The High Hat

There’s a fantastic 1990 Coen Brothers Gangster film called Miller’s Crossing that didn’t seem to permeate the mainstream. Maybe you’ve seen it.

In the opening sequence, Jonny Casper (Gasparo) the Italian gangster has a monologue that I like to quote. In it, he exclaims to his rival, the Irish gang leader Leo O’Bannon that he isn't getting any respect and the situation needs to change. The monologue reaches its climax with an exasperated Casper exclaiming: “I’m sick of the high hat!!!” as he pops a vein in his forehead. It’s iconic. I think about it all the time when I’m frustrated.

Being Jewish these days feels a lot like Johnny Casper feels in that moment. Sick of the high hat! Which is an archaic term that means getting disrespected or snubbed in a condescending kind of way.

And boy have we ever been disrespected these last couple of years. There’s a major dissonance with our reality. We exist in a society based on classical western values that are chiefly informed by Christianity and Judaism. Ideals of peace, justice, and logic. But the discourse when it pertains to Jews and Israel is anything but peaceful, justified, or logical.

Of course Israel isn’t perfect - I’ve never met a person that says it is. In fact, the Jews in my network have the most nuanced and fair criticisms of the country. They tend to be highly critical of the government but also support the mission, idea of, and existence of the state.

Despite this measured approach, Jews and supporters of Israel in Canada and around the world have for years been receiving the proverbial high hat. We are being disrespected and treated unfairly. Snubbed. It’s particularly strange because Israel has won the ground and air battle against all of her enemies. It is still routing Hamas. It is undefeated militarily - and God willing it stays that way because you know very well once Israel loses a military conflict, the consequences will be drastic.

Military might is one thing, but Israel and Jews worldwide are getting absolutely clobbered in the propaganda battle. I contend that this is because we Jews are committed to stick by our cultural principles. We use logic, rationality, and good faith when having discussions and arguments. I believe that if you stare at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict long enough, rational unbiased people who really dig in will always arrive at the same conclusion: Israelis and Jews want peace and prosperity for everyone. The conversation is way more in depth and nuanced and of course there are exceptions with certain far right cohorts. This is the same as anywhere else in the world in 2025, a great topic for discussion, but not at all the point of this essay.

The point is that we’ve been arguing in good faith, taking the high road, and relying on underlying parameters and assumptions that have been the bedrock of discourse and western society since the enlightenment. Winning this war of ideas, through the typical channels, through good discussion and debate, and appealing to people’s better senses was a long and arduous uphill battle. It was won eventually, and that’s why we got 1948. We’re really good at making those sound arguments. We’re experts yet somehow we’re still getting thrashed in the media and the global discourse.

How is that possible?

On the one hand, I suppose we could be completely wrong and that Israel could be evil. I haven’t been there since 2012. I want to go back, but I’m afraid to until the war is over. Truthfully though, I don’t firsthand know what’s happening on the ground. So I trust the people I know who do go to Israel. I talk to my friends who are Israeli and I rely on the general mainstream Jewish narrative. That trust is an implicit piece of modern discourse. That people aren’t lying to us, or telling us half-truths. We grew up in a context where we assume everybody is arguing in good faith and coming from that same place of good principles and logic.

So how do I actually know that I can trust what I hear and read on this issue? For me it’s quite practical, I can go to Israel if I want. There are people who are incredibly passionate about this, the ones who would literally die for the Israeli project. They go there and they talk to Israelis and they experience that society and culture. Then they come back and they explain that Israelis are great people in a terrible conundrum. I can’t say for sure if how the Israeli government and society is prosecuting their war is truly just, but I do take it on good faith that they’re doing the best they can given the situation they’re in.

I’ve tried very hard since this conflict started to stay out of the mud. I don’t want to alienate people. I don’t see the benefit in getting in the swamp and having complex discussions where no one is really making any headway on changing anyone else’s opinion. When I do take the bait, and wade into the sludge, we just end up disliking each other. I go into the conversation wanting desperately to take the high road and empathize deeply with the other person, and yet - it sours. There have been five or six occasions in the last two years where I’ve really gotten into the discussion - I feel like I’ve argued my position excellently, A+ Jacob. Yet it just makes the other person resent me. I use logic and that logic is completely sound and to my chagrin and disappointment the other party never changes their mind.

