 |
| Roman Arnusch Photo Sun-Herald/Janie Barrett |
Late at night, a Jewish couple, Dr. Jeffrey and Mrs
Cheryl Bogan, asked about getting a train home. A State Rail customer service
manager, Roman Arnusch commented repeatedly and laughingly, “They’re all Jews
living in the Eastern Suburbs. They’re all wealthy – they can afford to get a
taxi”. A complaint was made and he was fired but then reinstated by an appeals
board that declared his comment “racist, offensive, uncalled for and completely
inappropriate” but deemed a six-month suspension without pay to be sufficient
punishment [1].
This anecdote highlights one of the controversies about
prejudice. Some have argued that racism used to be clear and harsh but now it
seems to be about groups complaining about perceived insults and driven by the
“multicultural industry”[2]. I
do not think that is a reasonable description of the situation with the Bogans,
who made it clear they were more outraged than hurt. Still, I think it is
useful to discriminate between discriminations, and recognise the varying
degree of harm they cause. In this article I also examine the trade off some
religious communities including some Jewish groups would seek in which they would
prioritise religious practices over inclusion.
The Power Factor
Racism has been defined as “a form of privilege or
oppression resulting from a societal system in which people are divided into
‘races’, with power unevenly distributed (or produced) based on these racial
classifications. Classifications are socially constructed and are based on
perceived biological, cultural, religious or other differences, which are
reflected in and reinforced through attitudes, beliefs, behaviours, laws, norms
and practices[3].
The link between power and discrimination is also reflected
in a Torah source. The principle that is repeated the most times, in the Torah
relates to the treatment of the stranger which is mentioned 36 times[4], more
than love of God or keeping the Sabbath[5]. “And
the stranger[6],
you should not mistreat, nor should you oppress him as you were strangers in
the land of Egypt
I was a little relieved to read that Mr. Arnusch will
not be permanently unemployed as a punishment for his offensive comments about
Jews. I am glad he did not just get away with it, but like Dr. Bogan himself, I
would not want him to be deprived of a job. I find his comment highly
offensive, discriminatory and wrong. One particularly offensive aspect of it is
that in talking about Jews in this way he promotes a view of all Jews as the
“other”, people not like “us” normal people. This is an expression of the “new
racism” that is not explicit about some people being better than others are,
instead it positions some as “normal” and others as “different”. Still, I think
there is a big difference between offensive bigoted generalisations aimed at a
group like Australian Jews and those aimed at Blacks or Aboriginal people. The
difference is the degree of powerlessness.
The Bystander
Considering the importance of power in the most severe form
of prejudice, the role of the bystander becomes even more important. I recently
had a conversation with Dr. Simon Longstaff who pointed out that in many of the
photographs of Nazi Germany he saw in the Sydney Jewish Museum, there are
people standing and watching. The issue of the bystander to mistreatment of the
vulnerable is hinted at the change from singular to plural in the following
verses. “You (plural) shall not oppress לֹא תְעַנּוּן any widow or orphan.
If you (singular)אִם
עַנֵּה תְעַנֶּה oppress him, [beware,] for if he
cries out to Me, I will surely hear his cry[10]”.
The change teaches us that anyone who sees a person oppressing the an orphan or
a widow and does not help them he too is considered to have oppressed them[11].
Religious Considerations
While Torah is very clear about oppressive prejudice against
the vulnerable, it is not against all forms of discrimination if it deems it
necessary for carrying out the religion properly. In introducing the section
about laws relating to monetary matters such as slaves and damages, the Torah
states “And these are the ordinances that you shall set before them[12]”.
The word “them” is interpreted as
requiring litigants to use a Jewish religious court even in the case where the
laws of the idol worshippers court are consistent with Torah law[13].
It could be argued that this is simply a case of prejudice against people of another faith. Our tradition sees bypassing the Torah based court in favour of one administered by idol worshipers or non-Jews as insulting toward God and the Torah. (An exception is the case of a thug who refused to yield to the authority of a Torah court, in which case dispensation can be sought in order to save property in an “idol worshipper’s court”)[14]. In Judaism, even a ruling on a practical monetary dispute is a form of worship. “God says to judges be careful with the judgement as I sit among you[15]”. The administration of these laws is a dear to God as the Ten Commandments[16]. It also compared to a King who gives his beloved youngest son a gift of his beloved orchard[17]. The intention and religious spirit of the proceedings would be seen as highly significant, rather than just as a means to an end. Perhaps, settling a dispute outside a religious court could be compared to offering sacrifices outside the temple.
It could be argued that this is simply a case of prejudice against people of another faith. Our tradition sees bypassing the Torah based court in favour of one administered by idol worshipers or non-Jews as insulting toward God and the Torah. (An exception is the case of a thug who refused to yield to the authority of a Torah court, in which case dispensation can be sought in order to save property in an “idol worshipper’s court”)[14]. In Judaism, even a ruling on a practical monetary dispute is a form of worship. “God says to judges be careful with the judgement as I sit among you[15]”. The administration of these laws is a dear to God as the Ten Commandments[16]. It also compared to a King who gives his beloved youngest son a gift of his beloved orchard[17]. The intention and religious spirit of the proceedings would be seen as highly significant, rather than just as a means to an end. Perhaps, settling a dispute outside a religious court could be compared to offering sacrifices outside the temple.
Of course, one option would be to reject these traditions.
For those who uphold these teachings, there needs to be self-vigilance to
ensure that these religious teachings do not have the effect of leading to
disrespect of people of other faiths or none. As we are taught, “therefore man
was created alone so that the families will not provoke one another to say my
ancestor was greater than yours[18]”.
Conclusion
Not all prejudice is the same. The crushing exercise of
power by members of a privileged group is the most serious. Jews in particular
are called on to have empathy with others who find themselves as outsiders just
as we had been “and we know the spirit of the stranger[19]”.
Ridicule of people is still a serious matter, even where there is no power
imbalance. When religious principles elevate one group over others, we must
beware of unintended consequences.
[2] Article
appeared in the Australian Newspaper making these arguments, unfortunately, I
have been unable to find the original article
[3] Paradies
Y 2006a, ‘Defining, conceptualising and characterising racism in health
research’, Critical Public Health, 19(2), pp. 143–57. cited in More
than tolerance: Embracing diversity for health
Discrimination affecting migrant and refugee
communities in Victoria
[4] Talmud
Bava Metzia 59b
[5] Liebowitz,
N, New Studies in Shemot Exodus p.380
[6] The
Hebrew word is Ger, which can be translated as a stranger as Rashi on this
verse states “every expression of the word Ger is a person who was not born in
that country/state, only he came from a different country to live there”. It is
used this way in Abraham’s statement “I am a stranger and a resident among you”
in Genesis 23:4. It is translated as a stranger on Chabad.org. The same word is
also used to refer to a convert and a lot of commentaries understand it that
way
[7] Exodus
22:20
[8] The
widow and the orphan are mentioned in the very next sentence, which suggests
that the preceding example of the stranger is similar in that all three groups
lack power
[9] Ibn Ezra
[10] Exodus
22:21-22
[11] Ibn
Ezra
[12] Exodus
21:1
[13] Talmud
Gitin 88b
[14]
Maimonides Yad Hachazakah laws of Sanhedrin 26:7
[15] Midrash
Aggada , cited in Torah Shlaima vo. 17, p.7
[16] Midrash
Hashkem, cited in Torah Shlaima vo. 17, p.4
[17] Manuscript
Yalkut Albichani, cited cited in Torah Shlaima vo. 17, p.6
[18] Talmud
Sanhedrin 38a
[19] Exodus
23:9
