11 septembre aaron klein abbas abdallah abdallah II accords d'oslo affaires Ă©trangĂ¨res afghanistan afrique afrique du sud ahmadinejad AKP al qaida al-arabiya al-fayed al-qaida algĂ©rie aliyah allemagne america anavad angela merkel ankara ansar dine antisĂ©mitisme antisemitism apartheid aqmi arabe arabes arabes israĂ©liens arabie saoudite arabs arafat armĂ©e armĂ©niens ashkenazy assad assyriens atatĂĽrk auschwitz autoritĂ© palestinienne azawad Ă©conomie Ă©glise Ă©gypte Ă©lections Ă©tat Ă©tats-unis Ă©vangĂ©liques bachman baker bangladesh bankruptcy banlieues barack obama barak bayrou begin beilin belgique benoĂ®t xvi berbĂ¨res bernheim bible biden bill clinton blancs blood libel brĂ©sil brzezinski burke bush cahuzac canada carter Castro cfr chaldĂ©ens Chavez cheney chiites chine chirac chrĂ©tiens christianisme chypre circumcision cisjordanie claude guĂ©ant clermont-tonnerre clinton cnn colin powell columbia commentary communautĂ© confrĂ©ries congrĂ¨s conseil de sĂ©curitĂ© conservative conservatives consistoire constitution contestation coptes corĂ©e du nord crif crise crise sociale cuba cuisine culture daniel pearl dĂ©mocrates dĂ©mocratie dĂ©mographie de gaulle demographics demography dhimmis dhimmitude dieudonnĂ© dinard dollar droite droits de l'homme eisenhower election elections emanuel empire ottoman ena enderlin enfants erbakan erdogan espagne etat etats-unis ethnic ethnie EU eurabia euro europe european union exode expulsion fabius far left far right fatah fayĂ§al ferdinand ferhat fethullah gĂĽlen fifth republic fillon flandre flotille fmi food foreign policy france franco frĂ¨res musulmans frontiĂ¨re internationale gates gauche gaza gĂ©nocide gĂ©opolitique geopolitics george soros george washington germany gingrich giscard d'estaing golden age goldstone grĂ¨ce grecs-catholiques grecs-orthodoxes guĂ©ant guĂ©rilla guerre gurfinkiel hallal halutz hamas herzl hezbollah hillary clinton histoire history hitler hollande holocaust holocauste huntsman hurvah ibn saoud identitĂ© nationale iforas immigration implantations inĂ¶nĂĽ inde internet interview irak iran isabelle islam islamism islamisme islamistes islamists israĂ«l israel j call j street jabotinsky jĂ©rusalem jean paul II jerusalem jews jihad jihadists john mccain johnson jordanie judaĂŻsme juifs juppĂ© kabylie kadhafi kadima kassam kemal kennedy kerry kgb khamenei khomeini kippour kissinger knesset kosher kosovo l'express lapid le monde le pen le point lebanon liban libĂ©raux libertĂ© libye liebermann likoud livni livres louis xvi maccain magoudi mahmoud abbas mali mao marine le pen maroc maronites massortis mavi marmara mĂ©dias mĂ©lanchon mccain media medias mein kampf melkites merah meretz merkel mexique middle east missiles mitterrand mnla mohamed merah monarchie monde arabe monod montauban montesquieu morocco morsi moscovici moubarak murder muslims musulmans napolĂ©on naqba nasser national front nations unies nato neo-french netanyahu nethanyahu new york review of books new york times nicolas sarkozy nixon noĂ«l nobel noirs norvĂ¨ge nuclĂ©aire obama occident olmert olp onfray onu orient orthodoxes oslo otan ottomans pacifisme pakistan palestine palestiniens palin pape paris parlement europĂ©en pĂ©trole peres petraeus pipes pogrom politique pologne poutine prĂ©sidentielles presidential election primaires printemps arabe proche-orient protestantisme PS pundak quai d'orsay quartiers rabin rahm emanuel raid rajoy rasmussen rĂ©formĂ©s rĂ©publicains rĂ©volution reagan religieux religion restaurants revolution riots rogers romney ron paul roosevelt royal royaume-uni russia russie rwanda sadate sahara salafistes salem al-fayed sandler santorum sarkozy savir sĂ©golĂ¨ne royal sĂ©nat scandale SDN shafik shalit sharon shas shoah sionisme socialist socialists sociĂ©tĂ© society sondages ss staline state nobility statism stratĂ©gie strauss-kahn sunnites syria syrie tahrir terror terrorisme thatcher time torah totalitarisme toulouse tourisme travaillistes trilatĂ©rale truman tsahal tunisie turkey turquie tv ue uk UMP un union europĂ©enne union pour la mĂ©diterranĂ©e unrwa URSS usa valeurs judĂ©o-chrĂ©tiennes valls vĂ©drine ve rĂ©publique versailles vichy vietnam violence washington post wright yemen zapatero
Sunday, August 12 2012
French Jews/ No Future
The Toulouse massacre did not bring French anti-Semitism to a halt. It actually increased.
