Black-on-Jewish violence in the New York area has been endemic for decades, if not centuries. I lived in the Northeast back in the 1970s, and used to frequent the Jewish areas of Brooklyn. I was involved with Habad (AKA Lubavitch) Hassidism at the time. Back then, blacks would target Jews frequently. In response, Jews would walk in large groups for protection. Some Hassidic groups even had a system worked out to deal with black violence. If a Satmar Hassid had trouble with a black hoodlum, he would only need to shout “Khop im! (Jump him!), and other Jews would come to his aid, beating the living daylights out of the offending hoodlum. I heard stories of Lubavitcher Hassidim beating black trouble-makers within an inch of their lives.
But in those days, crime was rife in New York. This was before the reformations of Mayor Giuliani. It was like the Wild West, and people had to look out for themselves, because nobody else would. You couldn’t count on the police to be there, or for anybody to do much about it if you reported a crime.
Since then, things have calmed down in the New York area, and my impression is that the Jews have become complacent about protecting themselves.
The recent spate of black-on-Jewish violence on the East Coast is something the Corporate Media cannot entirely ignore. A recent Atlantic article states:
Batya Unger-Sargon, the opinion editor at the Forward, put it bluntly and correctly this morning:
After the massacre at a Pittsburgh synagogue on Shabbat that killed 11 people last year, and another fatal shooting at a shul in Poway, California six months later, one often heard that the great threat to Jews—even the only threat—comes from white supremacy. Conventional wisdom said it was the political right, and the right’s avatar in the White House, that was to blame for the rising levels of hate against Jews.
But the majority of the perpetrators of the Brooklyn attacks, and the suspects in Jersey City—who were killed in a shootout with the police—and now Monsey, were not white, leaving many at a loss about how to explain it or even talk about it. There is little evidence that these attacks are ideologically motivated, at least in terms of the ideologies of hate we are most familiar with.
And therein lies the trouble with talking about the violent attacks against Orthodox Jews: At a time when ideology seems to [reign] supreme in the chattering and political classes, the return of pogroms to Jewish life on American soil transcends ideology. In the fight against anti-Semitism, you don’t get to easily blame your traditional enemies—which, in the age of Trump, is a non-starter for most people.
If Batya Unger-Sargon is “not most familiar with” black-on-Jewish violence, then the leftist media (of which she, as an editor at the Forward, is a part) is to blame. Until now, it has been loath to write about it at all; it does not fit the narrative that it so aggressively pushes. To be fair, this is the main point of the Atlantic article – but why the long wait?
Actually, the ideology behind the black-on-Jewish attacks is very familiar to the Corporate Media, it’s just that it’s only recognized when the perpetrators are white.
It’s perfectly normal, and strongly encouraged, for American blacks to be openly proud of their race. But when a white person does the same, he’s a “white-supremacist.” In other words (using leftist parlance), it’s perfectly normal for blacks to be “black-supremacists,” but an aberration for whites to be “white-supremacists.” Does Miss Unger-Sargon honestly believe that these recent crimes do not at all exist against a backdrop of black identity? That it’s completely coincidence that so many of the attackers are black?
She won’t even say it out loud; instead, describing the attackers as “not white.” We all know that they’re not Asian, or Native American. I wonder if Miss Unger-Sargon would be fired if she came out and specifically described them as “black.” Perhaps the initial draft did spell it out, but it was changed.
Miss Unger-Sargon, if you’re reading this, take note: We cannot hope to solve such problems if we continue to honor hackneyed taboos. We must tackle these issues head on, and call it what it is, without euphemisms or codes. It’s BLACK-ON-JEWISH VIOLENCE, and if you were consistent, you’d call it “black-supremacy.”