Thursday, August 18, 2022

Friday, August 5, 2022

Andrew Torba, "Christian Nationalist" and Alleged Anti-Semite

 I'd not heard of Andrew Torba till just now. I was watching a Stephen Colbert monologue on YouTube and Colbert mentioned Andrew Torba. My ears perked up for a couple of reasons. "Torba" is a Polish word meaning "bag." And Colbert said that Torba is a Christian nationalist and an anti-Semite. 

I searched online. If what I found is accurate, Torba is of Polish descent. He is from the coal mining region near Scranton, Pennsylvania, again, if what I found is accurate. 

I don't know how much power Torba has. 

The article about Andrew Torba is here

Below is his statement, as featured in the Media Matters article. Torba singles out Jews as a problem and pretends that all Christians are like him. I am a Christian and I have nothing in common with a man who speaks like this. I hope any increased visibility brings with it increased condemnation of so-called "Christian nationalism" and all anti-Semitism. 

ANDREW TORBA (GAB CEO): This is a Christian nation. Christians outnumber you by a lot. A lot. And we're not going to listen to 2%. You represent 2% of the country, OK? We're not bending the knee to the 2% anymore. The 98% of the rest of us — you know, 70, 75% of which are Christians, self-identifying Christians — we're not taking it anymore, bud. We are taking back our culture. We're taking back our country. We're taking back our government. So deal with it.

You know, there's nothing you can do to stop us because what has been set into motion, it's snowballing now. Right? We have Marjorie Taylor Greene openly saying that she's a Christian nationalist. We have Matt Gaetz kind of flirting with it a little bit today with his tweet on Christian nationalism. You know, we have Paul Gosar. We have like people in Congress right now, members of Congress right now who are openly, openly saying that they're Christian nationalists. We have multiple candidates for governor who won their primaries in a landslide, are winning in the polling right now, and are going to win the governorships of multiple states who are Christian nationalists. 

We have officials not only at the state level, not only at the federal level, but also at the local level. People who are running for school boards — Christian nationalists who are running for school board and by Christian nationalists, I mean like concerned Christian parents who are done, who are done, done with this, done, done being controlled and being told what we're allowed to do in our own country by a 2% minority or by people who hate our biblical worldview, hate our Christ, hate our Lord and savior. Done. It's over. So you better deal with it. 

You can — you can demonize me individually. You can try and attack me. But guess what? You know, I am just one of hundreds of millions of Christians in this country, bud. So guess what? It's inevitable. Sorry.  

Friday, July 29, 2022

CUNY Is Pervasively Hostile to Jewish Students: Complaint. The New York Post


The New York Post published an extraordinary article on July 23, 2022. 

The article alleges overt anti-Semitism at CUNY. That is astounding enough. Another astounding feature of the article is that it never mentions who is harassing, threatening, and fomenting hatred against Jews on the CUNY campus. Never. Who is doing this? The article does not say. Astounding. 

One can be certain that were the assailants Poles or Catholics or Polish Catholics the assailants' identity would appear in the headline and throughout the article. 

BTW, I have no idea who the assailants are. 

From the article: 

The City University of New York has become a “pervasively hostile environment for Jewish students,” according to a newly filed complaint to the US Department of Education that alleges violations of the Civil Rights Act.

“Some of the harassment on CUNY campuses has become so commonplace as to almost be normalized,” according to the complaint by the American Center for Law & Justice in Washington DC., which cites a litany of harassment going back to 2013.

Court papers cite incidents at Kingsborough Community College in Brooklyn where a Jewish professor “found swastikas carved into the door and her keyboard drenched in urine” and another Jewish professor from Israel was asked how many people she had killed.

The college’s former interim president complained there were “too many Jews” among the school’s faculty, The Post reported.

At Brooklyn College in 2016, students interrupted a Faculty Council meeting “to demand the removal of all Zionists from campus,” the Center said in its complaint, which noted students called the council’s chairman, who was wearing a yarmulke, a “Zionist pig.”

You can read the full article here 


I did a Google search and found this article from Tablet. Again, I did not find any perpetrator demographic identified. 

