Just read the story of Esther. Now there is the standard interpretation that Esther took the role of Queen so that she could diffuse a Persian genocide of Jews. When Esther's uncle Mordecai refuses to bow to the King, the King's adviser Haman persuades the King that the Jews are a problem because they worship another King to Xerxes. The King is persuaded to kill them all. But Xerxes' wife is a Jew and when the King finds out that Haman has effectively persuaded him to kill his wife, the King kills Haman instead. Declaring to the King that she is a Jew was a brave thing for Esther to do which could have gone wrong and she could have been killed in the genocide as well. And the fact that the Jews were saved by Esther being in a position to help is seen as the work of God.
Now this is the reasonable Jewish side of the story. But what is the Persian side of the story? Well the law of that land was that it was ruled by Xerxes who had absolute power. Anyone not respecting the Law of Xerxes was guilty of treason exactly as is still true today. The Persian Jews were not Patriots and quite rightly those who refuse to obey the law face death. So it was not a "genocide" from the Persian perspective, just a mass case of legal disobedience and it is just a side feature that all those arrested and killed would have been Jews.
This is a very classic example of what the Jews don't understand. If you annoy people as an individual you will be hated as an individual. And if you form a club of people who annoy people that club will be hated. Now from the Jewish perspective it looks like prejudice against the club of Jews. But what Jews don't understand is that by joining together into a club that opposes other people they will be hated by other people together! That is not racism or prejudice it is quite coincidental that they are all Jews!
Consider a fire. If someone throws themselves in the fire they will die and everyone will see it as an individual tragedy. But if a club of people form called the "fire jumpers" and they all jump in a fire and die that is not genocide against the "fire jumpers." That is just individual people dying, and its a coincidence that they are all fire jumpers!
In the story of Esther the Jews were being killed not for being Jews but for not respecting the Law. It just so happens that many of the people not respecting the law were Jews. Jews seem to have some mental block or pathology that stops them seeing things from a Gentile perspective.
This is a type of Affirming the Consequent logical error. Look Jews are being killed! Therefore there must be a genocide. But I think you will find that anyone who didn't respect the Law of Xerxes was also put to death. This can be easy illustrated in a Venn Diagram of all the people put to death in the Persian Empire.
From this Venn Diagram it can be easily seen that if you pick someone being killed by Xerxes it is not necessarily because they are Jewish. It is because they disobey the Law, are non Patriotic and have committed treason! There was no genocide! Esther did not stop a genocide. How then is God involved?
This problem the Jews have is that they are Hermetically sealed against the outside world, they cannot see themselves from the perspective of a Gentile. Yet they still believe in Gentiles - in there is an SRH contradiction***. Someone might accuse me of Racism now for making broad statements about the Jews as a whole and not treating "them" as individuals but this comes from a fault in Jewish thinking itself!
J = ∀x | x is a Jew
"Jews" love to define a set of people (J) who are Jewish. There is this very funny
website based upon exactly this.
Now is there a property true for all and only Jews?
∀x | x is a Jew ↔ P(x)
So P(x) might be long nose, or a spend thrift, or anything. But the question is, is the Anti-Racist denying there is any P().
If the Anti-Racist denies P() then there is no way to know who is a Jew or who is not a Jew! In which case there is no such thing as a Jew!
∀P∃x | x is a Jew & ¬P(x)
For all properties there exists a Jew to whom the property is false.
Now in fact this is false. There are some very well known P(). There is the inductive definition of a Jew for example.
∀x | x is a Jew ↔ Mother of x is a Jew.
Who is J0, the first Jew. That is Eve I believe. So if you can trace your female line to Eve then you are a Jew by definition. The Anti-Racist is wrong!
But there is another definition:
∀x | x is a Jew ↔ x only accepts God as King.
So there you have it. You can refer to Jews as a set J without Racism and you can define properties to that set that are true for all members. And those properties are things that Jews themselves would uphold. This is one of the most extraordinary thing about Jews: they are racists! The whole existence of Jews depends upon having some algorithm that decides whether someone is a Jew or Not. THAT IS RACISM because it makes a statement broadly about a racial group of people, and prejudices against people not in that group.
And it is from that which the Persians quite reasonably decide to round up Jews and kill them.
Now Esther was able to bend the will of the King, so in fact she corrupted the King. From a Jewish perspective she bought the Jews time, but she did it by corrupting the King. And it is this way that Jews corrupt countries which has been the biggest property that unifies them.
What just King makes an exception for a racial group? That is racism against his own subjects! Xerxes killed all those who did not obey the Law. Why would he spare Jews?
Now Xerxes seems like a harsh ruler. But nothing really has changed. If you break the law you are in trouble. All that has changed is that the Law is no longer the will of one man, but has been abstracted to a general principle that applies to all. Most notably this entered writing on the fields of Runnymead in Surrey in England in the
Magna Carta. But breaking the Law has never been allowed, not in Xerxes time, not today. Yet the Jews openly break the Law of countries by actually respecting their own law above the law of that country! Jews actually openly justify illegality and law breaking. For this reason it makes sense to imprison if not kill all Jews.
Now from the Jewish perspective they will say that all worldly Laws are inferior to the Law of Moses. But that is only true for Jews. And as seen above not everyone is a Jew. In a country ruled by a particular Law, the Law of Moses probably does not apply. And that makes all Jews criminals.
There are only a few ways out of this that I can see:
(1) The Law of Moses essentially overlaps the local laws. So Jews can respect the Torah and not infringe the local law. But they need to understand that where the Torah contradicts the local law they will go to prison or be killed. This is not racism, or intolerance it is just the nature of Law.
