Latest / Infidels / The Lobster Trap: How the Left Got Stuck Defending Jihad | Andrew Pessin
Transcript
- Richard Landes: I'm pleased to have Andrew Pessen again to discuss matters. He's a professor of philosophy at Connecticut College in New London, Connecticut. he underwent a rather difficult moment written up by me in a book called Salem on the Thames in 2015. And has come back charging with a new field that he is in some senses founding, the critical study of antizionism. And in a couple of days we'll be launching his journal called Andrew Pessin: Journal for the Critical Study of Antizionism. Richard Landes: Okay. Journal for the Critical Study of Antizionism. And today we're here to discuss one of the phenomena which is in many ways the most troubling. on one level, it's about what I call the great lethal projection, which is the way in which Palestinians and really jihadis project onto their enemies their very own desires and actions. So the Palestinians, for example, constantly accuse the Israelis of targeting civilians or even committing genocide when in fact That's what they do, that's what they say they want to do, and any chance they get as in October 7th, that's what they do. So on the one hand, you have this issue of the great pre lethal projection. And on the other hand, you have the problem of what some call the Muslim question. And that is in the 19th century and in the early 20th century, largely on the basis of a text, a forged text called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which first appeared in the early 20th century, Jews were accused of wanting to conquer the world and enslave mankind, and probably in the process killed a lot of people. Andrew Pessin: Not probably. It's actually pretty open in the protocols that the Jews are prepared to commit mass murder as necessary. Richard Landes: I see. Okay. So so here we have a text that literally projects onto the Jews the mindset of the The mindset of the 20th century, early 20th century imperialists, and as a result, was heartily received by Hitler, who even admitted that it might not be true, but it didn't matter because it's exactly what he wanted to accuse the Jews of. This is called mirror accusations. There's a great article we have up by Kenneth Marcus about the nature of these and how they were used by the Hutus as they were slaughtering hundreds of thousands of. Of Tutsis in the 1990s. Now, what faces us today is the following problem. Jews in particular, having been accused of wanting to commit genocide and enslave the world, and having felt the ferocious effects of the success of that accusation, are loath to accuse Muslims of wanting to do the same thing. And yet, as opposed to Jewish writings in which you can barely find a trace of imperialism, much less world conquest, Muslim sources, supremacist Muslim sources, are full of plans and urges and preaching not only for world conquest and the subjugation of the non-Muslim, the infidel, all over the world, but also openly of the genocide of the Jews everywhere in the world. So we we're faced with this problem that we don't want to encourage a sort of mass panic and accusation that every Muslim in the world is evil, which is what happened with the Jews in the 20th century. On the other hand, we can't ignore the fact that this is not a fantasy, it's not a projection. In fact, they are projecting that very mentality onto us. So We've asked Andy to come and discuss it because he's thought a great deal about it and in some senses it's at the core of this new field of critical anti Zionism studies. Andrew. Andrew Pessin: So there there's no question in there, so I should just comment on that introduction. Richard Landes: Right. Take it away. Andrew Pessin: Take it away. So you know, yes, so your your characterization strikes me as basically very, very accurate. I I'm certainly not a scholar or expert on Islam or Islamism and the long history. However, This new field that I am helping to develop along with several others, including Adam Louis Klein and Nailect and other and Isabella Tabarovsky. we are looking at the the history of antizionism. A lot of people think that it's that today's antizionism is somehow a response to Israel's alleged crimes, and that's just simply not true. It actually has a very long and sorted and dark history. the modern history I argue I'm actually writing a book now. I want to write this sort of introductory textbook to this new field of study, the critical study of antizionism. Richard Landes: Nice. Andrew Pessin: the modern antizionism begins with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which as you mentioned, 1903 was its first appearance in Imperial Russia. and yes, it is this famous conspiracy theory about the Jews plan to con dominate, control, subjugate the world, and enslave or mass murder non-Jews. And indeed it ends with a A call that all the earth should be under the house of David or something close to that, right? Richard Landes: interesting. Andrew Pessin: yeah, that's like the the cl the last protocol is visioning the you never published a whole book on this. wait a second. It Richard Landes: I d I didn't get to the end. I I got about halfway through and I thought, no, I can't take this. It was edited. It was edited. Andrew Pessin: it is