Don’t reward your abuser
Do we tell battered women to negotiate with their abusers? To plead with them to reform? To beg the abuser to take them back? Of course not.
Instead, every expert tells them to leave and to run away—fast.
The odds that an abuser will reform are low. If he does, wonderful, and only then might the victim consider returning to an entirely new relationship between respectful equals. It’s not the victim’s job to implore or cajole the abuser to get help.
Yet when it comes to Jews, we do the opposite. We plead with our abusers to stop abusing us. We ask them to tolerate us. We try to persuade. We pander.
This is ridiculous, dysfunctional and empowering to our abusers.
The better answer is no different than in the case of any other abuser: to vote with our feet. Leave. Flee. Good riddance. Don’t look back.
That is, in fact, what American Jews did—by necessity—more than a century ago.
When barred from clubs, we formed our own. In 1914, in Boston, Kernwood Country Club was founded after Jews were denied entry to other clubs. In Cleveland, it was Oakwood Club. In Los Angeles, it was Hillcrest Country Club. There were many others, most of which (thankfully) have since been integrated as Jews eventually became welcome almost everywhere.
The same dynamic existed in the universities. For example, Brandeis University was founded because of antisemitism and quotas limiting Jewish enrollment at elite schools like Harvard.
Jews also founded separate hospitals when they were barred entry as patients or physicians. In fact, more than 100 were formed, like the legendary Barnes Jewish Hospital in St. Louis. Fortunately, just a handful are still defined as “Jewish,” since Jews have since been welcomed into the mainstream medical profession.
When doors were closed to us, we built new doors. That isn’t retreat but agency. It’s self-respect and self-determination.
Back then, Jews didn’t have a choice. The thought of negotiating with your antisemitic abuser was nonsensical. The only choice was to flee and form your own club, school, hospital or organization. In the long run, this worked wonderfully.
When confronted with such hatred today, we have a choice. But too often we are foolishly choosing to beg our abuser to accept us.
My alma mater, Harvard University, is a prime example. Jewish groups have contorted themselves for years begging Harvard to address its problem with antisemitism, which is ironic considering that Harvard, like a classic abuser, denies it is antisemitic at all.
In fact, in its current issue, Harvard Magazine refers to “the pretext of antisemitism.” Summarizing Harvard’s ongoing legal battle with the Trump administration, the magazine states that the president is “using the pretext of antisemitism to justify the attack.” That is equal parts insulting and infuriating.
Is it an attempt to suggest that antisemitism at Harvard is a fiction or overstated?
Does it imply that, after Hamas’s barbaric attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, more than 30 student groups—supported by faculty—did not issue a statement blaming Israel for the massacre? That Jewish students were not harassed, spat on, shouted down and blocked from entering campus buildings? That they weren’t left afraid to walk across campus, let alone display any Jewish symbols?
That Harvard Yard wasn’t blanketed in Palestinian flags, with some protesters chanting not just “death to Israel,” but “death to Jews”? That Harvard’s Jewish enrollment hasn’t plummeted 50% over the past decade? That it isn’t at its lowest level since before World War II, when there were quotas on Jewish attendance?
Of course, to cover itself, Harvard did form an obligatory antisemitism task force, from which even its co-chair resigned as it was a feckless charade, but the school’s true colors had been revealed.
Debating whether Harvard and much of academia, particularly in blue states, has a problem with antisemitism is like debating gravity. The existence of the “debate” itself emphasizes the severity of the issue.
Can you imagine any other minority group suffering such treatment and being told that their outrage is “pretext”? In almost any other instance, campus elites would be applauding the government’s effort to punish and reform the university. Not at Harvard.
I hope Jewish enrollment at Harvard declines to zero; that Jews reject Harvard as Harvard has rejected them. Jews should vote with their feet and embrace schools committed to ethical, earnest and rigorous education, not institutions of higher learning that reward mob-led virtue-signaling.
To my fellow Jews, stop begging to be liked, accepted or understood. Instead, walk tall and embrace your Judaism and Zionism. And reject your abuser.
Get the latest updates in our WhatsApp group.
The article argues that Jews should not negotiate with institutions exhibiting antisemitism, likening it to a victim negotiating with an abuser. Instead, it advocates for Jews to "vote with their feet" and create their own spaces, as they did historically when faced with discrimination in clubs, universities, and hospitals, leading to the establishment of institutions like Brandeis University and Jewish hospitals. The author criticizes the current approach of Jewish groups begging institutions like Harvard University to address antisemitism, especially after Harvard Magazine referred to "the pretext of antisemitism" in its coverage of a legal battle. The article highlights alleged antisemitic incidents at Harvard following the October 7, 2023 attacks, including student groups blaming Israel, harassment of Jewish students, and a significant drop in Jewish enrollment. It concludes by urging Jews to reject such "abusers" and embrace institutions committed to ethical education, rather than seeking acceptance from those that have rejected them.
© All rights to the original article belong to the source. Din Online shows a headline, an excerpt and a link only. The objectivity rating is computed automatically and is an estimate only.
Discussion
No comments yet — be the first to comment.