2 Friday, March 2, 1984
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
Purely Commentary
Senatorial Conscience
Emerges High-Spiritedly
in Death Penalty Issue
A Sanhedrin that effects one execution
in seven years is branded a murderous
court.
Eleazar b. Azariah: one in seventy
years.
Tarfon and Akiba: Were we members
of a Sanhedrin, no one would ever be put
to death.
Simeon b. Gamaliel: They would mul-
tiply murderers in Israel!
Mishna: Makkot, 1.10.
Michigan was the earliest of the states in the Union to
oppose the death penalty. Capital punishment supporters
in recent years kept renewing demands for the institution
of the death penalty as punishment for the many crimes
that are now crowding the court dockets and the many more
crimes that admittedly go unpunished. Consistently, the
citizens of Michigan have opposed the death penalty. Now
it is on the national agenda. The U.S. Senate approved a
capital punishment measure. The House of Representa-
tives will be confronted with it in a matter of days.
There are so many crimes, so much on the record that is
inhumane, that support for the death penalty is easily
approachable. Endorsement of it has become a simple mat-
ter. Therefore, opposition to it calls for courage — such
judgment depending on the attitudes adopted. And if oppo-
sition to capital punishment in an era when there are great
demands for instituting it is courageous, then it also brings
into focus the conscience of the legislators confronted by it.
•Nt* Senator Carl Levin was
undoubtedly confronted
with the problem, as were
the other opponents, includ-
ing Senator Don Riegle.
It was a comparatively
brief debate in the Senate
and Carl Levin had a lead-
ing role in the ranks of the
opposition to the measure
approving the death pen-
alty. He did two things: he
argued against the measure
and expressed concern over
the apparent indifference to
an important human factor
in politics.
He delivered an
CARL LEVIN
eloquent address as an op-
ponent of capital punishment, asserting at one point in the
debate:
I rise in opposition to the bill to reinstate capi-
tal punishment for a number of Federal offenses,
not because I or any of the other opponents of
capital punishment are less sickened by acts of
violence than those who propose and support
capital, punishment as a solution. As a matter of
fact, I think those of us who oppose capital
punishment are at a minimum equally sickened
by the horrors and the brutalities which exist in
this society.
The issue is not whether those acts exist. They
do. In disgraceful and disgusting and repeated
numbers.
The question which has to be addressed is
whether or not capital punishment will deter
those acts, and also whether or not the possibility
of mistake in this criminal justice system and any
other criminal justice system, which is operated
by human beings, is subject to error.
He cited scores of case histories, placing on the record
the crimes for which advocates of the measure he opposed
demanded judicial vengeance. What he did could have been
used as arguments supporting the majority viewpoint. To
those who back him, as does this commentator, he proved
wherein guilt reverts to government for failure to pursue a
basic human principle.
Carl Levin proved that Senatorial conscience is vital
for the Senator primarily, and also for the nation.
In this respect, he expressed dismay that major issues
are often ignored by the Senate while emphasis is given to
the sensational. On that score he asserted in that important
debate in which he was in the minority but which his action
protected Senatorial dignity:
In this case, the difficulty is that the issue is
not whether or not we are going to reimpose the
death penalty. The issue today is whether or not
one day of debate on the death penalty — one day
of debate plus perhaps a few hours — is a reason-
able debate in the U.S. Senate on this issue.
We spent five days on withholding on interest
and dividends. We spent weeks on the gas tax.
Think of it Five days on withholding on interest
and dividends. Weeks on the gas tax. We have had
By Philip
Slomovitz
Senator Carl Levin's Risk on an Issue That
Challenges the Conscience of All Responsible
Legislators and Reveals Character and Courage
about a day-and-a-quarter on the death penalty,
and we are voting on cloture. We have not even
begun to get into the details of this bill.
Michigan voters will surely be faced with the issue,
perhaps at the November election. The response until now
has been in opposition to judicial vengeance. Hopefully,
this state again will oppose the death penalty. Perhaps it is
wishful thinking. But while Senator Levin was in the
minority he offered proof to his constituents that Senatorial
conscience is not to be trifled with. His constituents will
surely know how to respect it.
Jackson and Two Communities:
Common American Horse Sense
Vital to Black-Jewish Amity
A most regrettable incident in the political experience
of this nation developed into what could at times have been
termed as a scandal. It all emerged in the name of Jesse
Jackson.
It was an unnecessary occurrence and it is hopefully
approaching an end with a recognition that such sensations
do not belong in the political spheres of this great democ-
racy. And it is perhaps because this is a great democracy
that what is labeled Jacksonism vis-a-vis black-Jewish re-
lations could have occurred.
Now it is generally recognized and also admitted that
Jackson authored the issue, and also has to his credit an
approach to resolving and finishing it.
There is this to be remem-
bered: that without respect for
differing opinions there is no
true American spirit. The
proof: of the candidates for the
Democratic nomination for the
Presidency, only two of the
eight in the race favored a
Palestinian state: George
McGovern and Jesse Jackson.
No one calls McGovern an
anti-Semite. The label was at-
tached to Jackson for many
other reasons. Then came his
slur on New York Jews, with
an implication of abuse di-
rected at all Jews. Thereupon
JESSE JACKSON
came an admission and an apology from Jesse Jackson.
Does it end the dispute? It should!
The fact is that there is a duty, an obligation resting
upon all Americans to use the simple and commonly-
adopted horse sense not to resort to hatreds, to abort suspi-
cions and prejudices, never to be parties to rancor.