it is a hard book to get through. It is poorly you know, it's poorly written, it's turgid, it's delusional nonsense. But anyway, protocol twenty four. It ends with the the there They said this is this is what the Jewish Messianic era is. So there's a complete distortion of the concept of the Jewish Messianic era. It is basically a world where the entire the entire world is under the house of David, ruled by the under the house of David and as and Jews or dead, right? So now this conspiracy theory, as you pointed out, has z literally zero basis in fact. It's just there are no elders, there was no secret meeting, there is no such plot. You will not find, you know, in in the long history of Judaism, I'm sure there's one or two guys who had this fantasy of Judaism conquering the world, but it's certainly not an official normative position and it's not an ambition of of any actual living Jews. and yet that didn't matter. it it took off. It is probably the most, I would argue, second most influential book of the 20th century after the Bible, and the gap between them is probably very small. It literally went Richard Landes: Ouch. Andrew Pessin: around the world multiple times. It is alive and well today. It continues to be published and sold all over the world, hungrily consumed by the vast majority of people who believe it to be factual. And even the handful who don't. You mentioned Hitler was aware at a number of points and some of his inner circle people understood it was probably a forgery that there was no such meeting, etc. But t two things from response there. One is I think they believed it anyway. I think is a more accurate thing. Although this particular book might have been a forgery, maybe there wasn't such a meeting, they still believe that the Jews actually had this plan. and, you know, Hitler's famous thing said just look at the events going on in the world, it confirms this Jewish plot, right? So I so even if the book was a a higher truth. well that Richard Landes: Exactly. Exactly. The higher truth. Yes. Andrew Pessin: no, that yeah, yeah. Well that's an actual truth, not a higher truth. It says even though this book might have been a forgery, they actually have this plan. So it's it's Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: it's perfectly true. And then of course there's the secondary question, and this will maybe bring us back to begin to there wasn't a question there, but begin to come back to your topic. you know, to to what degree is it simply used for instrumental purposes by people who know it's false and the Jews don't have this plan, right? So there's any individual, you don't know whether they actually believe it, or they know it's a forgery, but they believe the Jews have a plan, or they know the Jews don't have a plan, but they're this is still a very useful political tool. It whips up genocidal hatred of the Jews. So you know any individual we don't know where we have to figure out where they stand in that area. now coming back to Islam or Islamism, two things are important to keep in mind. One is Islam there is a long history of Islamic let's call it anti Jewishness to sound scholarly, right? Hatred of the Jews, fear of the Jews. Goes back to the very beginning of Islam. By the time we get into the 20th century, there's 14 centuries of this built into I'll call it, let's say, the theology. I think that's fair. and then in the 20th century, although the protocols is a European concoction and it it both captures and advances, let's call it your European Judeophobia. I know that's your preferred term, right? what happens in the 20th century is that this text is flooded into the Muslim Arab world first by the Nazis. Some of those early Arab translations got in there through the Nazis who understood at the very least the potency of that propaganda, even if you know, even if they didn't believe it's literal truth. Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: And then later, even more so in the 1970s, the Soviet Union literally flooded the Muslim Arab world with translations or the Arabic translations Richard Landes: Interesting. Andrew Pessin: with protocols. And so what you have starting with the Nazis, But certainly by the 1970s with the Soviets, who also were busy arming and equipping the Arab armies to destroy Israel, right? It wasn't just a propaganda campaign. Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: You have this 14th century deep hatred slash fear of the Jews built into Islam. You and then on top of that, you pour in the protocol sort of modern 20th century conspiracy theory about the Jews, and that produces this apocalyptic mess. That is what I would call today certainly i Islamist Jew hatred today as a product of of the meeting of both of these two things. Richard Landes: So now we have to deal with the uncomfortable opposite situation, which is the Jews were un How could I put it? The Jews were unjustly and inaccurately and falsely accused of wanting to conquer Andrew Pessin: Exactly. Richard Landes: the world and subject non Jews by not only the Nazis who wanted to do just that, and the Soviets who wanted to do just that, in that case, to subject non communist peoples, Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: but the Muslims, the supremacist Muslims. Who