“Any time young people approach me in order to get married, I ask them various questions about their future. Eighty percent of them say they do not envision any future in France.” This is what one rabbi in Paris told me last week. I heard similar statements from other French rabbis and lay Jewish leaders: “We have a feeling the words are on the wall now,” one leader in the Lyons area confided to me. “It is not just our situation in this country deteriorating; it is also that the process is much quicker than expected.”
Even the chief rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, may be sharing that view now. A philosopher (holding a prestigious French agrégation degree in philosophy), a graduate of the French Rabbinical School in Paris, and a former student at some of the most orthodox yeshivoth (Talmudic academies) in Jerusalem, Bernheim was until recently very eager to reconcile traditional Judaism with Europe’s “open society.” He has just devoted a book to France as a nation and how Jews can contribute to France’s public debates (N’oublions Pas De Penser La France), and in 2008, the year he was elected chief rabbi, he coauthored a book on Judeo-Christian dialogue (Le Rabbin et le Cardinal) with Cardinal Philippe Barbarin.
Despite all that, Bernheim suddenly warned Jewish leaders a few weeks ago about a growing “rejection” of Jews and Judaism in France, something he linked to the global passing of “Judeo-Christian values” in French society as a whole.
The immediate reason for Jewish pessimism in France and for Bernheim’s change of heart may be the Toulouse massacrelast March: the murder in cold blood of three Jewish children and a Jewish teacher by Mohamed Merah, a Muslim terrorist, on their school’s premises. This crime, instead of instilling more compassion and understanding towards the Jewish community, has actually generated more anti-Jewish violence and hate talk, as if Merah was not seen as a vile thug but rather as a model by parts of the population.
There were no less than six cases of aggravated assault on Jewish youths or rabbis in France from March 26 to July 5, including one case in Toulouse again. According to the Representative Council of French Jewish Organizations (CRIF), anti-Semitic incidents of all sorts have increased by 53% compared to the same period last year.
President François Hollande and Minister of the the Interior Manuel Valls must be credited for taking the present anti-Semitic crisis seriously, a noted departure from the ambivalent attitude of the last socialist administration of Prime Minister Lionel Jospin ten years ago. On July 22 — on the seventieth anniversary of the “grande raffle” (“great round-up”) of Jews by the Vichy government police in 1942 — Hollande drew a parallel between the Toulouse massacre and the deportation and mass murder of Jewish children during the Holocaust. As for Valls, he not only repeatedly acknowledged that “there was an upsurge of anti-Semitism in France,” but on July 8 went so far as to stigmatize the “most stupid, most dangerous new anti-Semitism” brooding among “young and not-so-young people” in the “neighborhoods” (a code word for Muslim enclaves). Quite a bold statement, since the Socialist party and the Left at large primarily derive their present electoral edge in France from the Muslim vote. Valls and his staff may also have inspired several no-nonsense reports on anti-Semitism that were recently published in the liberal, pro-socialist press.
