On the July/August issue:

Fighting Anti-Semitism

To the Editor:
Danielle Pletka, in her excellent article “The Anti-Semitism Money and Power Network—and How to Smash It,” states that the lack of a legal definition of anti-Semitism has hindered the federal and state enforcement of the existing laws even on campus (July/August). The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which has been passed by 42 countries and was overwhelmingly pass-ed with bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, defines and makes it easier to prosecute anti-Semitic activity. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, however, has not brought this bill up for a vote. Senator Schumer, who calls himself the shomer (Hebrew for guardian) of Israel, should explain why he has not brought up this important bill for a vote given the massive rise of anti-Semitism in this country.
Seymour M. Cohen, M.D.
New York City

To the Editor:
I read Danielle Pletka’s article with amazement. The piece contains such depth of knowledge and detail that it could qualify as a Ph.D. thesis. Pletka details excellent steps to counteract what is going on, and her article should be disseminated among U.S. legislatures and enforcement authorities. 

I would have loved, however, if she had discussed in similar detail what could be done by the Jewish community or Jews individually to combat anti-Semitism in America.
Jake Cohen
Baltimore, Maryland

Danielle Pletka writes:
Thank you to Seymour M. Cohen and Jake Cohen for the kind comments. The question of what Jews in America can do to combat anti-Semitism is a tough one. As the Jewish community knows better than anyone, it is not a monolith. And much as in Israel, we have seen fissures develop among American Jews over the prosecution of the war against Hamas, over the Netanyahu government’s decision-making, and over politics at home in an election season. So, here’s where I would start: Chuck Schumer needs to pass The Antisemitism Awareness Act. Simply, the act carves into law the executive orders of our two most recent presidents and builds the foundation for the action that I describe in the article as necessary. Absent agreement about what anti-Semitism is, the fight is all the more challenging. Another step: Like so many of us, I come from a family of Holocaust survivors who did not wear their experiences on their sleeves. Too many of us had grandparents who didn’t want to talk about what happened, didn’t want to call attention to themselves, practiced the philosophy that living well is the best revenge. You know what? Winning is the best revenge. What is the point of being labeled a powerful force in American politics if that force is not used for good? Anti-Semitism must be anathematized in academia. Money must be directed to schools that protect their Jewish students. Anti-Semites must be named and shamed in the public square. Ankles must be bitten at every turn. The right outcome is that before any anti-Semite opens his mouth to speak on questions of Judaism, Zionism, or Israel, he fears being tarred with the brush of anti-Semitism. That means empowering the organizations that go after hostage-poster scrapers, Jew harassers, and those who equivocate about whether “From the River to the Sea” is really a call to annihilate the Jewish people. In U.S. law, when Congress compels a representative of the president of the United States to take a particular position—vote against World Bank money to Iran, for example—the term of art has it that that representative will use her “voice and vote.” It is time for American Jews to use their voice and vote to defeat the forces of anti-Semitism. And for me, at least, that imperative overcomes the many other political priorities we have embraced as Americans. Because if we do not, it will get worse. We do not want to be the Jews of London or Paris. But without a fight, that will be our fate.

Capitalism and Jew-Hatred

To the Editor:
Thanks to Clifford Asness for his clear and well-argued article on the anti-capitalist left (“Capitalism Is the Real Target,” July/August). There is both tragedy and irony in the situation. The tragedy is obvious, but the irony is more nuanced: The Palestinians are perhaps the luckiest “oppressed” people in the world because they live with and next door to the Israelis, who have shown them a better way forward via their example of lawfulness and industry. The Arabs who work and live in Israel know this firsthand and benefit from Israel’s governance, democracy, and capitalism—or to paraphrase Asness, the opportunities for human flourishing provided by free enterprise. 

The situation appears hopeless in many ways because Hamas and its supporters are not swayed by reason, misery, or even military de-feat. But while the Arabs who are integrated into Israeli society know that Israel is not perfect, they know that it’s a just, healthy, and well-functioning society. Israeli Arabs demonstrate this by choosing to live lawfully and work in Israel. I hope that, in their way, they recognize fully the truth of what Asness writes.

My only suggestion is that Asness write more about the role of envy in the motivation of the Palestinians and their progressive supporters. This is nothing but a regression to primitive human instinct. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be any readily available talisman to ward it off.
Steven Perry
Austin, Texas

To the Editor:
Thank you to Clifford Asness for his excellent analysis. Reflex underdogism is a feature of the left. Another way of looking at the origins of anti-Semitism is that the exceptional success of so many Jews, despite their tragic history of discrimination and attempts to kill them off, have made non-Jews feel inferior. Searching for an explanation for their feelings of inferiority, they arrive at “a Jewish conspiracy.”