wanna do that right now? And they are deploying this text the same way the Nazis deployed it, which is to distract people, to have them think that the Jews are the enemy when in fact they're the enemy and accuse the Jews of exactly what they want to do. And we don't want to talk about it. So, how do we talk about it? We don't want to talk about it because hopefully and obviously there are plenty of Muslims who don't share this point of view. How do we distinguish, I'm trying to do it by using the term supremacist, how do we how do we talk about it without creating a situation in which we put Muslims who don't share this belief at risk? Andrew Pessin: Yeah, and that's the Muslim question, I think, that you were referring to earlier. So the Jewish question is a famous phrase from the nineteenth century into the twentieth century, basically, you know, European antisemites trying to figure out how we're going to deal with the Jews, whom we suspect of having all sorts of nefarious plans against us. and what you're suggesting here, I believe, is that today's version is the Muslim Muslim question what are we gonna do with the fact that. Islam in general is seems to have nefarious intentions towards the West, towards Western civilization. But the d two differences between today's Muslim question, and I know that phrase is referring to there was an anonymous essay on the anonymous blogger, Elder of Zion site, called the Muslim question. So that's what I'm referring to here. the two differences are one, that in fact Islam does have nefarious plans for the West, generally speaking, unlike The case with the Jews, where that is a conspiracy theory falsely alleged against them. There is factual foundation to this worry about Islam's interest in basically conquering the West. And then, two, the I I imagine the people raising what we might call the Muslim question. And even that very phrase is upsetting and problematic to a good liberal like me, because it it deliberately, I assume, connotes the Jewish question, which is an antisemitic question, it's bigoted. To have a Jewish question. So presumably And it's Richard Landes: And it and it was false. Right. Andrew Pessin: right, exactly. but so it it fe it's a very unpleasant phrase, the Muslim question. But again, the two differences are the first one that was again, Islam does have such a plan. And the second is the people raising it, and I I read Elder Zion quite regularly, so I I know his perspective. in fact he's written a whole series of responses to that essay, which are brilliant. Everyone must read them. He wants to address it from the pr the liberal perspective of we believe in freedom of religion and toleration and pluralism and diversity and all those wonderful things. So if we're going to raise the Muslim question, we have to be so unbelievably careful to recognize and accommodate, as you said, the many, many, many, many Muslims, and who knows what those numbers are exactly, they could be significant, who do not fall into that category. So we want to continue to accommodate them in the liberal sense of pluralism, diversity, freedom of religion, but not in a suicidal way that then allows the nefarious players to actually advance this actual plan. That is the problem, right? I don't know that I have an answer or a solution to that problem. I'm hoping you do with this project. I mean I you know the Infidel Awareness Month that you've launched. Step one begins with I guess wider awareness of this And here I'll call it a dilemma. The dilemma is the justified factual concern about Islam's interest in conquering the West, trying to somehow be balanced by the liberal toleration, diversity, pluralism that most decent people in the West say that they endorse. So that's that's the problem. But it begins by broader awareness, first of all, that there is such a problem. and I think what what we're seeing, and maybe this is the beginning of a Not quite an answer to question, but really a response to it. in the West, the dominant ideas over the past 20, 30, 40 years, depending how you want to count, is prog some form of progressivism. And progressivism goes all in on one side of that dilemma and doesn't recognize the other. It is so committed to Richard Landes: Im it embraces it embraces the other and ignores the fact that the other is not embracing it. Andrew Pessin: Exactly. Right. So so from the progressive point of view, the Muslim qu that you're even raising this potential nefarious plan is already Islamophobia and bigotry, et cetera. And they won't hear it. So they're all in on one side. And and I suppose you'll you probably have some far right wing zealots as well who are all in on the other side, Richard Landes: Short, short. Andrew Pessin: which is like we have to get rid of all Muslims, et cetera, right? Like and I'm assuming you and me, I don't know if I'm in the middle, I don't know Richard Landes: Okay. Andrew Pessin: where that spectrum is exactly, but I'm aware Of both the reality of this plan and concern about it at the same time as as Elder Zion's articulating really in detail and nicely the importance of respecting the pluralism that is a fundamental Western value, right? It's a fundamental Western value. So step one Richard Landes: Okay. Andrew Pessin: is get more people