The connection between Muslim immigration — or Muslim-influenced Third World immigration — and the rise of a new anti-Semitism is a fact all over Europe. Muslims come from countries (or are culturally attuned to countries) where unreconstructed, Nazi-style Jew-bashing dominates. They are impervious to the ethical debate about the Holocaust and the rejection of anti-Jewish stereotypes that were gradually incorporated into the European political discourse and consciousness in the second half of the 20th century (to the point that lessons on the Holocaust are frequently dropped from the curriculum at schools with a plurality or a majority of Muslim pupils), and are more likely than non-Muslims to engage in assaults, attacks, or harassment practices directed at Jews. Moreover, Muslim anti-Semitism reactivates in many places a dormant, but by no means extinct, non-Muslim European anti-Semitism. Once Muslims are unopposed, or at least unprosecuted, when they challenge the historical veracity of the Holocaust or when they refer to the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as an authentic document, a growing number of non-Muslims feel free to do the same.
Muslim immigration is nurturing European anti-Semitism in more surprising ways as well. One unintended and ironic consequence of European Islam’s demographic growth is that Jews are frequently amalgamated with Muslims. Many people use a widespread concern about a growing influence of Islam in Europe as a way to hurt Jews as well, or to hit them first.
Clearly, there are outward similarities between Judaism and Islam. Both religions originated in the Near East, and are — as of 2012 — related to Near or Middle East countries. Both use Semitic languages. Both insist on rituals, particularly in terms of gender roles, family life, or food, that do not fit with the current mainstream European way of life.
However, differences between Judaism and Islam may outweigh similarities. As far as Near Eastern or Middle Eastern countries are concerned, Muslims turn to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the strongholds of anti-Western hatred, while Jews turn to Israel, the super-Western “start-up nation.” In terms of ritual, kosher slaughtering — a quasi-surgical operation — is as remote from halal slaughtering as from secular slaughtering. Jewish circumcision is performed on newborn babies and is much closer to secular prophylactic circumcision (as it is largely practiced in the United States) than to Islamic circumcision, which is performed on boys in their preteens or early teens. And when it comes to relations between politics and religion, there is simply a chasm between the two religions. Judaism (including Orthodox Judaism) is not interested in mass conversion; does not seek to wrest Europe or any historically Christian part of the world from Christianity; recognizes the supremacy of state law over religious law in non-ritual matters; and sees Western democracy — a polity based on the rule of law — as the most legitimate political system.
But Europeans are not culturally equipped to understand such nuances or to keep them in mind (far less than the Americans, who are more religious-minded, more conversant in Biblical matters, and more familiar with the Jewish way of life). Jules Renard, an early 20th century French writer, wrote about his cat: “I keep telling him to hunt mice and let the canaries alone. Very subtle guidelines, I must admit. Even intelligent cats can get wrong on this issue.” And decide that eating canaries is easier and more satisfying than hunting mice. Regarding Judaism and Islam, most Europeans are like Renard’s cat. And what usually originates as a reaction against difficulties linked to radical brands of Islam quickly evolves into a primarily anti-Jewish business.
Earlier this year in France, during the last months of the conservative Sarkozy administration, a debate about the rapidly growing halal meat industry led to attacks against the kosher meat industry as well, complete with uncomely remarks about “old-fashioned rituals” by then-Prime Minister François Fillon. While Fillon subsequently “clarified” his views, the Sarkozy administration upheld its support for some kind of “tagging” of “ritually slaughtered meat,” a European Union-promoted practice that would prompt commercial boycott of such food and thus make it financially unaffordable for most prospective buyers. Since kosher meat regulations are much stricter than halal meat regulations, religious Jews would be more hurt at the end of the day than religious Muslims. The reason why French conservatives were so fond of tagging is that a 2009 poll shows a 72% rejection of “ritual slaughtering” writ large. And Marine Le Pen, the far-right presidential candidate, dwelled on that issue for a while.
