"The Passion" and the furor

Jews behaving badly


By ANDY NOWICKI


Actor, director, and former "Sexiest Man in the World" Mel Gibson
recently gave an interview to Diane Sawyer on ABC to defend his
upcoming movie, "The Passion of the Christ," which has been accused of
fomenting anti-Semitism, essentially because it portrays the scourging
and crucifixion of Christ as depicted in the Christian Gospels, which
undeniably means that the audience is exposed to some striking
examples of Jews behaving badly.

Of course, there are good Jews in the Christian account as well,
including but not limited to Jesus Himself. Still, as Gibson pointed
out in the interview, those who are against his movie really have a
problem with the four Gospels, and, thus, with Christianity itself.
After all, to be a Christian means to believe that Jesus is the Son of
God, and to believe that Jesus is the Son of God means that you think
the Jews, who reject the notion of Jesus as the Son of God, are (gasp)
wrong. Ergo, to be a Christian is to be "anti-Semitic," or at least
anti-Judaic, since if you take your religion seriously, you hold it to
be the truth and those who disagree with it (in this case, Jews) to be
in error. And that, of course, shows ? let's all say it together ?
"bigotry," "intolerance," and, worst of all, "HATE."

Yet some of Gibson's critics are more subtle with their allegations ?
as an example, there's Abe Foxman, president of the Anti-Defamation
League. Perhaps sensing that the all-out assault method might have
backfired, creating resentment from devout Christians who can smell an
overt double standard (when was the last time a director came under
such fire for portraying Christians negatively in a movie?), Foxman
has taken a more clever tack. No, he says, of course Gibson is no
anti-Semite, and by no means is his movie anti-Semitic in content.
But, Foxman adds, "The Passion" could spark anti-Semitic violence from
those who might wrongly interpret its subject matter and themes.

Well, it's a nice try on Foxman's part, but the problem of double
standards still applies. Gibson, who was less combative in the Sawyer
interview than on earlier occasions, still found a memorable way to
make that point, although in an effort to keep his rhetoric civil, he
made sure not to belabor it. In answer to the charge that "The
Passion" could cause people to hate Jews in spite of Gibson's best
intentions, Gibson offhandedly replied that watching "Schindler's
List" hadn't inspired people to hate Germans.

Of course, it cannot be said that "Schindler's List" did much to cause
people to like Germans. Nor can it be said that "Mississippi Burning"
made anyone like Southern whites, or that any of the movies directed
by Spike Lee or John Singleton have caused anyone to like whites in
general. But, strangely, at no point during the making of any of those
movies did any "concerned" group abscond with an early version of the
script and then issue news releases expressing their fears that some
might interpret the content of such films as advocating anti-German,
anti-Southern, or anti-white mayhem. If any group had done any such
thing, we all know that they would be crossly dismissed by the
"respectable" media as would-be censors with a probable racist and
Nazi agenda.

After all, as we have been well-trained to believe, groups such as
Germans and Southerners and (more broadly) whites, especially those of
Christian heritage, have no right to complain about being treated
unfairly. People such as those ought to just shut up and take their
medicine, whatever medicine the powers-that-be may prescribe. For
Reginald Denney, the white truck driver beaten by a black mob in the
aftermath of the Rodney King trial in 1991, the medicine was
particularly strong, consisting of repeated blows to the face with a
brick. For people of German descent living in post World War II
Yugoslavia, it was genocidal ethnic cleansing at the hands of the
Communist Tito regime, which could not have gone down well. For
thousands of German women and girls near the end of that same war, the
medicine, stiff indeed, involved getting gang-raped by soldiers of
Stalin's advancing Red Army. For thousands of Russian Christians with
the misfortune to live in the 20th century after 1917, the medicine
was martyrdom at the hands of a repressive Soviet regime that at the
same time ? mark well! ? stigmatized anti-Semitism as an unforgivable,
"counter-revolutionary" transgression.