(2) All Jews move to a country which is run by The Law of Moses. Israel has been made, ostensibly to protect Jews from Holocaust. But actually Jewish Holocaust in large part is because Jews don't accept local laws and customs. So its actually a way to let Jews be governed by their own Laws and customs without contradicting the nation in which they live. It's ironic that the Jews lost their land by refusing to pay taxes to various Empire and so absurdly enraging those empires that they got invaded and expelled. Jews really need to look at their own history with honesty and stop blaming everyone else.
(3) We do away with countries and have a Global Law of Moses. That becomes a Jewish racial dictatorship and Apartheid like the Nazis and South Africans with Jews divided from Gentiles. Is this what the Jews want?
(4) Multiculturalism. Lots of things are irrelevant to the Law so we'll call those culture and just enforce the important stuff. So Muslims can wear the Burqa and the country will ignore this cos its just clothing. But nothing is so simple because a Liberal Country which tolerates a lot, may seek to enforce Tolerance itself as a non-liberal principle. So ironically Liberalism becomes a rod with which to beat people. Muslims get beaten by the rod of Liberalism for not allowing their women to dress in Western clothes. And quickly it becomes a legal matter. Another example might be holiday times. National holidays are enshrined in Law. But those holidays may not agree with your own Law. Its not so simple.
(5) Extreme liberalism. The only way to do this is complete libertine. Everyone can do whatever they want and we do away with the idea of Law all together. Then no one can argue about what is correct. But actually this doesn't work cos Jews and many other people are defined by their Law. Reject Law and you will be accused of intolerance and racism by the very people who also hate other people's Laws. The argument for all these groups is not Law itself just which law.
(6) There is another: the Kierkegaard version of Abraham. For K there are 3 ways to exist. (I) The Ethic, that is the rule of public Law (Antigone obeying King Oedipus and not burying her brother Polyneices - that is 30 years after Mordecai not obeying Xerxes) (II) The aesthetic, following our heart and family love (Antigone burying Polyneices) and (III) what K calls the religious, which is the divine madness. (I) gains its justification from worldly Universal authority, (II) from individual choice but (III) is individual but with the authority of the world. When Mordecai does not bow to Xerxes he is not just being wilfully rebellious, he is behaving as an individual but with Universal authority. However regardless this analysis Xerxes has no choice but to kill Mordecai for breaking the laws of the land (and Mordecai knows this!).
In essence the problem here is Law itself. Law by definition must apply to all. This is what was decided at Runnymead. But its a two edged weapon. Law is great when its a law you respect, and not so great when you disagree. It means our rules must obey the same rules as us, but it also means we cannot escape the Law. Jews will always have a problem wherever they go because they think they are above everyone's law but their own and this is the essence of all the problems they have faced through history. They follow the principle of Law but also want exemption when its not a Law they like. That is an absurd contradiction, and look at the suffering it has caused!
But its not just Jews. This applies to anyone who respects a higher authority than the Law of their country. I for instance follow Pacifism. I believe there is never a reason to kill. That means if England ever goes to war and then very probably I will end up in prison for disobeying the government's order to fight. I will be accused of treason, treachery, lack of Patriotism and perhaps I will be killed in prison by people who hate me. But I'm not as stupid as a Jew to think this is prejudice against Pacifists! There is no genocide of Pacifists in times of War, there is just a legal system enforcing the Law which I happen to disagree with. What is particularly troublesome about Jews however is they seem incapable of understanding their own decision to cause trouble in this world. Christians did not complain when they were persecuted by the Romans. They knew perfectly well they were challenging the Law of Rome and the martyrs knew exactly they had the choice to obey the worldly leader or die for the God. Yet with Jews it seems its everyone else's fault and not their own. Jews know exactly what they are doing and they know exactly why it is happening. Talk of Genocides is just avoiding the truth, and diverting the blame. Jews have always had a simple choice: die for God or convert. And its a choice they have to take and live with the consequences just like everyone else.
So its a difficult one. But unless we have option 5 above and everyone is just allowed to do whatever the want then we have a problem. Something Jews/Muslims/Christians and all cultural groups with a Law of their own need to think about though: if what stops you from obeying the Law of your country is your own Law you at least accept Law. And what is the punishment for breaking the Law? Ultimately for everyone it is death. We all agree on this. So the question is simply who do you want to be killed by. Religious devotes famously choose to killed by their fellow man rather than by God. But many chose to keep peace with their fellow man and not be killed. Perhaps their souls will perish for their worldly obedience but these are the real questions behind Jewish identity, genocide and the story of Esther. Mordecai could have simply bowed to Xerxes and there never would have been any problem! Sounds stupidly simply doesn't it!
====
*** Jews are Hermetically sealed against the outside world. This essentially is the same as Solipsism or Self-Defining. Its what SRH set out to show was impossible.
In the case of Jewish belief they believe in God who is both the creator of the World and the creator of the Jews, who also places the Jews as central to creation. This encourages Solipsism cos it looks like all you need is to be a Jew. As a Jew you have direct link to the Creator. By being linked to the Creator you need nothing else in order to exist.
But what then is a Gentile? A Gentile is by definition not a Jew. It's also not exactly clear whether God made the Gentiles. My knowledge of the Old Testament is limited to that. If Adam and Eve were the first people then everyone is descended from Eve. So what I said above is not true and being Jewish more than being descended from Eve. It also means Eve was not a Jew else everyone is a Jew. I hear that descendance from Abraham makes you a Jew but then where does the Jewish Matriarchal line start. Sure there are answers but the point here is Gentiles are not defined in themselves they are defined in reference to Jews. Now is this really possible. If Gentiles are really defined just in terms of Jews...
OK lets skip the Jewish bit and make this the general issue. [Moved to new blog]
No comments:
Post a Comment