Rather, "Western Civilization" is to blame. Seriously? People urinating on a Jewish professor's computer are representatives of "Western Civilization" ? Brodsky is absurd. 

How, I wondered, had CUNY become like this? What was it about the politics of the institution, or the politics of the famously Jewish city that operated it, that had allowed the university to reach this point? David Brodsky, chair of the Jewish studies department at CUNY’s Brooklyn College and a fellow line-stander, was meticulously nonpartisan in his analysis. The problem is much bigger than CUNY: “Antisemitism is systemic in Western society. It manifests in ways that are under people’s radar,” the Talmudist explained. “Unless you recognize where it’s coming from systemically, you fall prey to it.”


I wrote to Prof. Brodsky. 

Dear Prof. Brodsky

I read a Tablet article addressing anti-Semitism at CUNY. You were quoted as blaming the harassment on "Western society." I find your statement to be unbelievable. I do not believe that, for example, whoever it was who urinated on a Jewish professor's computer, is a representative of "Western society." For many readers, I suspect, blaming these assaults on "Western society" is a less-than-courageous, less-than-accurate way of avoiding naming the actual assailants and their actual agenda, because those assailants, whoever they are, are members of a protected group.

I do not know who is behind these assaults, but given that Israel is frequently mentioned, I am guessing that these assaults have been carried out by Muslims. I am using the same technique to read about anti-Semitism at CUNY as I used to use to read Soviet-Era news. Something can't be said because it is politically dangerous to say it, so people are engaging in circumlocution.

I could be wrong, but I've read a couple of articles about anti-Semitism at CUNY, one in the Post and one in the Tablet, and neither makes clear who is carrying out these assaults, so I have to guess. Perhaps the assailants are not Muslims, but the media's and your declining to speak frankly is perhaps inadvertently placing the blame on Muslims.

If I am interpreting your comment incorrectly, please let me know. Thank you.  

Thursday, July 28, 2022

A New Biography of a Lesser-Known Nazi Confounds the Reader. How to Explain the Evil of Reinhard Heydrich?


A New Biography of a Lesser-Known Nazi Confounds the Reader
How to Explain the Evil of Reinhard Heydrich?


Who's the most popular Nazi? I thought of asking this as a poll question on Facebook, but I've been in Facebook jail so many times I dared not risk it. I turned to Google. Adolf Hitler gets thirty-one million hits. Eva Braun, two and a half million. Joseph Goebbels, two and a quarter million. Heinrich Himmler, almost two million. Albert Speer, a million and a half. Hitler's dog Blondi, 638 thousand. Reinhard Heydrich is just slightly more represented in my Google search than Hitler's dog. Heydrich racks up 787 thousand hits. The numbers change day by day, but the proportions remain about the same. Heydrich's relatively low profile astounds me, given the immense evil this – entity – I can barely stand to call him a "man" – wreaked upon the world.


The Hangman and His Wife: The Life and Death of Reinhard Heydrich, is a May, 2022 book published by Knopf. The book is 656 pages long, with 570 pages of narrative followed by notes and an index. There are 110 black-and-white photographs. Author Nancy Dougherty knew Lina Heydrich, Reinhard Heydrich's widow, and interviewed her for the book, as well as other surviving Nazis, including Albert Speer. Dougherty is a gifted writer who can report horror in beautiful prose. I'd recommend this book to anyone curious about Nazism or simply about human evil. 

Wednesday, July 13, 2022

A Rabbi Not Being Helpful During a Difficult Time in America.

 If a Catholic priest singled out Jews for criticism during this difficult time in America, that priest would be raked over the coals, and deservedly so. 

Saturday, July 9, 2022

Abortion and Anti-Catholicism on Facebook


After the SCOTUS decision overruling Roe v. Wade was announced, my Facebook page was awash in anti-Catholic rhetoric of the most primitive and hateful kind. 

Part of the raison d'etre of the Bieganski, Brute Polak Stereotype is Christophobia, as anyone has read the book, and this blog, knows. 

