BrennerL21@aol.com
9-21-3
|
Exposing Intelligence Agency Human Rights Abuses, Government and Corporate Corruption Along with the Problems of Zionism. The Foundation of Freedom is Freedom of Thought and Freedom of Speech
|
A Jew can be a leftist, but leftism does not mesh easily with Judaism. Leftism does not take race and religion as valid ways of organizing and separating people. The essence of Judaism is separation — separation between Jews and non-Jews, between men and women, adults and children, the Sabbath and the other days of the week, etc.
The Hebrew word for holiness — “Kadosh” — literally means “separate.” Judaism conceives of Jews as a people who dwell apart.
If you are a normal Orthodox Jew, you put your Jewish identity first before all other identities. You see what is going on in the world in terms of whether or not it is good for the Jews. One of the major advantages in being an Orthodox Jew is that you know who you are. Your choices in life are simplified.
The stronger your in-group identity, be it as Jewish or Muslim, the less likely you are to be liberal (to live and let live and to be ok with diversity) and the more likely you are to have negative views of outsiders.
The more liberal they are, the less their tendency to be actively “Jewish.” The level of liberalism is high among those who raise non-Jewish children “or who are married to non-Jews.” Liberal Jews feel less responsible for other Jews. They have a somewhat lesser sense of belonging to the Jewish people. Only a third of the “very liberal” (34%) feel that “being Jewish is very important” – compared to 54% of “right of center” non-Orthodox Jews. The “very liberal” don’t belong to synagogues (18%), have less Jewish friends, and tend less than others to fast on Yom Kippur or light Shabbat candles. Their attachment to Israel is markedly lower than the attachment of less liberal Jews.
That is to say: all across the board – feelings, activities, traditions, and affiliations – the liberals show a lesser level of engagement. The correlation between liberalism and disengagement is “modest” when it comes to “feelings” (Feel responsible for Jews in need, Feel a sense of belonging to the Jewish people, Feel being Jewish is very important). It is “strong” when it comes to “religious engagement” (Being religious very important, Kosher home, Shabbat candles usually+, Attends services monthly). It is also “strong” when it comes to “Israel attachment” (Israel essential to being Jewish, Feel very attached to Israel). In other words: liberal Jews feel moderately passionate about being Jewish; but they do not appreciate religion and do not appreciate Israel, and they especially do not appreciate hawkish views on Israel…Why is it so difficult to seriously discusses these numbers and this reality? That’s simple: because often times liberal Jews tend to value their “liberalism” more than they value their “Jewishness” (this is me speaking, not Cohen. I am not sure he’d agree). If the numbers tell a story from which one learns that liberalism and Judaism cannot go hand in hand, the liberals will choose liberalism. So the obvious policy of Jewish leaders and institutions is to avoid this seeming contradiction – to hide it for as long as possible and thus not force the choice on a growing group of Jewish liberals…
These numbers have meaning. They have implications, and these implications could be of three possible types:
– Judaism and liberalism cannot go hand in hand, and we ought to understand that some Jewish Americans are lost to us, Jews.
– There is a need to make Jews slightly less liberal – at least when it comes to the kind of liberalism that seems to make it difficult for them to be actively Jewish.
– There is a need to make Jewish Americanism more adaptable to the priorities of liberal Americanism. In all likelihood, to succeed in an enterprise whose aim is to strengthen the active Jewishness of American Jewish liberals, it will have to be a combination of both points two and three (that is, if you do not accept point one). But the exact prescription will not be easy, as the numbers – while telling us a story – do not reveal its source. As Cohen framed it: “What about being liberal makes them ‘less Jewish?’”
In other words: as hard as it is to spell it out with such bluntness, as a general rule, liberal American Jews seem to be less Jewish.
We are already justified in the conviction that human life as we know it in history is a wretched makeshift, rooted in ignorance; and that it could be transcended by a state of existence based on the illumination of knowledge and comprehension, just as our modern control of physical nature based on science transcends the tentative fumblings of our ancestors, that were rooted in superstition and professional secrecy.So who was Julian Huxley? Besides being the brother of the famous novelist Aldous Huxley who wrote Brave New World, he was an evolutionary biologist and also a famous eugenicist. Eugenics was a movement of the early 20th century that tried to create a better human race by preventing the birth of those deemed "unfit." Eugenics literally means "good birth" and it seeks to "improve" the human gene pool. Eugenicists like Huxley assumed that the individual is nothing more than what is encoded in their genes. Huxley wrote the following about his fellow man:
The human species can, if it wishes, transcend itself —not just sporadically, an individual here in one way, an individual there in another way, but in its entirety, as humanity. We need a name for this new belief. Perhaps Transhumanism will serve: man remaining man, but transcending himself, by realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature.
“I believe in Transhumanism”: once there are enough people who can truly say that, the human species will be on the threshold of a new kind of existence, as different from ours as ours is from that of Pekin man. It will at last be consciously fulfilling its real destiny.
"No-one doubts the wisdom of managing the germ-plasm of agricultural stocks, so why not apply the same concept to human stocks?"The American Eugenics movement resulted in the forced sterilization of over 60,000 Americans in 33 states. And eugenics did not stop there. Adolf Hitler was a huge fan of eugenics and brought it to its natural conclusion in World War II where millions of the "genetically unfit" were experimented on and/or snuffed out in an effort to create a master race. Those considered unfit were everything from political dissidents, free-thinkers, homosexuals, criminals, weak, feeble-minded, insane, and disabled. Anyone who came against them was in danger. Doesn't that sound like this?
"The lowest strata are reproducing too fast. Therefore... they must not have too easy access to relief or hospital treatment lest the removal of the last check on natural selection should make it too easy for children to be produced or to survive; long unemployment should be a ground for sterilisation."
"...unless [civilised societies] invent and enforce adequate measures for regulating human reproduction, for controlling the quantity of population, and at least preventing the deterioration of quality of racial stock, they are doomed to decay..."
"We live in hubristic age, when politicians imagine themselves to be messiahs and when many in the sciences frankly discuss their dreams of creating a “post-human” civilization of genetically engineered supermen, ignorant of the fact that like minds have often come before them and have left no legacy but death, destruction, and despair."