tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7014209.post2823254188111201666..comments2024-03-28T14:55:27.949+02:00Comments on My Right Word: Bauer's Anti-Wyman AddressYMedadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14333122797414935958noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7014209.post-37218061653384001672016-03-29T17:48:54.623+03:002016-03-29T17:48:54.623+03:00I received this comment from CF:-
I read your blo...I received this comment from CF:-<br /><br />I read your blog about Bauer's speech. I'm not sure that I would call it an attack on Wyman. I think that the question of the US attitude in general and FDR's in particular is a legitimate discussion. My sense was that he refrained from analyzing the attitude of the Jews in greater detail because then he would have had to address the Bergson group more seriously. The one sentence I recall was begrudgingly complimentary.<br /><br />I understood him to basically say what did you expect? The Jews were not important enough to deserve greater attention. After all, others were ignored as well. If this is so, then he contradicted his own conclusions at the end. FDR was not an anti-Semite. Maybe. But as Erich Fromm wrote, the opposite of love (in this case philo-Semitism) is not hate (i.e. Anti-Semitism) but apathy. So if the world was and may still be apathetic to the plight of Jews then should not the conclusion be that Jews need to be strong? We will not be bailed out so we have to look for ourselves. In this context the worst part of his speech was the gratuitous mocking of Shamir's stature.<br /><br />and my reply:<br /><br />a. thanks for reminding me about his personam attacks on Shamir and Barak.<br /><br />b. i do think he specifically attacked Wyman. not only his school, but as I mentioned his religion-based attitude which Bauer, the atheistic socialist disdains, noted dominated Wyman's reading of the history of the era and his approach to his attacks on FDR, attacks Bauer wouldn't make.YMedadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14333122797414935958noreply@blogger.com