The essay, below, addresses the Christophobia flooding social media in recent days. 

Sunday, June 19, 2022

A Jewish Joke Shared by the Australian Jewish Association on Facebook

 The joke, below, appeared on the Australian Jewish Association Facebook page. The joke supports the main ideas of my book Bieganski The Brute Polak Stereotype

In that book I argue that Poles and all other Christian and peasant-descent Eastern Europeans are stereotyped as large, strong, stupid, violent, and hateful, and Jews are stereotyped as smart, less physical, crafty, and money-oriented. 

Not only do others stereotype Poles and Jews this way. Poles and Jews stereotype themselves this way. 

The difference is that when stereotyping one's own group, one places a positive, as opposed to a negative, spin on the stereotype qualities. 

Poles may stereotype themselves as earthy, strong, reliable, and straightforward -- good qualities. Jews may stereotype themselves as being intelligent in a way that serves a good end rather than a negative one (world domination, in the most extreme stereotypes.) 

In the joke below, Jews stereotype themselves as clever, crafty, tricky, insincere, and money-oriented. Also, of course, as oppressed, and as oppressed by persons less intelligent than themselves, whom they can trick. But all these qualities serve a very good final result. 

Anti-Catholic and Anti-Semitic (or Anti-Smoking?) Nazi Der Sturmer Cartoon


According to the Jewish Virtual Library, (see here,) this is an anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic cartoon from Der Sturmer. The caption reads, "They belong to the church, she belongs to Satan. Both are lost to the German race."

Weirdly, Quora identifies this as an anti-smoking ad (see here). 

Thursday, June 2, 2022

"Force Ten from Navarone" and Brute Yugoslavs


I'm a big fan of Golden Age Hollywood movies. I recently re-watched "The Guns of Navarone," an all-star World War Two war adventure and heroism epic made in 1961. Gregory Peck, David Niven, Anthony Quinn, Anthony Quayle, James Darren, Irene Papas, Gia Scala, and Richard Harris star. John Lee Thompson directed. The plot: a crack team of commandos must take out some huge Nazi guns in order to allow British ships to enter a battle area. The story is not true, but it does reflect, if an exaggerated way, WW II fighting in Greece.

Each star tries to steal the screen from the others. I have to award points to David Niven for being unforgettable but also understated. Not easy given the rest of the powerhouse cast. And boy oh boy but was Irene Papas hot. The story is not very believable but it's a fun watch. Lots of expansive shots of Greek scenery. The ending when navy ships make their "whoop, whoop" sounds always gives me chills. You can watch that scene here. Maybe it will give you chills as well.


They really don't make movies like that anymore, and when I learned that there was a sequel, "Force Ten From Navarone," I knew I wanted to see it. It's directed by Guy Hamilton, who also directed James Bond films. Harrison Ford, Robert Shaw, Carl Weathers, Franco Nero, Edward Fox, and Barbara Bach star. It's not as good as "Guns of Navarone," but it offers lots of gorgeous Yugoslav scenery. And it also offers Bieganski, the Brute Polak stereotype.


As I make clear in my book, "Bieganski: The Brute Polak Stereotype," this stereotype is applied to all Eastern European, Christian, peasant-descent populations.


Bieganski-style characters are found in pop culture, media, academia, folklore, and other venues.


Bieganski-style characters are brutal, violent, stupid, hateful, and bigoted.


And of course Bieganski is to blame for Nazism's crimes. Not German Nazis, but Slavic, Christian peasants.


In "Force Ten from Navarone," the heroic team is menaced by perfidious Slavs lead by Richard Kiel. Kiel suffered from gigantism. He was 7'2" tall. He famously played a Bond villain. In "Force Ten from Navarone," Kiel played Drazak, a Yugoslav collaborator with the Nazis. He tricks and betrays the film's heroes and hatefully menaces a black American soldier, (Carl Weathers), and calls him "Blackie." He threatens to slice off the man's face. Drazak is so evil the Nazi in charge urges him to be "gentle." The Nazis are, of course, civilized, clean, neat, orderly, intelligent, and not shown doing any sadistic mayhem.