aware of the real problem because it's being silenced by the dominant progressivism. But Richard Landes: Okay. All right. Andrew Pessin: then I think really everyone needs to read Elder Zion. Maybe that's the answer. Richard Landes: So I I think maybe the way to start is I wouldn't call them baby steps, but take measured smaller steps before confronting the really big problem. And the first step that I would recommend is that becoming aware of Muslim and particularly Palestinian jihadi intentions to commit genocide. Against the Jews, so amply demonstrated in Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: the way they behaved when for 24 hours they had free play and killed in industrial quality quantities. given that, you don't have to start accusing them of it. But one thing that you can certainly do is stop listening to them accuse others of it. I mean, I'll give you an example that just Blew my mind when it happened, October 17th, 2023, 10 days after October 7th, 10 days after Hamas made it clear where Andrew Pessin: Yeah. Richard Landes: they were coming from, a bomb hit the parking lot in Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza. Andrew Pessin: Of course, right. Richard Landes: And Hamas, the Ministry of Health, run by Hamas, says to the journalist: it's an Israeli bomb. And it killed 500 people. And Jeremy Bowen said it flattened the hospital. So what's going on here? The they think that these people will slaughter Jews in the thousands, not just Jews, anybody they find in the thousands, and then 10 days later they're telling the truth about what happened, especially when it turned out to be a jihadi bomb that fell short. And may have killed a dozen people. The most we see is about a dozen bodies. So, but instead, all night long, until the next morning, when the pictures of the parking lot, the intact hospital and the parking lot with a dent in it, show up for the entire night. The the New York Times and other newspapers and and CNN were running this story straight from the mouth of Hamas. So I would say the first thing to do. is no longer to accept that people who are openly genocidal have Andrew Pessin: A need to tell the truth. Yeah, right. Richard Landes: legitimacy or or credibility when they accuse others of genocide. I think that would make a huge difference right off the bat. Andrew Pessin: Yeah, you know, so here's the thing. That's obviously what we need to communicate. And for whatever reason, it's failed for three years, right? So even, you know, the first of all, the example you give, multiply it by thousands, as you well know, right? It's just like every single day, every mainstream media leading with the Palestinian Richard Landes: Right, right. Every day. The famine. Andrew Pessin: narrat narrative. And so you know, that it's not just the one incident, it's the thousands and You know, what you have to figure out is, you know, how do you get the mainstream media? It's one thing to get individuals to s pause for a moment and stop and think and say, Why should I believe anything Hamas says? The the deeper issue is the decades of the domination of a progressive mindset whose conclusion is, and this is only the slightest bit of an exaggeration, what anything a marginalized person says or does is acceptable because they're marginalized. They're a victim of injustice. Richard Landes: They're resisting. Right. Andrew Pessin: And so that's why you believe Hamas, because you're already projecting onto Hamas that these are marginalized people of color who are fighting colonialism. And so anything they say or do is automatically justified. That is the deeper problem. And that that that's amongst the reasons we need the critical study of anti Zionism as an academic discipline, at least, you know, at the the I think the academy is ground zero for a lot of this. It it it percolates there, it like a nuclear furnace, and then it explodes and takes over everywhere outside the academy. we need to understand that ideologies whose conclusion is what I just said, are not acceptable. You need to look at see how that kind of conclusion is is utterly weaponized, first against the Jews in the current conflict, obviously, but it's also part of this larger campaign against the West, because what you have is you know, in this ideology which absolutely dominates the academy, it is totalitarian in nature practically. It brooks no dissent on most of at least the elite campuses, the prestigious campuses, you basically have the idea that the West is fundamentally evil, everything the West says or does is evil, and everything the non West, that's a very broad term, is therefore no matter how evil, everything they say or do is justified Richard Landes: No matter how evil, by those standards. Right. Andrew Pessin: in their battle against the West. And with that mindset you know, then you project onto Hamas that they are non Westerners fighting Western colonialism and you love those people. So that's Richard Landes: Four dears. Right, right. Andrew Pessin: the that's the deeper thing. So we need to show that that whole ideology is just broken. Richard Landes: Okay. All right. So right. So I in my book I call that Why2K Mine because it first appears in 2000 when the jihadis attacked the first democracy of the 21st century, that