The Jewish Press | July 20, 2018 | 9
viewpoint thejewishpress
(Founded in 1920) Abby Kutler President Annette van de Kamp-Wright Editor Richard Busse Creative Director Susan Bernard Advertising Executive Lori Kooper-Schwarz Assistant Editor Gabby Blair Staff Writer Thierry Ndjike Accounting Jewish Press Board Abby Kutler, President; Eric Dunning, Ex Officio; Laura Dembitzer; Candice Friedman; Jill Idelman; Andy Isaacson; Michael Kaufman; David Kotok; Natasha Kraft; Debbie Kricsfeld; Eric Shapiro and Amy Tipp. The mission of the Jewish Federation of Omaha is to build and sustain a strong and vibrant Omaha Jewish Community and to support Jews in Israel and around the world. Agencies of the Federation are: Community Relations Committee, Jewish Community Center, Center for Jewish LIfe, Jewish Social Services, and the Jewish Press. Guidelines and highlights of the Jewish Press, including front page stories and announcements, can be found online at: wwwjewishomaha.org; click on ‘Jewish Press.’ Editorials express the view of the writer and are not necessarily representative of the views of the Jewish Press Board of Directors, the Jewish Federation of Omaha Board of Directors, or the Omaha Jewish community as a whole. The Jewish Press reserves the right to edit signed letters and articles for space and content. The Jewish Press is not responsible for the Kashrut of any product or establishment. Editorial The Jewish Press is an agency of the Jewish Federation of Omaha. Deadline for copy, ads and photos is: Thursday, 9 a.m., eight days prior to publication. E-mail editorial material and photos to: avandekamp@jew ishomaha.org; send ads (in TIF or PDF format) to: rbusse@jewishom aha.org. Letters to the Editor Guidelines The Jewish Press welcomes Letters to the Editor. They may be sent via regular mail to: The Jewish Press, 333 So. 132 St., Omaha, NE 68154; via fax: 1.402.334.5422 or via e-mail to the Editor at: avandekamp@jew ishomaha.org. Letters should be no longer than 250 words and must be single-spaced typed, not hand-written. Published letters should be confined to opinions and comments on articles or events. News items should not be submitted and printed as a “Letter to the Editor.” The Editor may edit letters for content and space restrictions. Letters may be published without giving an opposing view. Information shall be verified before printing. All letters must be signed by the writer. The Jewish Press will not publish letters that appear to be part of an organized campaign, nor letters copied from the Internet. No letters should be published from candidates running for office, but others may write on their behalf. Letters of thanks should be confined to commending an institution for a program, project or event, rather than personally thanking paid staff, unless the writer chooses to turn the “Letter to the Editor” into a paid personal ad or a news article about the event, project or program which the professional staff supervised. For information, contact Annette van de Kamp-Wright, Jewish Press Editor, 402.334.6450. Postal The Jewish Press (USPS 275620) is published weekly (except for the first week of January and July) on Friday for $40 per calendar year U.S.; $80 foreign, by the Jewish Federation of Omaha. Phone: 402.334.6448; FAX: 402.334.5422. Periodical postage paid at Omaha, NE. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: The Jewish Press, 333 So. 132 St., Omaha, NE 68154-2198 or email to: jpress@jewishomaha.org.
American Jewish Press Association Award Winner
Nebraska Press As- National Newspaper sociation Association Award winner 2008
H
What to get the Nazi who has everything ANNETTE vAN DE KAMP Editor, Jewish Press ere’s the story: A classified advertisements website in France removed an ad marketing a secondhand showerhead as coming from Auschwitz. A spokesperson for the LeBonCoin website said on Twitter that as soon as the ad was flagged, moderators “immediately removed it, and were of course shocked by its content. We apologize to anyone who, like us, became upset by this ad.” The website may press criminal charges against the author of the ad, who sought 455 euros, or $535, for the metal object. (Source: JTA.com) Besides the price, which is a bit steep, the story is not really all that unique. There are many opportunities to buy Nazi memorabilia as well as newly designed “Holocaust gifts,” especially online. And as disturbing as those ‘memorabilia’ are, the fact that people continue to come up with new ways to pervert the memories of the Holocaust is equally worrisome. On Cafepress.com, you can buy Christmas tree ornaments with a picture of the Auschwitz-Birkenau barracks. They come complete with a little red ribbon for easy hanging. They call it an “Oswiecim Ornament,” it costs $14.99, is in stock and comes with a 100% satisfaction guarantee and safe shipping. They also sell Mauthausen kitchen magnets and oval car stickers with images of Auschwitz. And questionable t-shirts that simply state: “I survived” in toddler sizes. I don’t know what that’s all about. Or how about ‘Jewish Memorial at Terezin flipflops?’ They come in black, pink, orange and Caribbean blue (and they’re on sale!). It’s difficult for me not to mock these types of products and the people who buy them. While I know it’s hor-
rific that there are those who produce these things and that there is a market for Nazi-nostalgia, with money to support it, the need to roll my eyes outweighs my rational thinking. Who are these bizarre people who think selling an Auschwitz showerhead is acceptable? Who on earth would want to wear flip-flops with images of Terezin? Why, why, why? Nazi nostalgia has always puzzled me. The way Neo-Nazis parade in faux uniforms, with flags and banners in black, red and white color schemes, reminiscent of the Swastika (but not quite the same) makes me think there is more at work than the need to feel important, in control. Ideas are one thing, but having certain beliefs about racial difference, inferiority and intolerance of others does not automatically cause one to feel the need for dressing up. A racist is not automatically a Neo-Nazi who polishes his boots. It’s a relevant question as Neo-Nazi Arthur Jones currently runs for Congress in Illinois, causing a minifirestorm as Republicans are scrambling. Do they vote for the Democrat candidate in November, or do they write in a different candidate? Do they not vote at all? Back in
March, Jones ran uncontested in the Republican primary; with over 20,000 votes he made it onto the ballot. Jones, former head of the American Nazi Party has a list of NeoNazi credentials a mile long; he is also well known for being a Holocaust denier, calling it “the biggest, blackest lie in history.” It, again, begs the question: why the nostalgia? Why dress up, why the banners, the flags? If it was a lie, what exactly are you nostalgic for? I guess that’s my real question: if Hitler was so great, but the Holocaust never happened, what is going on here? “Cognitive Dissonance,” my husband the therapist says. CD is the mental discomfort experienced when one simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. I think those of us not in the mental health field call that hypocrisy. The notion that every self-proclaimed Neo-Nazi is mentally unhealthy is something that makes me uncomfortable, though. I don’t want to compare these people to the countless individuals who actually suffer from mental health conditions. I feel the same way whenever the discussion around gun control veers into mental health territory- it muddles the issue. I guess for the time being I will have to continue to wonder what motivates people to sell showerheads or wear those faux Nazi-uniforms. But then, it is entirely possible I don’t really want to understand their motivation.