Barbara Bach plays Maritza, a Slavic woman who has sex with a Nazi officer. She is shown nude. Her having sex with a Nazi and her nudity debase her. She's a female Bieganski. Drazak eventually beats her, because that's what Bieganski types do. She is killed by a Nazi who is disguised as a Yugoslav, because, hey, what's the difference. A loser all around.


The use of the Bieganski Brute stereotype in "Force Ten From Navarone" is especially vile given how hard Yugoslavs fought against the Nazis. From Wikipedia, "The five largest resistance movements in Europe were the Dutch, the French, the Polish, the Soviet, and the Yugoslav; overall their size can be seen as comparable, particularly in the years 1941–1944."


Yes, some Eastern European, Christian, peasant-descent populations did collaborate with the Nazis. That's an historical fact that deserves to be taught, as all history deserves to be taught. "Force Ten from Navarone" does not deal in historical facts. When it comes to Slavs, it deals in stereotypes.


The movie's story was by Carl Foreman. Foreman was born to a Jewish family in Chicago and was eventually blacklisted, and later was rehabilitated. He was, for a time, a member of the Communist Party. The Communist Party, of course, did circulate the Bieganski stereotype to justify its post-war occupation of Poland. I have no idea if Foreman introduced the Bieganski stereotype into the script or if it is found in the book on which the movie is based. When the commandos finally meet up with some good Slavs, those Slavs all have bright red stars on their big, furry hats. Commie Slavs are good.

Monday, May 23, 2022

"Should Jews Support Ukraine?" Bieganski Replies

Lucie Fielding 

Lucie Fielding, pictured above, self-identifies as "trans-identified." I don't know if that means that LF is xx or xy.
LF says, "I am queer, kinky, polyamorous, Jewish, non-binary, trans-femme and witchy."


As they used to sing on Sesame Street, "One of these things is not like the other." The point of the song was to help young children to learn how to classify objects. Blue things are all alike and different from green things. Rectangles are all alike and different from circles.


What's different about LF's self-identifiers?


That's correct. The word "Jewish." Claiming to be "witchy" and polyamorous is very much not like claiming to be Jewish. See, for example, Exodus 20:14, Deuteronomy 5:21, Exodus 22:18, Genesis 24:65, Genesis 9:21-27, Genesis 19, teachings on tznuit, or modesty – see this article – etc.


Given that the activities that Fielding advocates for are expressly condemned in Judaism, why does LF claim Jewishness?


One word: identity.


People crave meaning as they crave food. Identity is a big part of meaning. LF wants to be "Jewish" because being "Jewish," even for an American who rejects core tenets of Judaism, endows the claimant with a sense of identity and a sense of meaning.


Life can seem meaningless. Life intimidates us with big, scary questions. "Why am I here? What is this all about? Where did I come from? Where am I going? Is there a God? Does God have any relationship to me? Am I connected to others, to the past, to the future, or am I just a lonely particle floating around empty space?"


These big, scary questions are reduced to a background whisper, rather than a bullying shout, once one slaps on an identity moniker as if it were a nametag. In the case of folks like LF, the nametag is the kind with weak adhesive. You can remove it at the orgy, and replace when convenient to your search for identity.


"Identity" answers one question. Here's the next obvious question. Why doesn't LF just, simply, be Jewish?


At minimum, follow the Ten Commandments. Read the Bible. Attend synagogue. For a bigger experience of identity, LF could keep kosher, join a Jewish community.


And then there's the biggest commitment of all. Believe in God. Pray. Do God's will.


LF chooses not to do those things for the same reasons that anyone rejects a religion does so. LF doesn't believe in Jewish behavior's efficacy, and LF finds these behaviors too hard. LF would prefer to covet others' spouses, attend orgies, eat pork, party on the Sabbath.


People leave Christianity / Hinduism / Islam for similar reasons. "I don't believe this does any good," "This is hard," "I'd rather do other things."


Judaism makes high demands. There are 613 commandments.