In Germany, a rare case of malpractice by a German Muslim doctor in a Muslim circumcision led a court in Cologne to ban circumcision on children all over Germany on June 19, on the quite extravagant grounds that only legal adults may decide on issues irreversibly affecting their body, except for purely medical reasons. Which is tantamount, in the considered issue, to denying parents the right to pass their religion to their children.
Conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel immediately filled a bill to make religious circumcision legal in Germany, and it was passed on July 19 by the Bundestag (somehow, German conservatives are nowadays more genuinely conservative than, say, their French counterparts). But according to a YouGov poll for the DPA news agency released at about the same moment, 45% of Germans support the ban, while only 42% oppose it.
In an even more ominous instance, Judaism has been singled out in a protracted intellectual debate in France since early June, as the fountainhead, past and present, of totalitarianism and political violence and thus as a more dangerous religion than radical Islam.
The charge was made in Le Point, an important right-of-center newsmagazine, by Michel Onfray, a commercially successful dabbling philosopher and a long-time supporter of the radical Left, who himself reviewed and approvingly quoted Who Is God? (Qui est Dieu), an essay by another controversial author, the former diplomat Jean Soler.
In the 1970s Soler, who holds an agrégation degree in Greek and Latin classical studies but was never academically trained in anthropology, Semitics, or Near Eastern history, applied a structuralist approach to the study of Jewish rituals and won some polite applause from French, Israeli, and American scholars. Later on, when structuralism fell out of fashion, he sort of remixed his early work with neo-Marcionite currents in 19th century and early 20th century German and French Biblical criticism which claimed there was no spirituality at all, and indeed no real monotheism, in the Old Testament, a narrowly “tribalist” book. Or that everything spiritual in the Old Testament was a transplant from other cultures, either Pharaonic Egypt or Indo-European Iran.
Very few people in France realize what Soler’s later writing is really about, and that his approach or sources do not fit present academic standards. Even fewer people are aware that the neo-Marcionite hypothesis to which Soler has switched and which Onfray supports exerted a major influence on Nazi anti-Semitism (including the so-called “German Christian” movement) and remained after 1945 a major polemical tool in neo-Nazi or post-Nazi circles. So much so that the media had no qualms engaging for weeks in multifaceted debates and discussions about the Soler/Onfray contentions and thus, for all practical matters, promoted them.
The second half of the 20th century was a golden age for French Jews, both in terms of numbers (from 250,000 souls in 1945 to 700,000 in 1970 due to population transfers and natural growth) and in terms of religious and cultural revival. There was only one shadow: the French government’s anti-Israel switch engineered by Charles de Gaulle in 1966, in part as a consequence of a more global anti-American switch. The 21st century may however be a much darker age. After a first wave of anti-Jewish violence in the early 2000s, some Jews left for Israel or North America. Emigration never really ceased since then, and may soon reach much more important proportions.
Michel Gurfinkiel is the Founder and President of the Jean-Jacques Rousseau Institute, a conservative think-thank in France, and a Shillman/Ginsburg Fellow at Middle East Forum.
