2 Friday, September 14, 1919
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
Purely Commentary
The New 'Hyphenation' of a Nonsensical
'Black-Jewish Issue' That Has No
Place in a Decent and Honorable Society
By Philip
Slomovitz
A New Hyphenation Causing Justified Resentment Over the Unnecessary Black-Jewish 'Issue'
More than seven decades ago, President Theodore Roosevelt, in a call for patriotism,
spoke out against "hyphenated Americans." He didn't like the idea of hyphenating
loyalties. He was disputed by Italians, Germans and also Jews who denied split loyalties
but maintained their rights to human interests in the welfare of the people they left
behind in their native lands. For Jews, who were not dragged into the issue as much as
the others because TR recognized the plight of millions of Jews who needed American
succor, there wasn't much of an hyphenation involvement: how could loyalty for Russia,
for example, be appended to them when there were pogroms in Russia. "Jewish-
Americans," therefore, was a normal and natural connotation.
While in no way related, a new "hyphenation" has emerged which has created
sensational journalism and a "cause celebre." It.has suddenly become an exciting politi- •
cal ploy. It is an introduction for "divisiveness." Therefore the justification of branding it
as outrageous. It is what is being labeled "the black-Jewish issue."
Who would have imagined it in any other term than "black-Jewish" friendship
under conditions other than the availability of a scapegoat and the infusion into political
squabbles of an element that suits the purpose of carrying blame for human ills?
A black-white confrontation is an unfortunate fact. Jews are in the white category.
They also are in the leadership of the civil rights principles which they will never
abandon. Therefore, the blame placed on Jews for many ills had better be judged with
common sense and not with hatred.
On one point there is a difference of opinion and attitude. It is in the affirmative
action ,and quota systems. Jews have suffered from quotas and from the numerus.
,
The Stacking of the Cards
and the Insistence on Truth
A recent article in one of the Detroit newspapers by
Georgie Geyer gave the impression that a Christian com-
munity was exposing Israel, was backing anti-Israel claims
that Israel was intransigent, etc., etc.
The regrettable anti-Israel attitude by that writer has
been cause for concern. Her drawing upon a Christian
source for another condemnation of Israel brings added
concern.
Therefore, the viewpoint of a distinguished Christian
theologian who reveals the facts regarding the most recent
vilification is vital to the efforts to establish the truth
regarding Christian-Jewish relations vis-a-vis Israel.
Here is a statement from Msgr. George G. Higgins of
LaGrange, Ill., that is vital to the issue:
Because I happen to come from LaGrange, Ill., I
watched with more than usual interest the out-
come of a conference on "Human Rights and the
Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" held at the Christian
Life. Center there on May 18-20. The more I
learned about it, however, the more my home-
town pride began to turn into dismay, bordering
on shame.
The conference, sponsored by a varied group of
persons representing several traditional peace
groups and a number of well-known pro-Arab
sympathizers, purported to be an honest search
by Christians for approaches of reconciliation in
the Middle East.
Now I have no problem with such a search for
peace and justice in the Middle East," nor with
inviting Palestinians to speak. In fact, I would
welcome such initiatives as quite laudable means
of promoting a serious dialogue among Christians
in this country on the many complex moral and
political issues involved.
But the conference that was held in LaGrange
was seemingly intent on promoting anything but
serious dialogue among Christians. In fact, as the
National Christian Leadership Conference for Is-
rael (NCLCI) rightly pointed out, the LaGrange
conference was dealing with a stacked deck all
along. No one even vaguely sympathetic to Israel
was given room for a meaningful say. As the
NCLCI statement put it: "We believe that a con-
ference which is designed in a way that is so
clearly one-sided does not meet (the) fundamental
obligations and responsibilities of the Christian
Church."
Given the biased design of the conference, it is
no wonder that it came out with a statement
sounding more like PLO propaganda than a seri-
ous attempt to challenge the Christian con-
science. The statement mixes half-fact and
- twisted fantasy in almost every paragraph.
It claims, for example, that the very "establish-
ing" of Israel did "a deep injustice" to Palesti-
nians, "Confiscating their land and driving many
into exile." In point of fact, it was not the estab-
lishment of the state which produced the refu-
gees, but the dislocations of the war begun by the
surrounding Arab states that followed the estab-
lishment. The United Nations partition plan,
which Israel accepted and the Arabs rejected,fol-
lowed the lines of already settled population, giv-
ing Israel only a small fraction of the total area of
"Palestine" (Transjordan then already existed as
a Palestinian Arab state). In many instances Is-
raeli Jews pleaded with their Arab neighbors to
clausus. The search for decent treatment involved merit in achieving status. This cannot
be abandoned. In differing there is regret on this issue. Merit should resolve it for all.
Blame, tragically, assumes a role of hatred in matters like the current issue and
cannot be condoned. It is questionable, in fact, whether the masses of the blacks give
credence to what has been labeled "rift." If a rift exists the responsibility of leadership is
to
correct
it.
•
The "enemies" have raised issues of "exploitation" and other related matters. There
has been as much destruction of Jewish business as there may have been exploitation and -
the Jewish guilt as a massive action could not be proven. The fact remains: Jews are
dedicated to the basics of just rights and the erasing of prejudice against blacks or any
other groups and that remains a duty strictly adhered to.
Another interesting point could be raised relative to the Jew as .a scapegoat and
carrying blame for political mishaps. Jews are accused of responsibility for Andrew
Young's resignation. This nonsense has been refuted and cast into the rhetorical garbag
heap. The White House was involved in the "incident." Now there is talk of dumpin
Jimmy Carter. He and his friends will need a scapegoat. If Carter is to become a lame
duck by mid-November 1980, will he and his associates blame the Jews? This has already
become a possibility.