Yes, we all know that Judaism is, famously, an ethnicity as well as a religion. But Jews insist that Jews who convert to Christianity can no longer be allowed to call themselves "Jews." How about Jews who orchestrate and encourage trans orgies? I would think that that would be as much of a disqualifier of Jewish identity as accepting a Jew, Jesus, as the promised Messiah, that is, a Jewish concept.


In short, the need for identity trumps logic. People cling to identity in ways that simply aren't rational.




Here's a very, very counter factual analogy.


What if …


What if, in 1945, after the end of World War II, it was widely known what atrocities the Germans had committed in Poland? What if it were also widely known that the advancing Red Army, as it made its way West, was raping every female they could get their hands on, and sometimes literally raping women, girls, children, grandmothers, concentration camp survivors, to death? What if it were also widely known that the USSR would take control of East Germany for the next forty plus years, and maintain a notorious police state?


And what if social media existed back then?


I'm Polish-American. I would be outraged and broken-hearted at the atrocities Germans committed against my relatives and other Poles.


Even so, I cannot imagine posting on social media, "The Germans committed atrocities against Poles; therefore, I don't care about German women and children being raped by the Red Army. I don't care about the USSR turning East Germany into a prison nation with no human rights, for the next two generations, including Germans born after the fall of Nazism."


Why would I not say that?


Because what the Red Army did was wrong. Period. No further discussion. Nothing justifies the atrocities that Russians committed against German women. Nothing justifies the USSR turning East Germany into a prison state.


It's a slogan children can understand. "Two wrongs don't make a right."




After Russia invaded Ukraine, Tablet: A New Read on Jewish Life published an article that depicted Ukraine as a "muddy," "freezing" "slaughterhouse." I blogged about that article here.


The timing of the article deserves attention. Ukraine is under attack.


Some basic facts:


Vladimir Putin, alone, is the author of this war. He is a power-mad monster. He kills his enemies for fun, often using poison. He has threatened America with nuclear war. Ukraine posed zero threat to Russia. NATO is no threat to Russia. There is no rational, decent reason for supporting Russia in this war.


Decent, rational people support Ukraine, and want to see Russia defeated, for reasons too numerous to detail here.


But here are some.


Ukraine is a major grain producer. Areas of Africa and Asia rely on Ukrainian grain. There is grain in Ukrainian silos now ready for market. Russia is preventing it from reaching the market. Ukraine is also a major producer of edible oil. Russia is preventing that from reaching hungry people.


The war is increasing gas prices worldwide.


Russia is committing war crimes. Rape, torture, murder of innocents. All documented.


Rational, decent people support Ukraine.


The Tablet article appeared at the wrong time.


What else was wrong with the article? It resorted to the Bieganski stereotype. The article was not an intellectually and morally responsible treatment of atrocity. The depiction, rather, supported a stereotype of Eastern European, Christian, peasant-descent populations as *essentially* brutal, irrational, violent, hateful, anti-Semites.


That stereotype is false.


Saying that a stereotype is false is not the same as saying that bad things never happened.


Again, an analogy. There are anti-Semites who insist on depicting Communist atrocities that were committed or facilitated by Jews like Jakub Berman and Lazar Kaganovich not as events of a given time, place, and set of circumstances, but, rather, as expressions of an essential, timeless, Jewish character. These anti-Semites insist that Jews did bad things, not because of the particular time and place and circumstances surrounding the atrocity, rather, Jews did bad things because Jews do bad things, no matter the time or place or circumstances or individual involved.


That's stereotyping.


Did Ukrainians commit atrocities against Jews? Yes, they did. That is a well known fact, dramatized, albeit in a sanitized form, in one of the most popular musicals of all time, "Fiddler on the Roof."


To understand those atrocities, one must understand something of Ukrainian history. Those resorting to stereotyping, as in the case of the above-mentioned Tablet article, assiduously refrain from mentioning any of that history.


"You're just saying that because you are not Jewish and you do not feel our pain!"


