Ezra Pound’s madness aside about Protestants being re-Hebraic Christians, I am still trying to negotiate my way around and through the morass of misinformation and disinformation about Catholics propagated by Jewish and Protestant media managers in the America, whether broadcast, print or film, whichever medium you might examine. The message therein is clear for those who look, received nonetheless, subliminally always.
I do not have to tell Catholic people how endemically anti-Catholic media in america has been–Jewish and Protestant media moguls are together an American coalition of Anti-Catholic/Anti-Italian-American false image makers; how anti-White the former has been in the influence garnered through many of the media organs in America, a ploy approved by Machiavelli, ironically himself Italian, is not another issue, but an extension of this one.
I understand that in the received ideas of our culture I am supposed to believe that America is no longer endemically anti-Catholic, just as African-Americans are supposed to believe that there are no ways America or Americans can be racist, an attitude or posture to be taken by African-Americans in barter for their privileges–and there are privileges doled out to African-Americans–we misunderstand or dis-understand what privileges are. They are not for the elites; they are for the repressed. They are given by the elites to the repressed in exchange for continued inequality. Yes, the horror of horrors is that affirmative action is a privilege system born of a system of inequality. As long as privilege systems persist, inequality will exist, and if there is no endemic inequality, then it must either be manufactured, reanimated, or the illusion of its persistence must be created and disseminated. No one keeps his balance in such upside-down-ness.
Italian-Americans are not a group that receives discriminatory practices or responses from Jews or Protestants in positions of power, influence or authority. But like most received ideas, they are aligned with propaganda, and all propaganda is another form of lying, as is advertising–how cleverly is the yard stick used to measure it. But then clever is the intelligence most prized by criminals and businessmen, either corporate or small companies, the twain shall always meet.
I hope this does not offend people I have grown to trust and respect–although, if it does, I know exactly where I stand with respect to their relationship to a persistent bigotry in America, one I know the checkered past of the Catholic Church has helped foster. Personally or professionally, I understand power is power and influence is influence, as authority is authority–but Truth is more than tautology. Independent of race, religion or ethnicity, and the manifestations of them and the consequences and results of their manifestations that will always be similar no matter where or when or by whom or at whom, Anti-Catholic or denigration of Catholicism is easy in American film, video or television. Too easy. And using Italian Americans as participants in this as a justification of bigotry against Italian-Americans and Catholics, or as a rationalization of it, is like using blacks in black face in minstrel shows as a justification of minstrel shows or the assertion that minstrel shows were not racist.
Everything involved in bigotry and persistent prejudice and stereotyping cannot be incidental. The same dynamic that can be drawn for Anti-Semitism can be drawn for Anti-Catholic, and I am not naive enough to believe there will be one-to-one correspondence between the two for every point in one or the other. I cannot believe that Anti-Semitism and Anti-Jewish are exactly the same things. But this I will leave for another essay, hopefully neither offending nor outraging anyone by employing arguments once asserted by Hannah Arendt, distinguishing between what was the secular 19th century ideology of Antisemitism and the religious Jew-hatred based primarily on the traditional antagonisms of the Jewish and Christian creeds. A simple read of Arendt’s “Preface top Part One” of her larger work, The Origins of Totalitarianism will elucidate further, as would any penetration into the first part, with respect to how politicized Antisemitism differs from competing religious Anti-Jewish sentiments, actions, violence, polemics.
I know that politics in America is tribally aligned as it has been for a very long time. If someone were to tell me that Jewish influence in our media does not have a vested interest in keeping black and white separated, divided, each believing the other is the enemy, thus able to translate its cache of influence into authority, that person would be deluded and would also lose credibility in my eyes. This is not a conspiracy, but the nature of politics and politicking, particularly when the elite of a single group has access to the dissemination of information and images.
A people can take advantage of social situations through their leadership the way any individual could be opportunistic to his advantage socially, economically, professionally. The interesting thing is that the every day simple separate Jewish individual can suffer disadvantage from this as much as anyone, not understanding the trickster dimensions of his new ethnic position and identification; white when needed, not white when necessary. And again, opotunism by elites is not grand conspiracy. he latter, as a professor friend of mine had said many years ago, requires a humankind more cooperative and better suited to mutual action than most humans exhibit, Human nature is often anything but cooperative, unless the means of cooperation are targeted toward survival, as the propaganda of the Second World War fostered for America and Americans in its war effort on the home front. There is an element of survivalist rhetoric and politics and policy making exhibited by the American media toward the end of Jewish survival and the survival of the State of Israel. It would be nearly unnatural for that not to exist.
We have a hard time accepting, though. that Jewish people can be in this position because another aspect of our media, aligned with the forces of propaganda historically, is to perpetuate the image of a long-suffering Jewish people, an image mirroring the truth of history, and an image we see projected in one Holocaust story after another, keeping alive the sentiment that all white European society is endemically anti-Semitic; just as that same media, from the same sources, has played its machiavellian cards well, by driving the idea that white America is endemically racist.
