March 5, 2014
Netanyahu's inaction to Obama's provocations sends powerful message
Kerry, after apparent criticism by Schumer, seeks to allay skepticism on diplomacy
How to ruin a perfectly good kid in 10 simple steps
2014 Oscars played it safe, but was faith lost in the shuffle?
Apple joins Hobby Lobby in touting corporate values beyond profit
March 3, 2014
Alina Dain Sharon: In the Hebrew calendar, a leap year has extra month, not day
Latest Obama appointment to prove Prez set on emasculating so-called Israel Lobby
Jewish World Review
Sept. 7, 2006
/ 14 Elul, 5766
Feeding the crocodile
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who likes historical
analogies, compares the appeasers of Germany in the run-up to World War II
to his critics who stubbornly refuse to see in full the terrorists who want
to destroy the civilized way of life, and us along with it.
The 1930s were "a time when a certain cynicism and moral
confusion set in among the Western democracies." Men and women who should
have known better refused to see what was writ large and plain before their
eyes, and what Winston Churchill meant when he said that accommodating
Hitler was "a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last."
The analogy to modern appeasement is not exact, but the faint-hearted who
demand a quick withdrawal from Iraq are trying to appease a hungry
crocodile. The French, as the Germans of the Weimar Republic had before
them, wore blinkers looking at the crocodile. Those most blinded to the evil
threat of Hitler were exactly those with the most to lose.
Many intellectuals and Democratic politicians of our own time
resemble the Germans so soothed by rhetoric and intoxicated by the
creativity of the 1920s and early 1930s that they could not see how all they
held dear could be destroyed by Hitler. The Germans were afflicted with a
terminal naivete, confronting the emerging fascists in their country, just
as many Americans are confronting the "new fascism."
When Walter Rathenau, the Jewish foreign minister for the Weimar
Republic, was assassinated in 1922 by right-wing thugs, an outpouring of
grief enveloped one of the largest funerals in German memory. Thousands of
fascists at that very moment raised their beer mugs in celebration of his
death. Those in the liberal press of Weimar who called for stern measures
against the fascists conspiring against the republic were ignored or
discounted as unreasoning hysterics. The government did nothing to curb the
anti-republican forces in the judiciary, the police or the state
bureaucracies; all would contribute to the rise of Nazism.
When Hitler famously marched into Munich in 1923 with
like-minded thugs calling for the dissolution of the "criminal government"
of Germany, the minimum sentence for high treason was five years, the
maximum, life. A sympathetic judge saw that Hitler served less than a year.
When "Mein Kampf" was published in 1925, it was largely ignored, and the few
who publicly noted his plans for the Jews and the republic were largely
ignored as well. Not even the German Communists, who despised the fascists,
deigned to unite against him, calculating that he was a mere minor threat.
They could wait him out.
The Bush administration now concedes errors in Iraq, foremost
among them failure to understand the reluctance of so many Iraqis to support
a democratic government. While historical parallels are always imperfect,
it's fair to observe that the Germans who supported Weimar also failed to
understand how fragile their republican government could be. The Western
democracies were slow to perceive that, too.
Just as anti-Semitism was harnessed to bring down Weimar, hatred
of the Jews keeps trouble on the boil today in the Middle East.
Anti-Semitism is the refuge of cowards who are eager to exploit the appetite
for hatred of the Jews. Anti-Semitism in the '20s and '30s was respectable
in Germany, just as it is fashionable today among certain intellectuals and
creative artists, including some Jews. Describing the Israelis as the "new
Nazis" invites no outrage among certain bright young (and old) things who
decry bigotry in others.
Martin Heidegger, the German philosopher of the 1930s,
complained about the "Judaization" of the German university. He defended
himself, saying that he was no more anti-Semitic than many of his Jewish
colleagues. It was a glib observation not entirely wrong, but few took on
Heidegger for his outspoken anti-Semitism.
Noam Chomsky is widely respected today for his linguistic
theories, but he is willing to join forces with those who deny the
Holocaust. He wrote the foreword to the standard French-language textbook of
Holocaust denial. He praises "Jewish History, Jewish Religion," a book by
Israel Shalak, one of the most outspoken Jewish anti-Semites. Gore Vidal,
who insists he's not an anti-Semite, wrote the foreword for that one.
"The appearance of political anti-Semitism in the Arab and
Muslim world is of relatively recent date," writes Walter Laqueur in "The
Changing Face of Anti-Semitism." He observes how the Muslims who preach
hatred of the Jews have found friends in Europe: "Islamist anti-Semites have
collaborated with European anti-Semites of the left and with the neo-fascist
anti-Semites in convening various conferences, protest meetings,
demonstrations and declarations."
Those who assisted the Nazi rise to power held diverse views and
were motivated by different influences, both inside and outside Germany, and
the rest of the world recognized the peril of Nazism only slowly and
reluctantly. Islamo-fascism poses a similar danger for us now.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Comment on JWR contributor Suzanne Fields' column by clicking here.
Suzanne Fields Archives
© 2006, Creators Syndicate, Suzanne Fields