is Israel and the Aslo Jihad. and the instinct was when jihadis attack a democracy, blame the democracy. So they blamed Israel, Andrew Pessin: Democracy. Exactly. Richard Landes: and then when 9/11 happened, these same people Andrew Pessin: They blamed America. Richard Landes: People that Benedict Beckeld calls oikophobes, those who loathe their own culture, blamed America. So you've got that mentality, but you know, to be honest. It's ridiculous. So the fact that it exercises Andrew Pessin: It is. Richard Landes: it's ridiculous. So I mean, basically what they're saying is by the values that I got from my society and that my society has been trying to live up to for the last thousand years, we have fallen so far short that I prefer people who haven't started this journey to my own society. Okay, so what I would say is the fact that this Dominates, as you say, almost like a totalitarian ideology. I don't think it comes from the logic of it. I think it comes from basically a fear of Islam. What these people are doing as they appear to be revolutionary and thinking out of the box is they're just being vimi. They're being subject infidels whose first and foremost job is not to criticize Islam. And the leaders, that is, our Thought leaders in academia and in journalism are in are tasked with enforcing that attitude that criticizing Islam is inacceptable. That's their task, and they're doing it very well. So what I would say is one of the things that we need to do is start criticizing Islam. I just had a conversation with Danny Burmaui, and his thesis is that. The real phobia here is not fear of Islam, which is certainly not a phobia, it's a justifiable concern. The real phobia is Muslim fear of criticism. And the fear of criticism and our fear of criticizing them, which is our submission to their fear of criticism, is at the core of the problem. And if we were, as you say, with your studies of critical antizionism, if we were to start criticizing them, that might be the beginning of an ability for the West to start pushing back. Andrew Pessin: I've got so much to say on that topic. we have so few minutes, I'll speak very fast. Richard Landes: All right. Okay, very fast. Andrew Pessin: no, so I I would disagree a little bit only at least looking at the origin. I think the the Western masochism, as you like to put it, like postmodern masochism, like the oikophobia, right? Like I I don't think that's initially generated by fear of Islam. I like as we're going back into the sixties and seventies, that right, it's got these very, very deep Richard Landes: No. Agreed. Agreed. Right. Andrew Pessin: roots. Richard Landes: Absolutely. Andrew Pessin: It actually comes out of and this is this what is what breaks my heart. you know, I am a a lefty progressive at heart. I believe there's value and insight in progressivism generally speaking from its early roots, at least in the nineteen sixties, but I do believe it jumped the shark fairly early and went into some very terrible dark places where the anti Semitism is is the manifestation of that. So I I I'd like I I'd like to still believe there's a baby in that bath w water that's capable of being saved, Richard Landes: Yeah. Andrew Pessin: right? So When I look back at the sixty it comes from a very good place. There were serious n injustices that needed correcting and that's what drove progressivism. but then it gets Richard Landes: And and I'm all in f I'm all in favor of postmodernism's embrace of the other. You just have to be a little judicious in who you embrace. Andrew Pessin: No, exactly. Right. And then and pretty early on it goes, I think it jumps the shark fairly, or at least its more extreme elements jump the shark and become anti Semitic, certainly by the nineteen seventies and manifest manifesting itself in the anti Zionism. So that's a little bit of pushback. But now we're in the year twenty twenty six and with you know, and the the this progressive left has had a long fascination with and adoration of and this is actually a very orientalist move of theirs, ironically, right? Richard Landes: Yes, absolutely. Andrew Pessin: They romanticize the mu the Muslim, the radical, et cetera. and so for some decades, there's just they they see in Islamic radical, Islamist radicals, they see the revolutionaries that didn't the Marxist revolutionaries that didn't appear in the West that they longed for. So Richard Landes: Yes, yes, yes, yes. Andrew Pessin: that's not fear. That's that's some sort of weird ideological projection, enthusiasm. Richard Landes: Enthusiasm enthusiasm. Andrew Pessin: But that said, for many of them, and this can vary on an individual basis, As I don't know, Islamist terrorism becomes so prominent against the West, starting as you said, Y2K at least, right? And maybe a little earlier. without question, there's some for in many of them, there's a fo there's a fear in the fear of criticizing Islam is mixed in. And what endorses that fear, well what endorses the outcome, which is silence, not criticizing, is Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: the whole progressive ideology that says you can't you you can't punch down, you can't, you know, criticize the marginalized, et cetera, and then throw into that the reality Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: that if we criticize them, they'll kill me, they'll attack me. So, you know, so it's again, Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: it's a fervent mix of multiple things, one of which is Richard Landes: Okay, so can we call Andrew Pessin: the the fear. Richard Landes: right can we call it a lobster trap? In other words, they willingly go in, and once they're in, they can't get out. So for instance, when Iran killed Andrew Pessin: Okay. Richard Landes: 20,000 people in two days, specifically targeting okay, specifically Andrew Pessin: I'm now hearing forty thousand five. Right. Yeah. Richard Landes: targeting civilians, a massive Andrew Pessin: Yeah. Richard Landes: slaughter, the left found themselves demonstrating in favor of the mullahs. Andrew Pessin: The regime, right? Richard Landes: Right? So they couldn't even pull out at that point, they couldn't say, no, this is a bridge too far. They and that comes to the Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: amazing twenty-five minutes of applause for the movie NASA, which was which was like the the applause for Stalin. Everybody was afraid that if they were the first to stop clapping, they would be identified Andrew Pessin: They'd be shot. Richard Landes: as a genocider. Andrew Pessin: That's right. so without question, I'm I'm hesitating to generalize. That's what my hesitation is. But without question, for many, it is a combination of the progressive ideology with a fear. And, you know, and together it's it's powerful. The fear of dissenting, the fear of criticizing. So, you know, you might well be right that a way in is to normalize criticism, critique of Islam, generally speaking, right? And again the Muslim question. We wanna balance the liberal tolerance, pluralism, diversity with the genuine fear of Islamic Islamist takeover, right? So I don't know where that sweet spot is exactly. But to begin the criticism and, you know, the irony is irony, I know it's maybe weaponization is that you know, there's that famous slogan goes around the internet. Who is it at it might be attributed to Voltaire, but it's not him. the one that says, if you wanna know who rules over you, ask who you're not allowed to criticize, you know, that Richard Landes: I like that. I like that. Andrew Pessin: That so I have to track down the the origin of it. It's attributed to Voltaire, but it's actually somebody else. It it got particularly famous Richard Landes: All right. No, I think it's a good formula. Yeah, it doesn't sound like Voltaire. Andrew Pessin: because antizionist actor John Cusak a few years ago, you know, who's a an I would say a Jew hater, frankly, certainly an Israel hater, he tweeted something that had something to do with Israel. And, you know, if you want to know who you who rules over you, ask who you're not allowed to criticize. So it's applied against the Jews. This it's an antisemitic meme that's quite Richard Landes: Right, right. Right. Andrew Pessin: popular. but the reality is, as you you know, the preemptive themitude, it's far more accurate with respect to criticizing Richard Landes: So actually Right. Andrew Pessin: Islam, wh who the only people who openly do it are instantly tagged as, you know, right wing fanatics or something like that. Richard Landes: Right. Right. Right. So actually, if we're going to apply that statement, if you want to know who rules over you, find out who you can can't criticize. And if you want to know who doesn't rule over you, find out who you can slander freely and nothing will happen to you. John Cusack. Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: No, that's perfect. In fact, we need to make that a medium. No, it's exactly right. So the irony is, right, it's a claim that you know not to criticize the Jews and the Jews are most the roundly criticized of any people, starting with the UN downwards, right? Like Richard Landes: Right, right. You know, that that reminds me of that there was an interview with Inigo Montoya. Andrew Pessin: I'm sorry, isn't that the the character in the Princess Bride? Okay. Richard Landes: Yes, played by Andrew Pessin: Mandy Potinkin. Richard Landes: this interview with Mandy Petinkin, where he invokes his character in Iga Montoya, and how in the last scene, you know, he says, gee, I've been in the revenge business so long, I don't quite know what to do. Andrew Pessin: What am I gonna do now? Richard Landes: Right. And at that point, it would have been really nice if he had turned to the Muslims. And the antizionists and said, you know, maybe you guys should listen to this and give up this passion for vengeance that you have and start living your lives. But instead, it's no. And if only the Jews would listen to me, then there would be peace. So, you know, exactly Andrew Pessin: Yeah, right. Richard Landes: the wrong target of the very criticism that he's justifiably Andrew Pessin: Right. Richard Landes: formulated. Andrew Pessin: So my my conclusion ultimately, and we need a lot more time for this, is you know, I I spend a lot of time I'm working, I'm writing this book, doing a lot of scholarship on this stuff and all sorts of fancy, complex theories, studying the history of progressivism, not Nazi Soviet antizionism Richard Landes: Well. Andrew Pessin: campaign. There's