The Holocaust was real, was devastating, was grotesque and more than horrific—words fail, which also lends itself to the repetition, the repetition, the repetition. But we do know There is no business like Shoa business, and it is a billion dollar industry in itself. Suffering sells; it’s good for profits; marketing in America capitalizes on how well it sells.
Racism is real; slavery was devastating. Jim Crow was violent and used as many of the same tricks to foster support of repression as the Nazis used to foster resentment of and violence against jews. However, American white people are not endemically racist; and the idea that African-Americans can be and are racist when they are racist and not when they are not should not be a surprise, nor should the response be indignant shock.
Surviving horror, though, often leaves generations vulnerable to perpetuating survivalist thinking ad nauseum. This is why so many Jewish people and Jewish influence in the media can translate anything that questions the motives or the intentions or the actions of Israel and its military in Gaza or the West Bank as anti-Semitic, which is what frequently happens when any question of Israel’s policies arises, most savagely when the critic is himself or herself Jewish.
It’s also why so many stories sell the idea that Jewish people are monolithic, when necessary—it’s okay to sell this idea as it is also to disseminate what we have come to call positive stereotypes. It’s fine for a Jewish writer to say that Jews created Hollywood, calling it an Empire, but when a non-Jewish film actor says in an interview that Mel Gibson had bitten the hand that fed him, it becomes an anti-Semitic slur–and considering that the Palestinian victims of Israel’s reprisals or acts of aggression are also Semites, we need to say Anti-Jewish and not anti-Semitic, which we have said historically, Semitic being a term that noted Jews were not white western Christians, or inheritors of Rome’s legacy and it’s opposition to Semites in the middle-east. The subsequent incursion of the Arabs into Iberia, and Italy’s, particularly The Venetian Republic’s, opposition to the Ottoman Empire, a non-Arab extension of Arabic culture through the adoption of Islam, helped perpetuate this notion of the Alien Semite Jewish People. Semite stood for cultures and civilizations non-Western when Middle-Eastern.
Anything pro-Palestinian is often met with accusations of it being anti-Semitic and coming out from a fascist closet, an irony, seeing that it is mostly slung by those who are the most fervent of contemporary Zionists, Zionism itself having succumbed to an overarching reactionary faction, one growing through the manipulation of facts, images and ideas that get disseminated by the American media, decidedly pro-Zionist, even willing to turn a blind eye to Israel’s atrocities when they do not agree with them. All of American society has moved to the right; since Bill Clinton in 1992, this has been increasing. Clinton thirty years earlier would have been a Republican, if he were around in the sixties talking what he talked in policy forums. Obama today would have been a moderate Republican in the 70s.
To question Israel in this media/political crucible is purportedly to question Israel’s right to exist, or so goes the current thinking, at least the reflexes of the mind when it does not think. The absurdity is missed amid acceptance of the post-Holocaust dogmas surrounding the Jewish man or woman sanctified through the secular martyrdom of the camps. But being human, Jews in the camps betrayed other Jews, as Russians betrayed Russians, French, French, et cetera. I do not know how I would have responded to the atrocities, but death and survival in the camps existed in a complex nexus of innocence, guilt, betrayal and heroism, along with a great degree of existential absurdity. Conditions in the camps were such that humanity was the monstrosity. Please understand how monstrosity is used here, how it is defined. A monstrosity is a variation in nature that is unhelpful or even harmful. Everyone has an instinct to survive. No one knows what he would have done in the camps, including every Jew who never had to be in one. Yet, the facts remain that the Nazis were so thorough that many of the adult survivors managed to survive through complicity or betrayal. Now, even when this is said sanely or rationally, it is met with derision because it would taint the survivors and soil the nobility of surviving. The general consensus against Primo Levi after his book The Drowned and the Saved was astounding–perhaps ev en more so in America because he was Italian?
The inferences have been clear throughout my education in the Public Schools of New York City and in my days in College. We are not to question the motives of anyone Jewish anywhere at any time, and if we do, it will resoundingly be shouted down as anti-Semitic. So much for free-speech in America. But for this Italo-American Catholic, freedom of speech is always going to be something mediated or moderated, filtered today through a particularly reactionary Zionist Ashkenazi lens, which is not to say all Ashkenazi are Zionists or that all Zionism must be reactionary and neo-fascist. I do not know how this is helpful for Israel or Israelis, let alone for America or Americans, including Jewish Americans, the simple separate Jewish man who lives as I do existentially, suffering similar calamities and absurdities.
Einstein wondered if the Jewish people were going to do to the Palestinians what the Germans had done to the Jews. Einstein, it seems, was a prophet.