Comments on: “The Wandering Who?” Gilad Atzmon and Jewish Identity

By: Eli

Eli — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 23:25:54 +0000

The Groucho Marxist-I fully understand the distinction and I sympathize with the motivations behind the USPCN’s letter. Indeed, I too am trying to fry the bigger fish in my film work. None of that detracts from the fact that this is an important internal Jewish conversation that is long overdue.
JG- Thanks. I was trying to deal with the ideas. I leave it to others to talk about the man.
Greg-I agree that it is important to talk about the context in which these accusations are occurring, but that was not the purpose of this piece.
Gilad Atzmon-If your intention was to only criticize Jewish-ness as you claim, you were very sloppy about it in the book. Perhaps you can explain the following passage:

“The dialectic of fear has dominated the Jewish existence and mindset far longer than we are ready to admit. For while Jewish ethnic leaders have exploited it politically since the early days of emancipation, it is much older than modern Jewish history. In fact, it is the heritage of the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible), there to induce in Jews a pre-traumatic state…It was the Bible that originally set the Jews in a state of Pre-TSS and initiated the fear of Judeocide, the Bible that paints the Jewish universe as a disaster waiting to happen.”

To my ears, this sounds like a critique of the Jewish religion not a critique of a “Zionist misinterpretation of the OT.” It is, as I mentioned in my piece, uninformed and superficial. For two millennia, Jewish thinkers have created intricate exegesis on these stories-and there is what to criticize. But you can’t expect us to take your criticism seriously when you ignore everything but the OT.

By: Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 01:19:25 +0000

Very interesting and enlightening review. I guess that you missed a few points though… The book doesn’t criticise Judaism, it actually explores the Zionist misinterpretation of the OT.

The references to Biblical plunder (in the context of home coming) suggests how misleading the interpretation and why.

The book explores contemporary J identity rather than Judaism, However, I make it clear more than once that Judaism offers a coherent and consistent moral Jewish existence..

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:32:50 +0000

I think its important to understand the context in which these accusations of antisemitism are occurring. In particular, it needs to be understood that Atzmon has a long history of attacking Jewish leftists (including anti-zionists) and has even gone so far as to defend the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Some sort say he has even flirted with Holocaust denial. People of conscience should have nothing to do with this man.

see the following links for more info:

azvsas.blogspot.com/search?q=gilad+atzmon

By: J. G.

J. G. — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 02:55:21 +0000

Excellent analysis. Instead of knee jerk reactionism, an attempt to understand a complex and imperfect individual.

By: The Groucho Marxist

The Groucho Marxist — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:45:35 +0000

I’m not sure you understand the difference between “policing discourse” and “freedom of association.” That it is possible, by working very hard and being very very charitable, to empathize with the cul de sac that you describe at Atzmon’s predicament, and even feel sorry for him, doesn’t mean that this should be done as part of a struggle to liberate the Palestinian people, a struggle that, like all just struggles, is a magnet for opportunists. Some of us have bigger fish to fry.