As an angry mob has amassed in New York’s financial district, and countless other cities, promising to “Occupy Wall Street [Or Your Location Here],” I have felt a discomfort that grows more insistent by the day. Not because I am one of the nation’s wealthiest one percent (I am quite far from it indeed), nor because I would oppose higher taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations (I would likely favor them, depending on the particular proposal). No, my discomfort stems from a source much more primal than any theoretical policy analysis: I am uncomfortable with the angry mob because I am a Jew.
My people has some experience, you see, with angry mobs—more specifically, we have a great deal of experience with angry mobs in times of economic distress who are fed up with suffering while greedy moneylenders prey like leeches on society, oppressing the majority while enjoying the unjust protection of the aristocratic powers that be. My people have heard that song before. It was sung countless times during the long history of Europe, by countless ordinary citizens who boldly resisted the orders of princes and bishops and took matters into their own hands. We still remember that the ghetto walls were originally built to protect us from the genuine will of the majority. We remember that the voice of the people need not be a voice of reason.
Yes, it is true: there are Jews Occupying Wall Street—not only in the banks, but at the barricades. The High Holidays brought hundreds of such Jews together for an Occupy Yom Kippur service, where the righteous radicals preached atonement—not so much speaking about themselves, of course, but rather about those sinful titans of industry across the street. (It’s very easy to get into the spirit of Yom Kippur when you’re talking about someone else’s need for repentance.) Plans are underway for Occupying Sukkot. Surely, it might be claimed, this is proof that my Jewishly motivated wariness is entirely inappropriate. How could the Occupiers be echoing antisemites of old, with so many Jews in their midst?
On one level, this is a fair point. I have no reason to believe that the Occupy Wall Street movement is antisemitic, and I make no such claim. What I do insist, however, is that Jewish history ought to teach us the dangers of finding an easy scapegoat for a problem, rousing the anger of the people, and taking to the streets for the purpose of confrontation. These dangers persist even in the absence of antisemitism itself, and the fact that Jews have joined in with the marching and shouting does not erase them.
The problem is not with large numbers, nor with passion; the problem is with anger.
Maimonides, who generally favored moderation in all things, made an exception for anger. One “should teach himself not to become angry even when it is fitting to be angry,” he wrote:
The early Sages said: Anyone who becomes angry is like one who worships idols. They also said: Whenever one becomes angry, if he is a wise man, his wisdom leaves him; if he is a prophet, his prophecy leaves him... This is the way of the righteous: They accept humiliation, but do not humiliate others; they listen when they are shamed, but they do not answer; they do this with love and are joyous in their sufferings.
I do not believe the individuals at Occupy Wall Street are fools, but I fear that in anger their wisdom may leave them. I do not believe they have nothing of value to say, but I fear that in anger their prophecy may leave them. I am perfectly willing to assume that the protestors are, by and large, good people, but I take James Madison’s dictum seriously: “Had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob.”
Of course, it would be too simple to declare that every angry mob is necessarily wrong. A thorough look at history would certainly uncover numerous events about which it can be said with absolute sincerity: “That angry mob was right.” Picture an angry mob of workers marching out of a factory in a spontaneous strike, provoked into righteous anger by one more cruel deprivation. Picture an angry mob of slaves rising up in violent revolt against their captors, driven to rage by one more murder of one more of the enslaved who would not submit to one more subhuman indignity. Picture the angry mob that converged on Tahrir Square this very spring, venting decades of fury pent up under Hosni Mubarak’s tyranny.
In the broader history of angry mobs, however, cases like these must be counted as exceptions, not as the rule. Show me a large group of angry people marching and chanting things in rhythm, and chances are fairly good that I can show you a group far removed from all nuance, far removed from all compassion, and with whom it will be nearly impossible to reason.
Seth Chalmer is Assistant Director of the Berman Jewish Policy Archive at NYU Wagner. The opinions expressed here are his own.
RESOURCES
David A.M. Wilensky, Inspirational Yom Kippur at Occupy Wall St.
Moses Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot De’ot Chapter 2.
Publius (a.k.a. James Madison), Federalist No. 55
Fall Web Campaign: Please donate to support the online mission of First Things.