For most of us, to be sure, the medicine is not quite so bitter. It
consists more in such commonplace but still aggravating occurrences as
being turned down for a job or for admission to a university because
of the (white) color of our skin. Or being hit with a "hate speech"
charge for expressing an opinion that violates the sensitivity of a
particular, protected (that is, nonwhite) group. Or being relentlessly
mocked as "lily-white" or "white-bread," in other words as having no
true soul, spirit, or culture because we are white.

Gibson is the latest in a long line of public figures who have caught
flak for the crime of Thinking Wrongly. John Rocker was perhaps the
last such high-profile case, and the popular backlash against his
persecution took the form of standing ovations from hometown fans and
a proliferation of "John Rocker for President" T-shirts. Similarly,
the backlash against those who are attacking "The Passion" is likely
to trigger a hugely successful run for the movie.

Such are the unintentional side-effects of the medicine our masters
make us swallow. I guess they'll have to work on all that. One of
these days, maybe they'll perfect the formula, and everyone will
finally fall into step. May the God who died on the cross for our
redemption keep us from that day!

"The Passion" and the furor

Jews behaving badly

By ANDY NOWICKI


Actor, director, and former "Sexiest Man in the World" Mel Gibson
recently gave an interview to Diane Sawyer on ABC to defend his
upcoming movie, "The Passion of the Christ," which has been accused of
fomenting anti-Semitism, essentially because it portrays the scourging
and crucifixion of Christ as depicted in the Christian Gospels, which
undeniably means that the audience is exposed to some striking
examples of Jews behaving badly.

Of course, there are good Jews in the Christian account as well,
including but not limited to Jesus Himself. Still, as Gibson pointed
out in the interview, those who are against his movie really have a
problem with the four Gospels, and, thus, with Christianity itself.
After all, to be a Christian means to believe that Jesus is the Son of
God, and to believe that Jesus is the Son of God means that you think
the Jews, who reject the notion of Jesus as the Son of God, are (gasp)
wrong. Ergo, to be a Christian is to be "anti-Semitic," or at least
anti-Judaic, since if you take your religion seriously, you hold it to
be the truth and those who disagree with it (in this case, Jews) to be
in error. And that, of course, shows ? let's all say it together ?
"bigotry," "intolerance," and, worst of all, "HATE."

Yet some of Gibson's critics are more subtle with their allegations ?
as an example, there's Abe Foxman, president of the Anti-Defamation
League. Perhaps sensing that the all-out assault method might have
backfired, creating resentment from devout Christians who can smell an
overt double standard (when was the last time a director came under
such fire for portraying Christians negatively in a movie?), Foxman
has taken a more clever tack. No, he says, of course Gibson is no
anti-Semite, and by no means is his movie anti-Semitic in content.
But, Foxman adds, "The Passion" could spark anti-Semitic violence from
those who might wrongly interpret its subject matter and themes.

Well, it's a nice try on Foxman's part, but the problem of double
standards still applies. Gibson, who was less combative in the Sawyer
interview than on earlier occasions, still found a memorable way to
make that point, although in an effort to keep his rhetoric civil, he
made sure not to belabor it. In answer to the charge that "The
Passion" could cause people to hate Jews in spite of Gibson's best
intentions, Gibson offhandedly replied that watching "Schindler's
List" hadn't inspired people to hate Germans.

Of course, it cannot be said that "Schindler's List" did much to cause
people to like Germans. Nor can it be said that "Mississippi Burning"
made anyone like Southern whites, or that any of the movies directed
by Spike Lee or John Singleton have caused anyone to like whites in
general. But, strangely, at no point during the making of any of those
movies did any "concerned" group abscond with an early version of the
script and then issue news releases expressing their fears that some
might interpret the content of such films as advocating anti-German,
anti-Southern, or anti-white mayhem. If any group had done any such
thing, we all know that they would be crossly dismissed by the
"respectable" media as would-be censors with a probable racist and
Nazi agenda.

