiliated with over 30 UNRWA schools involved in drafting, supervising, approving, printing, and distributing racist and extremist content to students.
To cite just one of many examples: UNRWA’s Al-Maghazi Middle School for Boys B in Gaza used an UNRWA-created Arabic reading comprehension exercise for 9th graders which celebrated a Palestinian firebombing attack on a Jewish bus as a “barbecue party.” At the same school, 5th-graders learned that martyrdom and jihad are “the most important meanings of life”
The press release by UN Watch notes that UNRWA’s annual budget includes £14 million from the UK.
Moreover, unlike in Israel, we can be sure there will be no negative repercussions within Palestinian society for the promotion of such extremism within their school system.
It should be stressed that the problem with antisemitism at UNRWA is the opposite of a one-off.
Waters will doubtlessly be spouting plenty of nonsense between numbers during his tour, and he will likely make use of the offensive symbols that have appeared on previous tours, such as an inflatable flying pig embossed with a Star of David. This sort of imagery sails close to the edge in most European countries. It remains especially so in Germany, the land of the Holocaust, where in the postwar era, Nazi symbols, Holocaust denial, Holocaust mockery and demands for Israel’s elimination as a sovereign state can run afoul of the law.
Indeed, those politicians advocating for Waters’ dates in Germany to be canceled as a protest against his antisemitism and his affinity for Putin have repeatedly referred to the country’s democratic constitution in making their case, as well as the corresponding moral values arising from Germany’s rebirth as a liberal democratic polity. Last month, the municipal council in Frankfurt announced the cancelation of Waters’ May 28 concert at the city’s Festhalle venue, citing his status as one of the world’s “best-known antisemites” as the reason. Similar moves are afoot in Munich, Cologne, Hamburg and Berlin, where Waters is also scheduled to appear.
The situation in the latter four cities is complicated by the fact that Waters will appear at commercially run arenas, whereas the venue in Frankfurt is owned by the city. Countering the concern that Waters will use stages in Germany to promote a hatred of Israel that looks and sounds a lot like a hatred of Jews is the fear that the notoriously litigious singer will sue for breach of contract. Indeed, last week, the musician’s management company announced just that, disclosing that the singer had been in touch with lawyers for the purpose of defending his “freedom of speech.”
Given that there are two months to go before the German dates are intended to take place, it remains distinctly possible that Waters will lose one or more of the four cities still hosting him. The challenge for local politicians is whether they can convert their frequently expressed horror of resurgent antisemitism into concrete action. In this regard, Germany’s recent record is very poor; in the last year alone, the Documenta contemporary art festival exhibited a series of viscerally antisemitic artworks, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas accused Israel of waging “50 holocausts” against the Palestinians while sharing a podium with Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and there was a near 40% increase in the number of violent antisemitic incidents—all while its politicians wrung their hands and did very little to curb the phenomenon.
An outright ban on Waters would send the message that Germany is serious about tackling antisemitism beyond mere rhetoric. Yet that is by no means a perfect solution because it does not engage the minds of the legions of fans who are sufficiently unconcerned by Waters’s antics to spend a three-figure sum on a ticket for one of his gigs.
Alongside the argument for a ban on Waters, there must be an even more compelling argument urging his admirers not to indulge his antisemitism and his penchant for dictatorships by buying concert tickets and merchandise. As it stands, however, prospective concert-goers in Berlin are not being challenged to consider the irony of seeing an antisemite like Waters play at an arena named for Mercedes-Benz, which deployed slave labor during the days when the automobile manufacturer was patronized by the Nazi regime.
If the gigs do go ahead, Jewish and anti-racist groups in Germany have pledged massive demonstrations outside the stadiums. These will provide an opportunity to explain why Waters is such a toxic proposition to the masses in attendance. The degree to which they pay heed to this message will give us valuable insight into whether ordinary Germans take antisemitism as seriously as their politicians seem to do.