© Michel Gurfinkiel & PJMedia, 2012
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Bravo pour le fait que vous tirez la sonnette d'alarme clairement. Mais faut-il abandonner la partie sans bataille? Ne faut-il pas combattre? Le problĂ¨me est : comment combattre lâ€™Islamisme ? Prenons lâ€™exemple du passĂ© ChrĂ©tien. Comment la haine ChrĂ©tienne avait-elle disparu extĂ©rieurement tout au moins aprĂ¨s la guerre 1939/1945? Est-ce l'horreur de la Shoah? Non! 10 fois plus de personnes avaient payĂ© de leur vie la folie expansionniste d'Hitler. Alors qui ou quoi a provoquĂ© la rĂ©volution? Dans le passĂ©, en 1948 Jules Isaac a fait paraĂ®tre son livre JĂ©sus et IsraĂ«l, analyse du Nouveau Testament face Ă lâ€™Ancien, et il a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© aux peuples chrĂ©tiens notamment que JĂ©sus Ă©tait juif. ConsĂ©quence : honte de haĂŻr le Fils de Dieu en qui on croit. On est ChrĂ©tien mais on ne montre plus la haine. Puis lâ€™on ne supporte pas la pensĂ©e dâ€™un JĂ©sus Juif, alors beaucoup fuient la ChrĂ©tientĂ© ! J'ai Ă©crit un livre "Lâ€™Islam et IsraĂ«l"-Editions ThĂ©lĂ¨s-(de Roger Bentata) 978-2-303-00404-6, qui prouve que lâ€™Islamisme dĂ©coule dâ€™une comprĂ©hension faussĂ©e (volontairement!) du Coran. Ceci provoque le fait que les Musulmans modĂ©rĂ©s considĂ¨rent les Islamistes comme des hĂ©rĂ©tiques. Par mon analyse prĂ©cise du Coran, j'ai pu dĂ©finir six critĂ¨res de pensĂ©es du Coran, concernant l'approche des Musulmans rĂ©servĂ©e aux non-Musulmans. Ils permettent de diffĂ©rencier scientifiquement Islamisme et Islam par les critĂ¨res adoptĂ©s "sĂ©lectivement". N'est-ce pas dĂ©jĂ un certain mĂ©pris du Coran? De plus nombre de versets importants du Coran sont cachĂ©s au grand public. Je dois ajouter que mon analyse des textes du Coran amĂ¨ne Ă la conclusion (et la prouve) que le Coran ne peut en aucun cas ĂŞtre considĂ©rĂ© comme un Livre Saint Ă cause des contradictions internes, des imprĂ©cisions graves qui amĂ¨nent Ă des interprĂ©tations tendancieuses, des utilisations de termes mal dĂ©finis, des erreurs portant sur la comprĂ©hension des autres religions monothĂ©istes, des conceptions fantaisistes,â€¦ (Taslima Nasreen, condamnĂ©e Ă mort, nâ€™avait-elle pas raison quand elle affirmait que le Coran devait ĂŞtre rĂ©Ă©crit?); seuls les Musulmans modĂ©rĂ©s peuvent voir en le Coran un Livre Saint puisquâ€™il a tirĂ© leurs ancĂŞtres de lâ€™idolĂ˘trie, et conscients de la vĂ©ritĂ©, ils se rapprochent de la dĂ©mocratie en rejetant notamment la Charia. La rĂ©ussite du livre serait qu'il pousse les Islamistes Ă se convertir Ă l'Islam. Le processus de disparition de la haine (ou presque) du juif par les ChrĂ©tiens aprĂ¨s 1948 grĂ˘ce Ă l'Ĺ“uvre de Jules Isaac ne peut-il se rĂ©pĂ©ter maintenant en criant aux Islamistes les vĂ©ritĂ©s qu'ils ignorent ou qu'ils cachent? Et rappelons que les Islamistes vouent une haine envers les ChrĂ©tiens encore plus grande qu'envers les Juifs car leur croyance en la TrinitĂ© les classe en tant qu'hĂ©rĂ©tiques Ă leurs yeux. Mais connaissant la force Ă laquelle ils s'opposent, ils cachent provisoirement leur jeux (Pensez Ă la situation des ChrĂ©tiens dans les pays arabes: Beitlehem,â€¦).
My French cousin is getting married to his French girlfriend in Israel. He has studied at Technion for several years now and I guess is making Aliyah. I never talked to him about Aliyah or life as a Jew in France, but that is my impression now. He doesnt seem particularly religious, altho does celebrate Shabbat afaik. Interesting article... This is good news for me, if I want a French wife.
L'expression anglaise est non pas "the words are on the wall" mais "the writing is on the wall", une allusion Ă l'histoire du roi babylonien Belchazzar qui a vu une main Ă©crire sur le mur "mene, mene tekel ufarsin". C'est justement cette fois-ci les persiens pour lesqels "l'ecriture est sur le mur".