Comments:
Plus I don't really get the Jewish angle. Other than the fact that some protesters and some bankers are Jews, what does Judaism have to do with any of this? The connection seems tenuous at best. In fact, it feels vaguely bigoted, along the lines of the old "bankers are all rich Jews" nonsense from the middle ages.
Jew or gentile, many Wall St titans are criminals who should be held accountable, not for their religion, but the vast scope of their crime.
Thank you for an insightful essay. Taking one historical event as an example of your main point, the French Revolution, we see the results of angry mobs. They sent countless priests, nuns, and 10 year old boys and girls to the guillotine. The mobs objected to "let them eat cake" but accepted "let them drink blood".
Which law did they violate?
The current recession was generated in the mortgage market, dominated by the quasi-governmental agencies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which were compelled by HUD regulation to purchase a specified percentage of their mortgages from those too poor to pay them off. They desperately created "bundles" in which the risky paper was mixed with sound mortgages and sold as a block to foreign investors. Meanwhile, the proceeds of the sales were by law made available as new mortgages. Consequently, the price of houses skyrocketed.
Meanwhile, the index of bankshare values increased only moderately and crashed much more thoroughly than housing prices.
The current unrest is based on the notion that there is no such thing as an interactive dynamic system and when bad things happen it is because bad people made them happen. In the old days, the moneylenders were Jews; today, they are more ecumenical. But the logic is no more defensible.
Donna, as the last dozen years of WTO, G8, and G20 protests-turned-riot have proven, it doesn't take much to transform a "nuanced group of Americans (Italians, Canadians, Greeks, and so on...)" into dangerous mob.
Also, we in Alberta don't have Tar Sands. We have oil sands.
Protestants have been known to call the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon pretty much since the Reformation kicked off. When I was in college in the Deep South, I used to hear guys, and occasionally girls, talking about other people as whores. Therefore, they must have been anti-Catholic! Because anti-Catholic Protestants used whore language about the Church!
Most will quickly determine that line of reasoning to be utterly laughable. For good reason.
As another commenter mentioned above, the people at OWS are, if anything, not angry enough. They are indeed very placid. And the movement is very organic. That's what drives a lot of pundits crazy. It's why we keep hearing, "What are there demands? What do they want?" Pundits are baffled at the fact that it's not organized, centralized, planned, strategized. There is no man behind the curtain whipping up the fury of an angry mob.
Finally, not every large-scale protest, or other social movement, qualifies as a "mob." OWS certainly doesn't. The Selma-Montgomery marches in the Civil Rights movement weren't mobs, either. There are plenty of other examples. Of course, there are also plenty of examples of real mobs, too. The point is that it's painting with an extraordinarily broad brush to say that any gathering of people who want to protest something is a mob, let alone an angry mob.
In summary: the most ridiculous thing I've read about the OWS movement to date.
Why, this sounds like the Tea Party (but they were described as a "grassroots" group, not "organic"). There's an interesting bottom-up movement on the right and left. Maybe social media has something to do with it---we don't need top-down organization any more. That supposedly had a lot to do with the Arab Spring protesters, too. Gee, that suggests that the Tea Party is the avant garde of this new political mode.
A son of Spain , he was also very likely influenced by the message of the power and sweetness , in being able to be merciful and forgiving , that inturn would sustain hearts from unjust hatreds - for Christians , something these are attitudes and ways of the heart that have to become as easy as breathing , inorder to empower The Spirit that was poured out , to sustain the suffering human nature of The Lord in The Passion , the Spirit who then comes and abides , in and for the help of The Church , during the Pentecost on !
Maimonides , who has been called the ' talking eagle' for his wisdom , died on Dec 12th . 1204 ; amazing;y, Dec12th is the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe .
Her simple , loving messages were brought forth , through the help of another
'Talking Eagle' - St.Juan Diego !
Many of the readers of F.T already would know how Mexico turned from being a land of human sacrifices of pagan sun worship , into a land that turned to The Son ( agree , the enemy warfare still flaring ! ) , to the Power of His Precious Blood , to cleanse and heal broken , fearful hearts that are in the grip of the serpentine enemy and the events that followed !
http://thedivinemercy.org/news/story.php?NID=3439 - good article on the truths that God wants to convey to us , through this timeless event !
