Views

M

y first clinical position 
as a young physician 
in the 1970s was 
working for the clinic’
s Jewish 
owner, a doctor in his late 50s. 
Knowing I was Jewish, he often 
spoke to me in 
hushed Yiddish. 
For 13 years 
I nodded and 
smiled knowingly 
whenever he took 
me aside to tell 
me something he 
didn’
t want any-
one else to hear. I can now con-
fess that, alav hashalom (peace 
be upon him), I understood 
maybe one word in 20. 
In reading through so many 
of the interesting posts on the 
Jewish History Facebook page, 

the stories, the food, the people 
and places of treasured memory, 
there is often a common thread, 
either spoken or implied, that 
bridges generations past and 
present to one another. And 
that’
s our Mamaloshen, our 
mother tongue: 
 Yiddish. It is 
an integral part of our cultural 
mosaic, forming the nexus that 
bonds us to our unique heritage.
Most of our English words are 
Latin derivatives. I took Latin 
for two years; it is very technical 
and sterile, almost devoid of 
emotional depth. But whereas 
Latin may be the language of the 
brain, Yiddish is the language 
of the heart. It seems to ema-
nate from deep within the soul, 
embracing us with its nuance 
and warmth.

I wish only to pay homage to 
this wonderful, rich language 
that was spoken frequently by 
my father’
s generation (often to 
keep secrets from the kinder, or 
children). Sadly, Yiddish is now 
just a quaint, fading remnant 
of its former self, sustained by 
descriptive words or phrases and 
epithets.
I believe that Yiddish is the 
most descriptive of all languages. 
Everything else appears anemic 
and two-dimensional in com-
parison. It’
s almost like compar-
ing a painting to a sculpture.
“Fat” in English becomes 
shmaltz in Yiddish; the word 
almost oozes out of our mouths 
as it reminds us of the taste 
and globby, soft, smooth tex-
ture of our Bubbie’
s knadlach 

(matzah balls) with chicken fat. 
It was the first thing I asked for 
after they pulled out the chest 
tubes following my bypass 
surgery, but sadly, it wasn’
t on 
the heart-friendly menu at 
Beaumont.
One of my personal favorites 
is shmatte. It makes me smile 
whenever I say it. I can sense 
its dismissive connotation as 
you visualize every detail of the 
ragged old garment. The word 
also implies a negative critique 
of the wearer, as in, “Look at 
that woman, wearing such a 
shmatte!”
Tchotchke, which has, at last 
count, 19 different spellings, is 
the catch-all word for anything 
of little value, yet the word is 
not necessarily demeaning 

Fred Gold

essay
Our Mamaloshen: Yiddish

guest column
Peace Through Partnership
T

o some policy makers, numbers in 
budgets made in Washington, D.C. 
are simply that — numbers. Yet 
to the people who receive that funding, 
they mean so much more. They mean the 
difference between fear of war and hope 
for peace.
For Israelis and 
Palestinians, foreign aid 
directly supports efforts for 
a peaceful resolution to the 
conflict. Cutting foreign 
aid directly impacts orga-
nizations that bring Israelis 
and Palestinians together 
in people-to-people programs. Without 
funding, these organizations are unable 
to continue work on behalf of reconcilia-
tion. Congress should restore their aid. It 
should also create an International Fund 
in support of a two-state solution for the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The Trump administration cut fund-

ing for the Palestinian government and 
population when it took office. It has 
pressured Palestinians to support the 
administration’
s skewed plan for peace. 
Given the reaction by both the Palestinian 
Authority and the Palestinian population, 
its approach has not worked. 
Peacebuilding programs are a bet-
ter approach. They change the people 
who participate in them. Israelis and 
Palestinians actively engage with each 
other. In the short term, these programs 
force participants to challenge their biases 
and prejudices of the “other” and form 
relationships. In the long term, they allow 
leaders to be willing to make concessions 
in negotiations with less concern for the 
backlash of their constituents. 
These programs can create a movement 
of nonviolent activists who support peace. 
Such programs are needed because sup-
port for a two-state solution is dropping, 
and support for a zero-sum view of the 

conflict is increasing. In the short term, 
more nonviolent activists give legitima-
cy to peaceful protest. In the long term, 
nonviolence may make both sides willing 
to negotiate because they do not feel that 
concessions will be met with violence. 
Some say that neither Israelis nor 
Palestinians want to negotiate. That is 
exactly why we should invest in peace-
building now, so that negotiations 
can have a chance to succeed in the 
future. Giving up on young Israelis and 
Palestinians will make a two-state solu-
tion more difficult to achieve. Investing in 
them gives peacebuilding a chance. 
Currently a bill is going through 
Congress that explicitly supports peace 
building. The Partnership Fund for 
Peace Act creates an International Fund 
for Israeli-Palestinian peace. The fund 
would support peace building and eco-
nomic development. It has bicameral and 
bipartisan support, and the support of 

Zach Schenk

8 | MARCH 12 • 2020 

continued on page 12

continued on page 10