July 6, 2004
WHO YOU GONNA BELIEVE? GOD OR ME?:
Bush is a boob (Jay Michaelson July 6, 2004, Jewsweek)
The project of this new column in Jewsweek is to look closely at the psychological, spiritual, and ethical underpinnings of our current political moment. I want to take a very Jewish reading of politics, which means, to me, not focusing on "Jewish issues" such as Israel or church and state but rather applying Jewish hermeneutical reasoning to the political issues of the day.If Paul asked us to take a common sense reading of the Bible and of spirit, the rabbis demanded the exact opposite: not assumptions of "common sense" but complexities, mutivalence, and depth. For the rabbis, midrashists, kabbalists, and Talmudists, the "plain meaning" of the Bible, like that of Bush campaign ads, is not its essential meaning. Indeed, the Zohar, the basic work of kabbalah, says that if you read the Torah on the surface, it's no more than a book of stories -- and not even as good as other books you might read instead. How diametrically opposed such a practice is to Bush's "gut feelings" and his reluctance even to read his own memos.
Bush is the dumb Ahasuerus who allows Haman to connive. In later columns, I hope to demonstrate that Bush is actually "bad for the Jews" on a host of pet Jewish issues, including the well-being of the state of Israel. But my deeper point is actually quite different, which is that Bushism is fundamentally anti-Jewish in its very conception. His whole way of life is antithetical to the Jewish value system, not because of any particular issue (is "Judaism" for or against abortion rights?) and not because it involves lots of hunting trips.
It is anti-Jewish because Bushism denies public discourse, denies that books should be opened and read, and denies even the possibility of transparent, articulate justice. It does these things partly for religious reasons, partly for ideological ones, but largely because it must. If the neo-Straussians, neo-Randians, and evangelicals spoke honestly about their agenda, they would be thrown out of office. So the Christian Coalition is silent, the malefactors of great wealth meet in secret, and the noble lie reigns in silence.
Being charitable, we'd like to believe this is parody, but alas that appears not to be the case. Looking at Mr. Michaelson's own website it quickly becomes apparent why he has to make the risible assertion that the Bible doesn't mean what it says:
Recently, I participated in a summit sponsored by Gay Spirit Culture, a new organization with two complementary missions: first, to bring spiritual practice and awareness into the gay community ("shifting gay culture by supporting inner transformation"), and second, to articulate and share the unique perspectives, if any, which gay people have into spirituality generally. These are noble goals. On the one hand, the GLBT community has been so wounded by the homophobia of traditional religion that it often seems wilfully anti-spiritual, despite the historical prominence of queer people among the world's leading mystical and religious personalities. And, of course, there remain conservative elements within the world's religious traditions who, due to their fear and ignorance, are causing great suffering - even death - among the co-religionists whom they drive to despair and self-mutilation.At GSC, we wanted to create not just a "safe space" for queers to be religious in the ordinary way; we wanted to create a queer space to be religious in a new way.
Such a project can't be reconciled with either morality or the idea of human dignity.
His real problem with George W. Bush then is the most obvious one--no hidden meanings need be unraveled--it is quite simply that the President is
too Jewish and is thereby a living rebuke.
It is anti-Jewish because Bushism denies public discourse, denies that books should be opened and read, and denies even the possibility of transparent, articulate justice.
What the hell is he talking about? And how have so many people turned into "transparent, articulate" nuts?
Posted by: Brandon at July 7, 2004 12:14 AMYou're going to see a lot more of it (and a lot has already been seen thus far).
It goes like this:
"I am for spirituality and against Bush. Therefore, Bush is against spirituality."
Or
"I am for virtue and against Bush.
Therefore, Bush is against virtue."
Or
"I am for spirituality and against religion.
Therefore, religion is against spirituality.
Etc. The permuatations are about as endless as
illusions are rife.
This of course gives one the right to lie about, slander, denigrate and vilify Bush because to do so is both spiritual and virtuous, good for the soul and morally uplifting. As long as one is lying for the right reasons (per Michael Moore and Paul Krugman, e.g.)
It's not a new game, but its vehemence has become abhorrent, endangering as it does, civility itself. And one hopes that the American people (that is, enough of them) are more abhorred by it than attracted to it.
Perverse times.
I fear Barry is right, and the President is just today's lightening rod for a very virulent ideological pathology. We seem to be slipping out of a war of ideas into something ressembling a battle against a collective, rampaging self-contempt and madness.
Posted by: Peter B at July 7, 2004 6:09 AMThis article is a wonderful example of reaching your conclusion first, and then attempting to mold your hypothesis to fit that result.
Posted by: John at July 7, 2004 8:10 AMAll I take away from it is that someone is very worried about the Jewish vote.
Posted by: David Cohen at July 7, 2004 8:37 AMThen Moses cried out to the LORD , "What am I to do with these people? They are almost ready to stone me."
Now you know how Moses felt.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at July 8, 2004 2:19 AM