On the Lies of Easter and How Jews Dishonor Passover
My rebuke of David French’s article, in today’s NY Times, on the “virtues” of Easter -- and How my Fellow Jews Debase Passover
By
David Gottfried
I am not criticizing the Jewish Holiday of Passover. This Holiday commemorates and celebrates the liberation of the Jews from Egyptian bondage. Even the sternest and most adamantine atheist of the Marxist persuasion, such as yours truly, can’t denounce a saga of freedom from oppression.
Rather, I am criticizing my fellow Jews for their sheer obliviousness as to what Passover is all about. And I won't bore you with abstractions. Instead, I will demonstrate that the “piece de resistance” of all Passover Foodstuffs, the treat that shines over all other Passover foods like a culinary capital of incandescent deliciousness, is really not Kosher for Passover. In a word, I will prove that Jewish law suggests that the majestic Matzoh Ball is really a case of the emperor’s new clothes. (I would love input from observant Jews, and those with a scholarly understanding of Judaism, for their criticisms, pro and con, of my critique. After all, my interpretation of Jewish law might be erroneous.)
My criticism of Easter goes much deeper. I deplore Easter to its core. My critique of Easter has been sparked, in part, by David French’s article, in the New York Times of April 9, 2023, which sings the praises of Easter and is entitled, “Easter Rebukes the Chistian Will to Power.” .
Passover
I am sure that most of my co-religionists, on the precipice of a diabetic coma from spending the past few days eating endless pieces of Chocolate Covered Matzohs, macaroons and other dainties that make Judaism, for the irreligious, essentially just a gastro-intestinal orgy, have never thought about the character of the humble but scrumptious matzoh ball.
On Passover, we are not supposed to eat leavened food products, or food that has risen, or expanded in volume, in the cooking process. This is because while fleeing from Egypt, we had no time to bake bread, which expands in volume while it is being baked. Instead. we ate matzoh, a form of flat bread. Because our ancestors could not consume leavened bread during the Exodus, we forego leavened foodstuffs during Passover.
Matzoh balls, however, are, without doubt, a foodstuff which increases in volume in the cooking process. To make matzoh balls, one mixes matzoh meal (crushed Matzoh) with eggs and a few other things. One forms the batter into spheres about one inch thick and drops them in boiling water. While in the boiling water, the matzoh balls grow, almost as rapidly as Pinnochio’s nose, which aptly symbolizes the Matzoh ball since the notion that the Matzah ball is rightfully the quintessential Passover food is, quite bluntly, farcical. Indeed, some people actually add a little seltzer to the batter to encourage the expansion of the matzoh ball.
Also, nowadays Passover is often seen as an ideal time to take glorious vacations, and I know some Jews who look forward to “doing Passover” in Italy. While celebration is in order (Traditionally, we ate the Sedar meal while resting on cushions to underscore our liberation from slavery and the opportunity, we now have, for leisure) it shouldn’t be just one more opportunity to behave like a JAP, a Jewish American Prince or Princess, luxuriating in the gaudiness of Americana and conspicuous consumption.
Of course, I have known some “progressive” Jews who try to turn Passover into an up-to-date and trendy leftist extravaganza, but those events have been nauseating ordeals.
For example, during Passover we often say, “Next year in Jerusalem." Some leftists, to show solidarity with their Asian and African brothers, have modified that chant and say, “Next year let us be in the third world.” Given their willingness to be deposited anywhere in the third world, it appears that they would have had a favorable view of those Nazis who speculated that the Jews would not have to be exterminated if they were simply quarantined in Madagascar.
But the tackiest progressive Sedar I ever went to was a “progressive” affair which sported a Sedar plate bearing orange slices. The sedar plate is composed of items relevant to the Passover story, such as bitter herbs, symbolizing the bitterness of slavery, and a bowl of salt water, as the salt water represents the tears of the Jewish slaves. At a certain leftist Sedar, orange slices were appended to the sedar plate to represent the needs of women and gay people.
But Passover is about our liberation from bondage; it should not be an opportunity for every interest group to have its two square inches of grievance displayed on the Sedar plate. Also, as a gay man, I was furious that some “liberal” fool had decided that I needed an orange to represent me, and the female gender, on the sedar plate.