There was a serious danger in the dispute: that of a
black-Jewish rift. Anything of the sort, shamefully alluded
to and feared in the past, must be condemned and rejected.
Regardless of the background of decent and sensible
black-Jewish relations in earliest times in American his-
tory, to and including the present, the ethical codes that
guide Jewish actions reject divisiveness and whatever
encouragement is given it stands rejected, condemned,
treated with contempt.
That's the form of an apology that must come from all
quarters: rejection of indecencies that lead to divisiveness
between blacks and Jews, whenever any such move at
creating rifts emerges among Americans, whoever they
may be and wherever they may be visible, and the com-
mitment to common horse sense that rejects the prejudices.
Was there Jewish guilt in the reported threats to Jesse
Jackson from groups that called themselves "Jews Against
Jackson" and others, some identified, some unidentified?
This should be treated as nonsense meriting the utter con-
tempt with which it is treated by national Jewish organiza-
tions.
The major spokesmen for American Jewry condemned
prejudice and in their messages to Jesse Jackson only asked
for his repudiation of comments that have an anti-Semitic
sound. This he is apparently doing. It is the condemnation
of alleged Jewish anti-Jacksonism that must be given most
serious consideration.
Jesse Jackson had criticized American Jewish leader-
ship, charging failure to repudiate attacks upon him by
extremist Jewish groups. The American Jewish Commit-
tee, American Jewish Congress, Anti-Defamation League,
Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and other
groups immediately repudiated the charge. The heads of
the American Jewish Congress issued a statement even
prior to the "Hymie" shock and they declared in part:
Jesse Jackson's charge that Jewish leaders
have failed to repudiate disruptive activity by an
extremist Jewish group is without merit. Fur-
thermore, Mr. Jackson knows it to be without
merit.
At the start of the Jackson campaign last fall,
the American Jewish Congress and numerous
other Jewish organizations sharply denounced
threats by an extremist group to use disruptive
tactics in opposing the Jackson candidacy. Our
condemnation was duly reported in the general
media as well as in the black press.
Responsible American Jewish organizations .
have followed a policy of restraint in responding
to an unfolding record of provocative statements
by Mr. Jackson concerning Israel and American
Jews. We have exercised this restraint in recogni-
tion of the fact that irresponsible elements, both
among Mr. Jackson's supporters and within the
Jewish community, would like nothing better
than to exploit the Jackson candidacy to under-
mine black-Jewish relations. We have been and
will continue to be vigilant in opposing any such
reckless behavior.
At the same time, our restraint should not be
read by anyone as indifference. We have fought
those who would invoke race to disadvantage or
disqualify American blacks from the fullest par- •
ticipation in American life. For the same reason,
we will not allow race to confer immunity from
scurrilous innuendo that borders on anti-
Semitism. The suggestion that "Jewish harrass-
ment" is somehow responsible for Jackson's poor
showing in Iowa or elsewhere is exactly that kind
of innuendo.
The participation of a black candidate in a
race for the Presidential nomination is a triumph
for American democracy. We urge Mr. Jackson
not to diminish that achievement with baseless
criticism of the Jewish community.
Jews are not all tzadikim — saints. (Wie es christelt
sich, so judelt sich — As Christians act, so also. do Jews).
Disruptive forces often make a lot of noise. Undeniably
there have even been criminals in Jewish ranks, and there
are the deluded who degrade Jewish traditions. But they
are few, thankfully, very few. Even the mention of their
names is often regarded with repugnance.
It is not only the treatment accorded Jesse Jackson by
such elements that is regarded contemptuously. When such
individuals bomb a Russian consulate or other official
Soviet quarters, it is condemned. Russia is mistreating
Jews, denies them exit visas. That does not justify violence,
as the following statement by Nathan Perlmutter, national
director of the Anti-Defamation League, regarding the
bombing of the Soviet compound in the Riverdale section of
New York points out:
Those responsible for terrorizing the Soviet
compound earn the contempt of decent people.
Terror is a blight on civil discourse. It exacerbates
rather than solves problems. Moreover, it helps,
rather than counters Soviet propaganda.
Such is the attitude of organized American Jewry in_
relation to anything that smacks of un-American treat-
ment of foreigners as well as fellow Americans.
Intolerance and violence are not in the Jewish vocab-
ulary, and it isn't in the responses to Jesse Jackson.
Therefore, the expectation that the unpleasant politi-
cal incidents are finished, that American fair play is in-
erasable, that common horse sense remains indelible on the
American agenda.
This also means that black-Jewish relations and all
other relationships in American ranks will never be dis-
rupted. Whosoever attempts it disgraces the basic and nob-
lest American principle.
Archives Preserve History
Tke iii St
IbL.th ,:t$
t<'41sitw
50 YEARS
'ERETZ ISRAEL"
A., HANEilli, iL. A?:At$A
1. A R i, P. RV
N.
k T AC:L. T. SUL MAN,
mA:
KFAZK:N,
SoNNU-4.1.U.0
.MUSJC EVANON
kii.;;c<; Or ME' St):7:.S: Zfill>2 A
H
This cover of a brochure and the original film
"This Is the Land" are housed in the Rad Jewish Film
Archives at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. This Is
the Land" is one of four films made in 1935 which
claim to be the first complete films made in pre-state
Israel. The oldest footage in the archive records the
visit of Kaiser Wilhelm II to Jerusalem in 1898.