many speakers. One leader praised us for showing up and “supporting the young kids throwing rocks at all borders” -- conjuring up images of Palestinian youth throwing rocks at Israeli soldiers. Those words hurt my heart. Gaza, Ferguson and Texas were invoked in the same sentence, establishing
of people who were suffering, not signing on to the particular policies they promoted. I hoped my presence communicated that they were not alone. This does not mean that all speech would have been acceptable. And this does not mean that in other venues and at other times we should not debate ideas and policies. It does mean that there are moments in life when focusing on our shared humanity, and the suffering of another human being, must come first. When we see the world exclusively in categories of “friend” or “traitor,” we risk making ourselves blind to real suffering and missing an opportunity to build foundations for a real transformative exchange of ideas. On the flight back to New York I thought about my experience. Despite those uncomfortable moments, it was an honor to be a participant in the action. It was beyond moving to see undocumented immigrants protesting on the streets of San Diego, taking an enormous risk to publicly affirm their right to live without fear and threat. It was critical to show Latinx communities -- who do not have a history of deep relationships with Jewish communities -- that we stood with them. It was an honor to walk with other faith communities for these causes. But at moments it was complicated. The U.S.-Mexico border was only one of the fault lines I encountered. Where do I draw my boundaries? Where does the Jewish community draw its lines? Sometimes it’s constructive to remember that “friend” and “traitor” are not the only ways to frame a conversation. Sometimes it is preferable to make the definition of one’s friend or foe just a little bit more porous to allow the humanity to come through. Rabbi David Hoffman is vice chancellor and chief advancement officer at the Jewish Theological Seminary. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.
We went to the border to support our friends. Our disagreements were for another time. DAviD HoffMAN JTA Ronald Reagan is reported to have said, “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.” There is much wisdom in this sentiment, but the realities of alliance building in the current political environment raise complicated questions for many people: What happens when the balance shifts and the percentage representing agreement goes south of 80 percent? And what happens when one of the issues that constitute the 20 percent of disagreement is foundational to one’s identity? How much disagreement can be overlooked before working together becomes impossible? I found myself thinking about these questions on a flight to San Diego earlier this month. I was traveling with a group of Jewish religious leaders mobilized by T’ruah to participate in a series of actions initiated by the national "Latinx" group Mijente. We went to demonstrate our opposition to the president’s border policies, to protest the xenophobic rhetoric too often used in national conversations about immigration — and make a statement of our moral and religious beliefs. Different from many of the protests I’ve been to in New York City, this action was organized and led by the Latinx and Chicanx communities most impacted by the immigration policies. I, along with other Jewish leaders, was there as a guest, stepping up in solidarity and as a witness to a moral crisis, but not occupying a central leadership role. The question of what it means to be an ally arose for me at several moments during the action, when Mijente’s leaders spoke words that I simply disagreed with or even offended me. The platform for the march included a call to abolish ICE, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency -- a policy stance that I believe is misguided. Part of the power of Mijente is that its leadership is broad and less hierarchical, so we heard from
Rabbi David Hoffman of the Jewish Theological Seminary, right, and other participants at a San Diego rally protesting the Trump administration's immigration policies organized by the grassroots group Mijente, July 2, 2018. Credit: JTS Communications facile moral equivalencies among clashes in Israel, a police shooting in Missouri and the separation of families at the U.S. border. Others described borders, fences and police departments as inherently immoral and imperialistic — again, not a position I accept. As I listened to the speakers, I found it more helpful not to conceive of the words as policy statements. I was hearing how people who live very different lives than I do experience the world. And sometimes even policy statements express emotions and experiences that deserve to be heard. I like to think that our group of rabbis and cantors transcended any particular policy. I decided neither to agree nor disagree. For this moment, in the context of this protest, these were unhelpful binaries. I was standing there as an ally with a group