First, why did he think that that which would represent women would represent gay people. Does he believe that gay men are not men ? And why does he think that I have a special likeness to oranges. Does he consider me round and sweet and fucking fruity ? People used to say that the extremes of fascism met the extremes of communism. I wasn’t too sure about that, but I do believe the extremes of homophobia are at one with the extremes of a certain faggotizing liberalism that agrees that gay people are just plain fruits.
Easter
David French alleges that Easter wisely, and in a peace-loving vein, counsels restraint, surrender and abject acceptance of one’s suffering. I argue that Easter, while purporting to plead for turning the other cheek, is actually a formula for augmenting tyrannical power everywhere: When people are taught not to rebel against their masters, their masters are free to tighten the yoke of persecution and pain.
French argues that Barabbas, the individual who was set free, instead of Jesus, counseled rebellion and insurrection against Rome. (I do commend French for alleging that Barabbas was freed for political reasons. For the past 2000 years, most Christians have argued that Barabbas was freed because the “dastardly” Jews preferred Barabbas, a common street criminal, to “angelic” Jesus.)
French further argues that Jesus counseled acquiescence to Roman beastliness and butchery. Indeed, the New Testament intones, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” I never understood the virtue in this comment. Caesar believed that the whole world was his for the taking, and he would, if given the chance, take the whole damn globe.
If this passivity or acceptance of brute force is the doctrine or lesson of Easter, it is not, as French argues, a lesson against the will to Power. It is only a lesson or idea for keeping the powerless powerless. It tells the poor not to rebel against the rich. And it does not tell the rich that in consideration for the poor’s passivity, the rich should be a bit less sadistic and miserly toward the impoverished. Consequently, Christianity is a formula for maintaining the status quo, no matter how awful conditions may be.
French further argues that Chrisitan passivity will win in the end, and the evidence he uses for his spurious conclusion is the post war black civil rights movement. French says that Martin Luther King and his allies were not violent, and they triumphed. Ergo, nonviolence and the nonviolence of Easter’s teachings work.
However, French is dishonest. French is a distinguished conservative critic who has always made it clear that he believes that America is finer and a more morally upright nation than any other. Therefore, he should realize that what worked for King would not necessarily work in other nations or in this nation at any other time.
When MLK was pleading for civil rights, America felt as if it stood at the top of the world as it had just conquered Hitler and was by far the richest nation on earth. American centrists were so confident of American power that they felt free enough, and sufficiently secure, to be kind. (Also, continued intolerance to blacks could be a boon to Soviet prospects in Africa, Asia and Latin America.) In the administrations of John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, change was viewed with favor. And our nightly newscasts were not tainted with the paranoic rants and collections of lies spewed by the Fox news network and Fox wannabes. In those days, the media was commanded by men like Walter Cronkite who eschewed hysteria and all forms of fascism, whether it be full-blown Hitlerite fascism or petite, insidious homegrown fascism along the lines of George Wallace or Rudy Guiliani.
Accordingly, King’s methods could work in the America of the 50’s and 60’s and that does not mean that they would work in other times and places. Indeed, if King’s tactics had been employed against Hitler, those tactics would have been akin to a masochist kissing the whip of the sadist who will beat him. The Hitlers of the world would have exterminated Martin Luther King with dispatch. I suppose some people might counter that the very act of non-violent resistance would have inculcated some measure of respect, on the part of the oppressor, for the courage and quiet conviction of the non-violent protestor. However, for many oppressors, any talk of quiet conviction and dignity in the act of non-violent civil disobedience is poppycock. To these men, all non-violence is cowardice reeking of emasculation.
Of course, the quietude and resignation of the Easter spirit as explained by French does not sit well with many people. Many people do not like the idea of simply accepting pain and oppression. Indeed, this may be what makes Easter so spectacularly violent. The unnatural passivity supposedly advocated by Easter instills, at the very same time that it supposedly counsels restraint and love for one’s enemies, disgust for the restraint and renunciation and will lead, periodically, to eruptions and avalanches of violence in the form, for example, of pogroms against Jews who allegedly drank the blood of Christian children to make matzoh.