The Holocaust was not so long ago. My grandparents are all survivors, and my father was born in the woods of Poland. I grew up hearing stories about Auschwitz and life on the run from the Nazis. Persecution of the Jewish people is not some distant past, a bad memory long gone. However successful Jews might be today, these memories are still very much alive in Jews, and understandably so. We are and will continue to be overly sensitive about these issues — any nation emerging from genocide would behave as such.
Taufiq Rahim suggested that open discussion about the disproportionate influence of Jews in American politics will discourage anti-Semitism in the Arab world (Nov. 5, "Conspiracy Theory Ends With Debate"). Historically, whenever concern was expressed in Europe about Jewish control of politics or the economy, anti-Semitism was on the rise. Such discussions were too often precursors to pogroms. Jews today cannot be expected to forget this historical precedent. We cannot be expected to welcome the sorts of discussions that not too many years ago led to our persecution and genocide.
Undeniably it is important in a democratic society to discuss pressing issues openly and freely. The examples given by Mr. Rahim of certain investigations shrouded in secrecy are cases in point. We should be concerned about who the identity of the Sept. 11 hijackers and not marginalize such information as it emerges. But should we be concerned about excessive Jewish influence on the political process?
A public discussion about the disproportionate influence of Jews on American politics generates questions about whether it is appropriate for Jews to occupy the powerful positions they do today. Asking such questions is not only anti-Semitic but against American values and traditions. The core of the American tradition is that anyone in America can succeed. If a person becomes a CEO of an important company or occupies an important position in the political process, as long as they achieved success by legal means, their power is legitimate and justified. Positions of power are given out according to merit alone, and do not depend on one's background and affiliation. If one believes that this is how positions of power should be administered, then it is as utterly inappropriate to discuss how many positions of power Jewish people may or may not occupy.
The American political process allows citizens to vote for whomever they please, regardless of background or affiliation. Lobbies are an important part of the political process, and anyone of any background may start a lobby to promote any cause. It is inappropriate for Americans who believe in this political system to question the legitimacy of one lobby having more power than others or of certain people being elected over others. If the system of voting and lobbying is fair, then its outcomes are fair regardless of who is powerful as a result. To discuss whether Jews are too powerful is to undermine a system of laws and traditions that does not discriminate against people based on their background and does not guarantee power to any group.
There are no systemic obstacles in the way of other groups such as Arab-Americans from lobbying capital hill or being elected for public office. If such obstacles do exist, they should undoubtedly be removed. If Jews have done nothing wrong in that they achieved their current status by obeying the laws of the land, creating discourse to single them out and question the legitimacy of their influence is anti-Semitic. It was in Europe and it is here in America.
It is true that sometimes these lines are hard to draw, and that Jews are oversensitive about these issues. Jews have every right to be oversensitive, and will inevitably react when rhetoric is reminiscent of pre-WW II Europe. But Jews aren't the only ones that should be vigilant about these matters. The world that pledged "never again" should also be weary when such rhetoric reappears.
Karen Karniol-Tambour is a sophomore from Netanya, Israel.
Read More
Seniors deserve better than Jay Shetty
Izabela Konopka and Joshua YangWe are writing to express our strong disapproval of the selection of Jay Shetty as the 2025 Class Day speaker. We deserve better than a self-help guru and repeated plagiarist who runs a “school” that an expert claims exhibits “similar patterns” to a multi-level marketing scheme.
We are writing to express our strong disapproval of the selection of Jay Shetty as the 2025 Class Day speaker. We deserve better than a self-help guru and repeated plagiarist who runs a “school” that an expert claims exhibits “similar patterns” to a multi-level marketing scheme.
The CPUC must not gut its Judicial Committee
Bill HewittEnding the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.
Ending the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.
Princeton, let’s adopt a digital prox
Jorge ReyesTo prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.
To prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.