After all, as we have been well-trained to believe, groups such as
Germans and Southerners and (more broadly) whites, especially those of
Christian heritage, have no right to complain about being treated
unfairly. People such as those ought to just shut up and take their
medicine, whatever medicine the powers-that-be may prescribe. For
Reginald Denney, the white truck driver beaten by a black mob in the
aftermath of the Rodney King trial in 1991, the medicine was
particularly strong, consisting of repeated blows to the face with a
brick. For people of German descent living in post World War II
Yugoslavia, it was genocidal ethnic cleansing at the hands of the
Communist Tito regime, which could not have gone down well. For
thousands of German women and girls near the end of that same war, the
medicine, stiff indeed, involved getting gang-raped by soldiers of
Stalin's advancing Red Army. For thousands of Russian Christians with
the misfortune to live in the 20th century after 1917, the medicine
was martyrdom at the hands of a repressive Soviet regime that at the
same time ? mark well! ? stigmatized anti-Semitism as an unforgivable,
"counter-revolutionary" transgression.

For most of us, to be sure, the medicine is not quite so bitter. It
consists more in such commonplace but still aggravating occurrences as
being turned down for a job or for admission to a university because
of the (white) color of our skin. Or being hit with a "hate speech"
charge for expressing an opinion that violates the sensitivity of a
particular, protected (that is, nonwhite) group. Or being relentlessly
mocked as "lily-white" or "white-bread," in other words as having no
true soul, spirit, or culture because we are white.

Gibson is the latest in a long line of public figures who have caught
flak for the crime of Thinking Wrongly. John Rocker was perhaps the
last such high-profile case, and the popular backlash against his
persecution took the form of standing ovations from hometown fans and
a proliferation of "John Rocker for President" T-shirts. Similarly,
the backlash against those who are attacking "The Passion" is likely
to trigger a hugely successful run for the movie.

Such are the unintentional side-effects of the medicine our masters
make us swallow. I guess they'll have to work on all that. One of
these days, maybe they'll perfect the formula, and everyone will
finally fall into step. May the God who died on the cross for our
redemption keep us from that day!

"The Passion" and the furor

Jews behaving badly


By ANDY NOWICKI


Actor, director, and former "Sexiest Man in the World" Mel Gibson
recently gave an interview to Diane Sawyer on ABC to defend his
upcoming movie, "The Passion of the Christ," which has been accused of
fomenting anti-Semitism, essentially because it portrays the scourging
and crucifixion of Christ as depicted in the Christian Gospels, which
undeniably means that the audience is exposed to some striking
examples of Jews behaving badly.

Of course, there are good Jews in the Christian account as well,
including but not limited to Jesus Himself. Still, as Gibson pointed
out in the interview, those who are against his movie really have a
problem with the four Gospels, and, thus, with Christianity itself.
After all, to be a Christian means to believe that Jesus is the Son of
God, and to believe that Jesus is the Son of God means that you think
the Jews, who reject the notion of Jesus as the Son of God, are (gasp)
wrong. Ergo, to be a Christian is to be "anti-Semitic," or at least
anti-Judaic, since if you take your religion seriously, you hold it to
be the truth and those who disagree with it (in this case, Jews) to be
in error. And that, of course, shows ? let's all say it together ?
"bigotry," "intolerance," and, worst of all, "HATE."

Yet some of Gibson's critics are more subtle with their allegations ?
as an example, there's Abe Foxman, president of the Anti-Defamation
League. Perhaps sensing that the all-out assault method might have
backfired, creating resentment from devout Christians who can smell an
overt double standard (when was the last time a director came under
such fire for portraying Christians negatively in a movie?), Foxman
has taken a more clever tack. No, he says, of course Gibson is no
anti-Semite, and by no means is his movie anti-Semitic in content.
But, Foxman adds, "The Passion" could spark anti-Semitic violence from
those who might wrongly interpret its subject matter and themes.

Well, it's a nice try on Foxman's part, but the problem of double
standards still applies. Gibson, who was less combative in the Sawyer
interview than on earlier occasions, still found a memorable way to
make that point, although in an effort to keep his rhetoric civil, he
made sure not to belabor it. In answer to the charge that "The
Passion" could cause people to hate Jews in spite of Gibson's best
intentions, Gibson offhandedly replied that watching "Schindler's
List" hadn't inspired people to hate Germans.

"The Passion" and the furor