Well, no. There are tens of millions of non-Jewish people who also have reason to have historical grievances with Ukrainians. Poles. Ukrainians committed massive atrocities against Poles at least twice in history: under Chmielnicki and during WW II. The Chmielnicki events of the seventeenth century were particularly devastating. They were part of something called "The Deluge" when Poland was attacked from all sides, weakened, and later lost its independence and became a colony of Russia, Prussia, and Austria. This resulted in horrific conditions in Poland. Poles are hyper aware of this history.


Again, in the twentieth century, Ukrainians massacred perhaps 100,000 Poles. Ukrainians raped and tortured Poles. Poles were sawn in half. Towns that had been Polish for centuries were ethnically cleansed forever. They are now Ukrainian towns. Poland lost a good part of its historic national territory.


And yet Poles are second to none in the generosity they have shown Ukrainians.




At least part of the reason is that we realize that Ukrainians who committed atrocities were not acting out an essential identity. Rather, they were responding to a given set of circumstances at a specific moment in history, and unless you provide THE FULL STORY of that entire historical moment you can never understand – not rationalize, not forgive, not justify – but simply understand – what happened.




I exercise zero political power. Even so, I frequently announce, in public, that I support Israel. I once went so far as to write an article explaining why I support Israel. That article is here; it was reprinted in an Israeli newspaper.


I care about Israel's survival as a nation and I care about individual Israeli citizens. When violence heats up I try to post pro Israel posts on social media. I lack the magical ability to protect people I care about in Israel, but at the very least, and I know this is a small thing, I can say, "I care about you. I am praying for you. I'm letting people know that I support Israel and that anyone who makes any anti-Israel comments will face pushback from me."




A Jewish Facebook friend shared the Tablet article. Numerous persons, identifying as Jewish, said things like "Wow. I had no idea Ukraine was such a hellhole. Makes me rethink my support for this war."


Another Jewish friend said, repeatedly, at least five times and certainly more, that he is magnanimous enough to offer Ukraine grudging support, even though it is a "shameful" country inhabited by Slavic rapists and he is personally ashamed of having roots in Eastern Europe, nations full of rapists and murderers.


Another Jewish friend sicced her non-Jewish friend on me, who came to my page and yelled at me.


Another said that I am a Polish nationalist and therefore nothing I say can be supported factually.


Another Jewish friend, ironically, someone with whom I had attended a march against violence against Jews, said nothing as his evidently clinically insane friend screamed insults at me in post after post. What insults? I'm stupid, violent, a thug. The Bieganski stereotype.


Another Jewish friend lectured me about how Eastern Europeans are rapists and murderers – the accusations are predictable and entirely in line with the Bieganski stereotype as outlined in my book.


This friend insisted that the Holocaust was a "culmination" of Eastern European peasant Christians' anti-Semitism.


This claim is astounding. I pointed out to this person that, in terms of raw numbers (as opposed to percentages of populations), Nazis murdered more Slavic non-Jews than Jews. I posted the charts, below. The millions of dead Slavs would seem to suggest that my friend's insistence that the Holocaust was a project of Slavs, as opposed to Nazis, is open to question.


His response to my mention of Slavic, non-Jewish deaths under the Nazis? He told me to stop talking to him.


The people saying these bigoted things to me are people who had previously given every sign of wanting to associate with me, even to associate with me more closely than is typical of social media. One had given me his phone number and encouraged me to chat with him over the phone. Another had once sent me a really lovely present: the CD set of Phillip Glass' opera "Satyagraha." I'm a big fan of Glass' music.


And yet these same people who had seemed to want to be friendly to me now said the most shocking, bigoted, ugly, things about Slavic Christians, apparently expecting me to nod my head and smile and say, "Oh, you are so right. Me and my ancestors? Nothing but murderous scum. And have a nice day."


In other words, the irrationality and cluelessness of these stereotyping posts is quite high. And it is telling. These folks are not thinking things through, I suspect. They are falling back on a stereotype, a stereotype that is important to their personal sense of identity.




What do all of the above facts add up to? To me, they are evidence of the accuracy of the diagnosis offered in my book Bieganski.