It will be interesting to read the views of the irresponsible columnists on this subject.
It will be an opportunity for the sensible and responsible to protect the honor of decent
journalism. This is a duty also in the poorly drummed-up and nonsensical "black-Jewish
issue."
stay on as citizens of the fledgling democracy.
Under the pressure of Arab propaganda, many
Arabs left. Those who stayed, however, held their
possessions and in fact became full voting citizens
of Israel.
The statement also alleges that no less than
"100,000 people have been arrested" and that an
indeterminate number "have been subjected to
brutal torture," falsely alluding to "the U.S. Con-
sulate in Jerusalem" as its source. Such allega-
tions, as "The New Republic" pointed out in an
editorial in February, have long been part of PLO
propaganda. And to equate Ms. Johnson, a low-
level visa official (since "retired') with the Consu-
late as such is to bend truth beyond the breaking
point. In fact, none of these charges has ever been
fully substantiated.
The statement also leaves out the other side of
the picture in calling for "restitution for past
wrongs" only for the Palestinians. Do the framers
not know that more than half of the Jews in Israel
are refugees from Arab lands, expelled from
centuries-old communities with all their goods
confiscated by the Arabs as they fled?
I do not know what sort of reconciliation or
what vision of a just peace the framers of the
LaGrange document hold. But I would seriously
question its claim to being "Christian."
Differences of opinion must be tolerated and there is no
denying the existence of viewpoints not to be ignored. But
truth cannot be bludgeoned into bias and bigotry, and the
interpretations which had received notoriety earlier can-
not be left unchallenged.
Msgr. Higgins states facts without distortions. The
Christian community must be kept aware of the realities,
the Jews must not be misled into confusions. Let the truth
be known. Perhaps it will lead to the good relations among
faiths, among races.
Distortions have led to a black-Jewish debate that has
gained such a variety of misapprehensions that one would
imagine that American public opinion is at war. It should
not be. It must be corrected. The issue dealt with by Msgr.
Higgins touches upon elements in the deplorable new is-
sues that have been labeled as "rifts" and there are rela-
tionships in all of them. Let the truth be established to
make all Americans free in their attitudes towards an
Israel in danger and her enemies who Create the dangers.
George F. Pierrot, Who Symbolizes
Historical Factors in Detroit
and Is the Limerick King
George F. Pierrot is not a man to retire. He has trouble
with his sight but not with his community vision or his
.
GEORGE F. PIERROT
MYRON STEINBERG
sense of humor.
It's sad for the city at large that his travelogue lectures
are coming to an end. They became part of Greater Detroit's
— Michigan's — image. They were inseparable from the
city's and the state's cultural life.
No other medium provided for his large audiences the
knowledge provided by experts about the world at large,
about the international developments, about travel and
travelers.
It was thanks to George that men like the enthusiastic,
affable, inspiring and instructive Julien Bryan brought
knowledge about Palestine and later Israel, about the
Zionist linkage and the Arab factions, about Poland, Rus-
sia, Communism, the world tragedies and rifts. Others like
him delineated about the Middle East and Eastern Europe.
George keeps telling good stories while giving courage
to those who love good food and sparkling beverages. In the
process he recites limericks. Helen Pierrot has a share in all
of these experiences.
This is where a family of good friends enters the saga
called Pierrot. He befriended the Steinberg family and was
an intimate friend of the late Morris Steinberg. He
encouraged Morris in the publishing of chess and checker
books. He was constantly with him when Morris sponsored
the bringing of Sammy Reshefsky for chess games in De-
troit when Sammy was not yet Bar Mitzva.
Now George has another partnership with a Steinberg,
with Morris' brother Myron. It is their, mutual interest in
Hopefully, the joint project by George F. Pierrot and
Myron Steinberg will soon be a fact. They are planning the
publication of George's limericks, and Myron already has a
share in the encouragement he is giving George in this
task.
Myron has a reputation for deep interest in publishing
the writings of local authors. He did it as inspirer of this
reporter's "Without Malice." He is doing it as a lover of
limericks, even the ribald.
So, George is not a retiring man. He will always be
good to laugh with, to share a good joke, and to resort to a
"L'Chayim" while thus enjoying life.
Moral. U.S. Duty to Defend Israel
From N.Y. Times Editorial, Sept. 9, 1979
The United States can no longer be a neutral actor in
these conflicts. It is bound, historically, morally and politi-
cally, to insure the survival of Israel. There cannot be a
disinterested American brokerage between Israel and
those who reject Israel's existence. As Mr. Sadat came to
understand, Americans can pressure Israel to negotiate
generous terms of coexistence with its neighbors, but never
terms that threaten its security or deny its legitimacy.
When Egypt broke with the Arab world to pursue this
recognition, the United States acquired a further oblig
tion: to support Egypt — and the negotiating process ti.
Egypt and Israel set in motion. The process offers peace by
states to those who will join. It also implies a corollary: that
those who fail to join may miss a precious opportunity.
Seen in this light, the debate over who may talk where
and how to the PLO has been almost beside the point. For
value received, diplomatically, the United States promised
Israel in 1975 not to negotiate with the PLO until it aban-
dons the vow to destroy Israel. And the American promise
was reinforced at Camp David for an even more important
reason: the treaty gave Palestinians, even those associated
with the PLO, an opening to move toward peace with Israel
and self-determination. As Mr. Sadat had the wit to demon-
strate at the height of the Young affair, a policy of keeping
some distance from an unreconciled PLO is not just a sop to
Israel or American Jews.
•
•