'Hate what is evil' - The Word tell us and may be unforgiving attitudes in us from pride may be , is to lead that list so that when faced with weaknesses and evil in others too , our first thoughts would turn to thanking The Lord , for the mercy that His merits have already obtained , so that the enemy does not get us caught up , in focusing on darkness alone !
It is likley that such a process is also taking place , among many of the protestors who could be there for the companionship /oneness of mind - this esp. so , in our culture that experiences the lonliness of not being in touch , with The Son and those in Him !
Wishing all, prayers and intercession of another daughter of Spain - St.Teresa of Avila , who also struggled for reforms ; may prayers of many help to bring minds and hearts , into silent acts of gratitude and Adoration , along with pleading for mercy , for conversion of all the hard hearted !
Mary, our Loving Mother , our Lady of Guadalupe, free us from the false gods of money , pride and self will and lead us unto the True God !
P.S - hope that the good Jewish minds associated with F.T would look at the mystery of The Eucharist , in light of the Kosher laws ; unsure if this has already been looked into but happened to read how the Kosher rules often 'does not make sense' , from a human perspective, yet many of the faithful amomg the Jewish chose to and still chooses to adhere to its ruless . could it not be that The Lord was preparing His people , to accept readily what would not also make sense , from a human perspective - eating of the Flesh and drinking of The Blood of The Son , taking part in His life fully , esp. . in the power and privilege to be forgiving , trusting that every such occasion is an act of grace that empowers His divine life in His children !
The Kosher laws helped to set apart the 'chosen ones' and thus protected them from destructive pagan influences around too ; such is what The Church also advocates for those who want to participate in the Divine Life, by accepting His Living Presence , in The Eucharist !
Shalom !
this is a goofy comparison. the author was comparing two kinds of conspiratorial rhetoric, you're just looking at one word used completely differently in separate contexts.
The author was comparing two kinds of conspiratorial rhetoric, but the author was also claiming that Jews could legitimately be wary of Occupy Wall Street because of the rhetoric, even though the Occupy Wall Street rhetoric has absolutely nothing to do with, and is in no way targeted at, Jews.
The point of my goofy comparison was to point out that the author's angle was goofy. If the author wants to talk about the need to be un-angry, and wants to quote Maimonides to that end, by all means, I'm all for it. But why not just make that point? Why even invoke angry antisemitic mobs, which are wholly irrelevant?
The reason for His anger stemmed from the disrespect shown to His Father's house; but I cant help thinking the prominence given to the event is also a warning against people obsessing over money. Their obsession with money had blinded them to the transcendant and their obligatione to God and their fellow man.
"The author was comparing two kinds of conspiratorial rhetoric, but the author was also claiming that Jews could legitimately be wary of Occupy Wall Street because of the rhetoric, even though the Occupy Wall Street rhetoric has absolutely nothing to do with, and is in no way targeted at, Jews."
I think an important point in the article, though, is the risk of scapegoating---
"What I do insist, however, is that Jewish history ought to teach us the dangers of finding an easy scapegoat for a problem, rousing the anger of the people, and taking to the streets for the purpose of confrontation."
The OWS protesters frequently make reference to "1%" of the population as the cause of our problems, and so that's who they are targeting.
The difference is that here, the 1% is mainly just a nice slogan for the people who are the real target, viz. the large investment bankers on Wall Street. And it turns out that, unlike the Jews throughout history, the large investment bankers on Wall Street really are to blame (for the financial crisis).
It's not scapegoating to identify the actors who were at the center of the financial shenanigans that almost single-handedly destroyed our economy.
The claim of “the 99%” has profound democratic roots.
On 17 June 1789, le troisième état proclaimed itself the National Assembly, saying, in effect, that they, the unprivileged, the nondescript, with no place in the organized hierarchy of the state were the representatives of the people and that the other two estates – the nobility and clergy – represented no one but themselves and their own special interests. In the same way, the fall of Communism in Easter Europe saw the various “forums” proclaimed themselves the representative of the entire society against the Party nomenklatura.
Democracy means the assumption of power by the nation itself and the abolition of all privileges that place the ruling minority above and outside the nation. Those who associate themselves with the common struggle for equality, human rights and against privileges, these constitute the nation.
It is not mobs that frighten me: it is the petty bourgeoisie – always ready to support authoritarian coups that put an end to political mobilisation, so that everyone can return to work and they can get on with the business of exploiting the labour of others for profit.