so much going on. But in the end, I come down to the conclusion this hatred/slash fear of the Jews is so deep in the cultural conscious subconscious. That in the end is the only expla is the ultimate explanation of it all. So when you deep down hate and fear the Jews, you will gravitate to your normal epistemic standards evaporate. You will accept any lie or slander about them. You Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: will twist any theory you believe in, whether you're a leftist or a rightist. You'll find a way to have the you know Jews come out on the short end of end of the stick. And in the end, it's just, you know, and this is As a scholar, I can't go to this this place, but I keep coming back to this conclusion as I try to make sense of how is it that progressives come out on the side they come out on? Where where it's so c Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: clear to me that the logical entailment of their actual ideologies would be maybe we should be Richard Landes: Right. Exactly. Andrew Pessin: critical of the Muslims, but instead it comes out we're critical of the Jews, right? And the same thing happens on the right, not the the far right, obvious anti Semites, but we're seeing a this rise of right wing anti Zionism now. And it's the same thing. Their fundamental principles should actually side with Israel, but they end up not. So it's Richard Landes: Right. Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: it's not explanatory except in the end, this maybe there is no explanation other than that this this deep rooted hatred. And I and and Jews are not immune to it. So Amandy Petinkin, you know, I get it a special phenomenon when the Jew is subject to it. I don't know if you use this category but Richard Landes: And he's so angry he's so angry. Andrew Pessin: Right. Well, it becomes, you know, there's a a phenomenon in psychology about how, you know, an abused person begins to internalize the worldview of their abuser, right? They see themselves through the lens of the abuser. Richard Landes: Right, right. Stockholm syndrome. Andrew Pessin: yeah, I think that I that may not be identical, but it's certainly in the ballpark. you know, and I I think that's part of the complicated explanation for Jewish anti Zionists in general, which is you're absorbed in this world that hates the Jews. How does it not sink in for many people who don't have the fortitude to Richard Landes: Right. Andrew Pessin: stand up and be hated? All right. So Richard Landes: Right. So so I invite you and everybody else, our listeners, on October 2nd, we are going to be addressing precisely this issue. In some senses, you just gave a description of what David Deutsch calls the pattern, which is Andrew Pessin: Pattern. Yeah. Richard Landes: this compulsion, no matter how it violates your moral compass, the compulsion to legitimize hurting Jews. It has to be, even if you don't want to. Do it yourself. It has to be legitimate to hurt Jews. And all of these discourses that people manage to find their way to, defying all the moral and even empirical logic is driven by, according to Deutsch, this. Now Deutsch doesn't explain it. I have something of an explanation. We can take this up later. Andrew Pessin: Yeah. So what I want to say, this I'll close with, you know, beginning by breaking down the barrier to critiquing Islam is a g is it's a natural place to begin. Maybe it's the only place to begin. And I do urge anyone who sees this, Elder of Zion is I think he's written now five responses to the Muslim question. What he's really trying hard to do is figure out the way to raise that question while respecting our commitment to pluralism and toleration. Richard Landes: Legitimately. Right. Andrew Pessin: Like how do you it you know, you can't single out Islam for criticism because that's a double standard and then that's bigotry, right? You have to figure out what your universal principles are that can be applied to everybody and everything, if you're gonna critique this. So I I I recommend any listeners check out his five responses and counting. I think I don't know if he's planning more, because he's he's raising the Richard Landes: All right. Andrew Pessin: question in the nuanced correct manner, Richard Landes: Right. Right. Andrew Pessin: which should guide us all, all I think. Richard Landes: Right. We'll be interviewing him too. I I I think the the the brief version of what you're saying is what is legitimate criticism of Islam? Jews accept that there's a legitimate criticism of Israel? They'd even accept there's a legitimate criticism of the Bible. Even if they don't like it, they're not ready to kill people who criticize the Bible. What's legitimate? Andrew Pessin: And there could be legitimate criticism of Jewish religious beliefs. Like there can be legitimate criticism of every religious belief, but but Richard Landes: Absolutely. Absolutely. Absolutely. Andrew Pessin: right, but you're permitted to do it to the Jews in a way you're not permitted to do it to the Richard Landes: You're not. Andrew Pessin: Muslims. And that's that's where a problem is. Richard Landes: All right. Thank you very much, Andrew. Andrew Pessin: it was a pleasure as always, Richard. Richard Landes: All right. Talk to you later.