Following the surge of right-wing parties in Europe’s Parliamentary election, Forward, the once-progressive Jewish outlet asks, “Have the Jews Lost Europe?” The tone of this question implies that until just a few days ago, at least some Jews believed that Europe was, in part, a ‘Jewish property.’ Such views were not baseless; Jewish Lobbies have dominated British and French policies by means of aggressive lobbying (CFI, LFI, CRIF, etc’).
Following the European poll, Dave Rich, deputy director of the ultra Right Wing Jewish para-military Community Security Trust, is concerned. He detects a growing resentment of Jewish politics in Europe. His article in the Forward openly examines whether Jews have lost their grip on the European continent.
Rich begins by quoting Israeli veteran concentration camp guard Jeffrey Goldberg. “At what point,” asks Goldberg, “do the Jews of America and the Jews of Israel tell the Jews of Europe that it might be time to get out?” Apparently, says Rich, “Goldberg is not the only one to have had this thought. In fact, according to a 2013 opinion poll …more than a quarter of Jews in the E.U. have considered emigrating at some point in the past five years because in their own countries they do not feel safe as Jews.”
Rich is also upset by growing European opposition toward Jewish blood rituals such as shchita slaughter and Jewish orthodox circumcision, a horrid unhygienic religious ceremony in which a Rabbi sucks the blood from an infant’s wounded penis (Metzitzah B’Peh). Rich is worried that ‘neo-Nazis’ within the European parliaments may scrutinize Jewish religious practices and culture.
Rich may be correct, this kind of barbaric tribal blood ritual should have been banned ages ago. For some reason, our ‘Left’ and ‘Humanists’ failed to examine these morbid practices while at the same time their enthusiasm for human rights led them to ban the veil.
Rich himself operates within a hard-core right-wing Jewish supremacist organization that is committed to the security of one race that happens to be his own. One would expect racially driven Rich to bond with or at least respect European racists whom he dismisses as ‘neo-Nazis.’ After all, Rich and his organization advocate their own ethnocentrism that is, at least categorically, no different than that of some of Europe’s most radical far-right groups.
Rich quotes British commentator Paul Mason who contends that “The Euro project was supposed to make sure the continent could never again go fascist. If European legislatures are now crawling with fascists, what was the point of that?” Leaving aside Mason’s apparent ignorance in matters to do with Fascism, Rich and Mason reveal that the political agenda involved in setting the ‘European project’ had aims beyond those expressed at its creation. In other words, those Europeans naïve enough to believe that the ‘Euro project was created to address their needs and wants can now learn from the Jewish press about the true agenda behind the creation of the EU.
However, Rich sees reason for optimism, “in several countries, the far right polled surprisingly poorly,” he states. “This is especially the case for those countries hit hardest by Europe’s economic problems of recent years; Spain, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, and Cyprus.” But Rich fails to mention that in these few impoverished countries the Jewish population is tiny and Jewish political lobbying is marginal. If this explains the failure of the far right in those countries, it is possible that the rise of right-wing parties in other parts of Europe is partially a reaction to aggressive Jewish lobbying and intervention. This is certainly the case in Britain, France, Hungary, and Greece.
In a desperate attempt to divert attention away from Jewish politics, Rich argues that “West European far-right parties… do want to cut immigration (or stop it altogether) and roll back the cultural and religious diversity that has become part of the E.U.’s guiding philosophy.” Rich fails to mention that it was Jewish progressive groups and institutions that for decades have been at the forefront of the pro-immigration campaign and the call for diversity. Rich also forgets to explain that this kind of Jewish support wasn’t driven by humanist or universal concerns. The Jewish Left obviously believed that immigration and diversity were very good for the Jews.
Rich concludes by arguing that European Right Wing politics “are not driven primarily by anti-Jewish sentiment … And Europe’s Jews do not need our American friends to remind us where that can lead.” Rich is correct here, the surge in political awareness of the European underclass and impoverished middle class is not driven ‘primarily’ by anti-Jewish feelings, however, increasingly, political commentators identify European malaise with Jewish and Zionist politics.
The European new Left was badly beaten in last week’s polls due, in large part, to its Jerusalemite nature and affiliation. The new left in Europe is driven by kosher ideology, it is dominated by Jewish lobbies such as LFI (Britain) and CRIF (France) and if this is not enough, the entire progressive dissent discourse is closely identified with Jewish interests and is largely funded, directly and indirectly, by liberal Zionists such as George Soros and his Open Society Institutes.
Bearing all that in mind, the political shift in Europe carries a clear message to Jewish institutions. Now’s the time for immediate and deep reflection.
Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli-born British jazz saxophonist, novelist, political activist and writer.
Atzmon’s album Exile was BBC jazz album of the year in 2003. Playing over 100 dates a year, he has been called “surely the hardest-gigging man in British jazz.” His albums, of which he has recorded nine to date, often explore the music of the Middle East and political themes. He has described himself as a “devoted political artist.” He supports the Palestinian right of return and the one-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
His criticisms of Zionism, Jewish identity, and Judaism, as well as his controversial views on The Holocaust and Jewish history have led to allegations of antisemitism from both Zionists and anti-Zionists. A profile in The Guardian in 2009 which described Atzmon as “one of London’s finest saxophonists” stated: “It is Atzmon’s blunt anti-Zionism rather than his music that has given him an international profile, particularly in the Arab world, where his essays are widely read.”