Israel has made things worse for those feeling inferior to the Jews as the Jewish state is so successful in advancing technology, military fighting, intelligence-gathering, and many other fields.
Allen Markowicz, M.D.
Toledo, Ohio

To the Editor:
 ‘Capitalism Is the Real Target” was an excellent read.  Most of what Asness articulates is dead-on. But I think it’s misleading to suggest that Jew-hatred was not really the point of all the protesting. If it were solely or even mostly capitalism that animated these people, it wouldn’t have taken the October 7 barbaric attack to trigger the mass hatred of Jews. Any capitalist flourishing, including new highs in the stock market, would cause worldwide anti-capitalism rallies.

When Asness writes of the destitute of Gaza, however, he hits the mark. If only they respected liberty in economics and in life, they would have a much better existence.
Greg Silvershein
Naples, Florida

Clifford Asness writes:
Regarding Steven Perry’s letter, I was writing about envy. I just didn’t use the word. As for Greg Silvershein’s comments, I certainly didn’t mean to imply that capitalism was the sole cause of the hatred and violence. For instance, I don’t think the Cossack pogroms were carried out because the poor Jews of the shtetl were successful capitalists. And, in fact, any capitalist flourishing does indeed seem to create worldwide hatred for capitalism.

Consensus vs. Courage

To the Editor:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s writing and perspective are only getting better with time, and she must relish having the last laugh at the Mr. Consensuses of the world as they are ousted from their positions of negative influence. It is a thrill to witness her neurons firing on all pistons and connecting reality to the policy of the insulated elites, whether the Laurentian overlords in Hull or the Beltway bougies who have no clue how their feel-good governance has affected the rest of us. We all need to be Mr. Courage and speak truth to the gas-lighters of the American public. They are the ones advancing intolerance and hate in the Western world by pandering to and appeasing Islamists, the leftists, and who knows what other forms of antidemocratic evil. I read Hirsi Ali’s article on July 4, and it was the best thing I read all day. G-d bless America.
Jarod Farn-Guillette
Brewer, Maine

To the Editor:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is very courageous to put her observations into words for the rest of us (“Mr. Consensus: A Portrait of a Suicidal Worldview,” July/August). We can benefit from her perspective, and we must pay attention to what she has to say. She has journeyed through multiple cultures and lived within the parameters of their worldviews.

I am a Dutch citizen, but living in Israel has changed me—especially since October 7. When I was young, I thought myself a pacifist. Today, I fully support the IDF and understand the danger that Western democracies are in. Being nice is not so important as being discerning.

In Israel, I feel safer than I would in the Netherlands, and I am thankful for it. In the rest of the West, media bias against Israel and willful ignorance of Hamas and Qatari propaganda are bedeviling and hard to combat.

My hope is that Hirsi Ali remains relentless, and I fully support her efforts to restore the biblical foundations of Western culture. We need her voice.
Esther Arnusch
Jerusalem

On Solzhenitsyn

To the Editor:
Gary Saul Morson’s excellent article about Solzhenitsyn is a warning to humanity (“Solzhenitsyn Warned Us,” July/August). I hope that most of us are not too far gone to heed its wisdom. People seem largely satisfied to chase what they see as worldly goals, not matter that they rarely or never achieve them.
Phil Droznika
Clarksburg, Ontario

To the Editor:
I am a great fan of both Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Gary Saul Morson. The first article of Morson’s that grabbed me and wouldn’t let go was “The Moral Urgency of Anna Karenina,” published in the April 2015 issue of COMMENTARY. I teach AP literature, and for the past number of years, I have given both the novel and Morson’s essay to the top student in the course. 

As relates to Solzhenitsyn, I introduce him to my students by way of an excerpt from The Gulag Archipelago, Vol I. The excerpt includes Solzhenitsyn’s observation that “the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart.” That is what I try to teach all my students.

I thank Morson for relaying this warning. Articles like his help me understand why I find much modern literature so soul-destroying and, ultimately, awful. There are no admirable characters and no occasions when one feels a “pang of conscience.” And, as Morson quotes Solzhenitsyn, “Literature which does not evoke a pang of conscience is already a lie.” I anticipate bringing up that quote in the future when discussing books with my peers.
Wendy McGee
Vancouver, British Columbia

Gary Saul Morson writes:

I am more than grateful for Phil Droznika’s and Wendy McGee’s kind words. As all three of us agree, literature—and the teaching of literature—should make us wiser.