Subj: ZGram - September 11, 1998 - "How not to lose "Mensch"-hood"
Date: 9/10/98 11:10:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: ezundel@cts.com (E. Zundel)
To: irimland@cts.com

Copyright (c) 1998 - Ingrid A. Rimland

September 11, 1998

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Matt Giwer always makes me laugh because he has a penetrating gaze exposing
human foibles - and the skill of translating those foibles for others. I
had saved this mini-essay below some time ago but my hard disk had
swallowed it, and only recently did I find it again.

I offer it here an anecdote filler.

Little sidebar, though: Matt made a mistake thinking that a horse did not
give milk - it does; it is a mammal! - and I cut that part out because it
otherwise blurred what he was trying to say, but the rest of it is more or
less intact, and those of us who have tried to "debate" our Jewish
opposition can surely relate to this Giwer Gem.

Matt writes:

"Most should be familiar with Hitler's observation that no matter how
telling a debating point, they will come back the next day as though
nothing had happened and be right where they were the day before.

I have been thinking of that for quite some time. The following is an
expansion on the basic idea.

Something to be observed about Zionists. No matter how wrong they are shown
to be, they always come back the next time with exactly the same big lie.
The Jewish method of "debate" is not trading facts and positions - rather
it is an exercise in who can be the most stubborn, intransigent.

It is an endurance contest.

There are even Yiddish stories and jokes about it - lifelong positions that
are "stubborned" every day for an entire lifetime, and the punch line is
something like the one who dies finding a way to have the last word after
death.

But the last word is still the same stubborn opinion held throughout life.

This not to be viewed as a means of exchanging or sharing opinions. Even in
the formal debate in the western sense it is not; (it is) rather a test of
debating skills.

In the Jewish culture it is not a matter of a test of skill, it is a test
of will - the ability to repeat a position in the face of every attack,
including fact.

We often confuse this with conviction but it has nothing to do with
conviction. It is known in these stories that it is "Mensch-hood" that is
at stake.

The person who gives in is shamed, is less of a man. Facts, figures,
observation - nothing is relevant.

One of the standard parries is to attempt to frustrate the opponent. This
is why, in the face of overwhelming evidence, they will come back the next
day with the same position as though the overwhelming evidence had not been
presented.

If the challenger gives up, they count that as a victory. If someone else
challenges the same position, they will announce that they "won" the same
"debate" before - which in their minds is true. All they did was hold out
longer. The ones honored in their stories are those who manage to hold an
impossible position all their lives.

We see this (in) many places. The attack on the Liberty is one. Gas
chambers is another.

We see this on alt.revisionism and talk.politics.mideast - in fact, any
place where they show up.

It is not their intention to arrive at the facts. It is their intention to
hold their position despite the facts.

The more compelling the reason presented for them to change their position,
the "greater" their accomplishment in refusing to change it.

Right now in several conferences, for example alt.conspiracy, they are
demonstrating this "mensch"-style debate by insisting that fat does not
burn in a fire.

Watch them. They have taken a patently absurd position.

Rather than an embarrassed, ". . . did I say that?" we see them sticking to
it.

Lets look at the methods used.

The matter started with one of their Yiddish stories - with the impossible
"fact" that fat does not burn in a fire.

This discussion, which any rational exchange of facts would have resulted
in mutual agreement that the story is nonsense, has gone on for weeks!
Every few days they come back to the beginning - by repeating the
ridiculous story that started it.

The response that is frustrating them no end in the". . . fat won't burn"
(claim) is people coming back and simply repeating: "Fat does burn!"
Stubborn is being met with stubborn.

In their stories there are also regular exchanges of ". . . you won't admit
it because you are meshugga" (sp)

In the ". . . fat won't burn" exchange it is ". . . because you are a
Nazi!" or ". . . because you are anti-Semitic!"

You will also find the Yiddish insults of drinking too much wine being the
reason.

"Because your business is poor" is given as a reason. Everyone who
disagrees instantly becomes a "failure" in life.

You will also find variants of ". . . because you wife won't have you."

There is a lot more I could go into. Everything they are doing has direct
parallels in Yiddish literature. It is instructive to read some of them to
see what they are doing.

However, it is most important to see what they are NOT doing. They are
NOT attempting to arrive at the facts.

What you do not see is, "That's right! fat does burn! Let us examine the
story carefully and see if there are special circumstances here that might
make it true."

You will not see that because it would be a "loss of face" concession. As
with the horse without udders, there is never a concession that the horse
he was talking about might be a special horse.

The position is always that the horse without udders is the special horse
being brought in to cheat and trick him into agreeing and, thus, losing
Mensch-hood.

(Example:)

"I will sell you six (million) chickens."

"But you only have one chicken."

"I will sell it to you six times. Now give me my money."

"But you don't have any chickens."

"I'll give you an IOU. Now give me my money."

"But you didn't deliver any chickens."

"Are you trying to impoverish me?"

Or, as the famous beggar said, "Because your business is slow, why should I
suffer?"


Thought for the Day:

"A man may build himself a throne of bayonets, but he cannot sit on it."

(William Ralph Inge)




____
____Information about Ingrid Rimland may be found at:
____http://www.webcom.com/ezundel/english/ingrids_books/index.html




----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (rly-zb05.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.5]) by air-zb02.mail.aol.com (v49.1) with SMTP; Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:10:10 -0400
Received: from mh2.cts.com (mh2.cts.com [209.68.192.68])
by rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id LAA07333;
Thu, 10 Sep 1998 11:09:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [204.94.77.201] (irimland.cts.com [204.94.77.201]) by mh2.cts.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA07756; Thu, 10 Sep 1998 07:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: ezundel@mail.cts.com
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 06:02:36 +0100
To: irimland@cts.com
From: "E. Zundel"
Subject: ZGram - September 11, 1998 - "How not to lose "Mensch"-hood"