All people, not just Jews, reinforce identity through stereotyping, for example: "Whites are hard working / Blacks are lazy." "Brahmins are spiritual / Untouchables are without divine contact." "Chinese are good businesspeople / Malaysians are not good at business."  


I remember Denzel Washington, one of the most successful people who has ever lived, referring to himself as a "slave." Of course he's not a slave; of course he's just saying that because it gives him a feeing of enhanced identity. Washington could dedicate himself to the African slaves living today. Maybe he's done that; I don't know. But working on ending slavery today is much harder than identifying oneself as a slave, and, thereby, as a hero who has overcome impossible odds.


That Facebook posters, including friends, felt perfectly comfortable screaming at me that I am an essential rapist and murderer because I descend from Slavic Christians (and Pagans) indicates to me that not a lot of thought is taking place here. These folks are repeating a stereotype that they have invested in without intellectual reflection.


How significant in this trend? I have no idea. I'm writing about material coming through my Facebook feed. I did not seek this material out; it just showed up. After a Jewish friend insisted that the trend is insignificant, I googled "Should Jews support Ukraine?" and I found similar comments on other platforms.


For example, I found the page linked here.


This website claims "as many as 100,000 Jews died" in the Chmielnicki uprising.


Wikipedia disagrees. "Newer studies have estimated the Jewish population of that period in the affected areas of Ukraine is estimated at around 50,000."


Chmielnicki was fighting against Poles, the article admits, but "his real victims were the Jews."


Wikipedia disagrees. "Population losses of the entire Commonwealth population in the years 1648–1667 (a period which includes the Uprising, but also the Polish-Russian War and the Swedish invasion) [The Deluge] are estimated at 4 million (roughly a decrease from 11 to 12 million to 7–8 million)."


The article depicts Ukrainians as anti-Semitic monsters. That effort worked for at least one reader, who responded that Ukrainians "dropped the lethal pellets into the gas chambers. The Ukraine had it's own Nazi SS Division. Mila Kunis' family left Ukraine because they hate Jews. What is so complicated?"


The article includes a graphic depiction of torture. The depiction was written by Nathan Hannover, a famous historian of this period. The article carefully omits one of Hannover's most famous quotes. Here it is: the Ukrainians "were looked upon as lowly and inferior beings and became the slaves and the handmaids of the Polish people and of the Jews."


We know why the article does quote Hannover but leaves out that key quote. Because the article is doing the work of stereotyping. Ukrainians are just a bunch of *essential* rapists and murderers. Their very country is a "muddy freezing slaughterhouse." We must repeat this, to cement our own idea of ourselves, even as Ukraine is subject to horrific war crimes, and our support is vital.


Ukrainians were oppressed by Poles and Jews. Ukrainians victimized Polish Catholics as well as Jews. These facts do not *justify* the atrocities Ukrainians committed. These facts do put those atrocities in context. Polish peasants committed similar atrocities against Polish Catholic nobility during an uprising in 1846. Notoriously, Polish Catholic peasants sold the heads of Polish Catholic nobility to foreign colonizers.


There are many atrocities in the long history of Eastern Europe. Not all these atrocities involved Christians killing Jews. Some involved Catholics killing Catholics. Some, as in the case of Berman and Kaganovich, involve Jews committing massive wrongs against non-Jews. To omit these facts is to distort history, but to reinforce identity.




A Facebook friend yelled at me for even mentioning this trend. She wants me to mention that Jews support Ukraine. She herself has donated to Ukraine, and she is not a wealthy person. God bless her.


I don't know how representational this trend is. Someone with research funds can conduct a survey and get back to me. All I know is, it exists, and its existence is not random. Its existence is evidence of the continued vitality, power, and function of the Bieganski stereotype.


I just googled "Israel support Ukraine." An image of the results is below. It looks as though Israel has been careful about supporting Ukraine.


I just googled "American Jews Support Ukraine." Those results also suggest a less than wildly enthusiastic level of support. Again, this is a Google search, not a fully funded survey, so it is inaccurate, an impression of trends, not a statement of actual support.