I typically end up finishing the conversation with a simple challenge: “You should go to Israel and see for yourself”. I also say “You should go to Gaza and/or the West Bank and see for yourself.” “Talk to the people on the ground and find out what’s really happening.“

Of course, no one ever does.

Perhaps it is a disingenuous challenge. I know they aren’t going to go - and it makes me feel better that they know that I know that… Anyway, it’s not so subtly proving a key point: There is an implicit fatal flaw with the foundation of the haters’ arguments. They ignore the fact that no one in their right mind would actually go to Gaza or the West Bank. They can’t admit out loud what they know - that they’d likely be murdered, taken hostage, or worse. This is key because it means that the foundation of their argument is disingenuous. They ignore the elephant in the room from the get go, and then move the conversation so far down the rabbit hole, that they forget there was an elephant in the first place.

There is a second elephant in that foundation's room - a key omission, a massive blind spot. These people never, ever, mention Hamas. It is as if the conflict is completely one sided. I shouldn’t need to remind you, but the government of Gaza is a terror organization that takes hostages as a matter of policy. It is a directive they give their militants. They gleefully kill Jews, Israelis, and anyone else who doesn’t want to conform to their world view. Their raison d’être is to destroy western civilization. These people are technically elected and therefore do represent their population. Yet detractors of Israel manage to ignore this fact entirely.

What really matters though with regards to Hamas is that it has been abundantly clear to me since October 8th, 2023 that the only way this will ever end is if/when Hamas surrenders (or at the very least gives up the hostages). If what I perceive as hate is really just you caring about Palestinian lives, then you should care about the goal of hostage release first. Because that would end the suffering! This simple bit of logic never seems to permeate the membrane of the Israel hating mind.

To summarize: It’s these two simple premises that I believe are at the core of why supporting Israel is just. The elephants:

1. You can go to Israel and see for yourself and talk to citizens and recognize it. It is a just and moral place. You simply wouldn’t go to the West Bank or Gaza, you’d fear for your safety, your rights, and your life.

2. The detractors seem to have forgotten that Hamas exists. If you care about Palestinian lives, you should be demanding for Hamas to surrender or at the very least give up the hostages. If this happens, Israel would no longer have a Casus belli (a just cause) for war and the war would end.

If you’re Jewish and you’re reading this, there’s a 95% chance you know all of this. You’ve probably argued some version of it with your friends, family, or colleagues. I’m sorry that you went through that to no avail (I’m assuming you were just about as effective as I was). That begs the question: why could such a simple set of logical thoughts be failing to hit home?

I have spent a long time thinking about this and have determined (as you might have noticed) that we no longer operate in a space where facts matter all that much. The facts have been devalued. The devaluing of facts means that the rules of the game have changed completely. What matters more and more is emotion. The rules have changed, and we haven’t adapted. Thus, we are getting clobbered in the propaganda war.

It used to be that you needed to be reasonable, and that you could rely on a few central tenets: those of goodness, of peace, and diversity of opinion and thought. We see however that on this issue and many others in the public forum, the facts just aren’t that relevant anymore. When a party appeals to your emotions, it short circuits the brain. It overrides the logical thoughts.

Jews have always wanted to take the high road. That’s what has worked for us and that’s what the culture espouses. We want to use logic. We want to reason our way up and above. It’s why there are so many Jewish lawyers and accountants. The culture has perfected rule-following to such a degree that we’ve created the Shabbat elevator. Rules are great, but if you’re no longer playing a game where the other team is following them, then you need to make an adjustment. You need to change your tactics to the new set of rules.

If we want to turn this thing around, we need to stop taking the high road all the time. We must acknowledge that there is intelligence and wisdom in the tactics of the other side. They may be evil, but they’re not dumb. They are people like you and me, extremely well resourced, and they’ve figured out something we haven’t. Therefore, we need to start changing how we act. We need to start getting creative. I say: “If you can’t beat em, join em.”

We need to stop acting like people are going to come to our rescue or suddenly come to their senses on the Israel question. We need to fight back in ways that resonate, in ways that play to emotion. You can decide how you want to do that. For me, the first step is thinking about the discourse and taking a hard look at language. We have a major branding problem. The Jewish and Israeli brand is catastrophic and we need to figure out how to turn it around. If we examine the key pillars of that brand, the one I want to focus on is the act of trying to combat antisemitism. To stop hate. The most noble pursuit really in all of this, we just want to be left alone after all.

Let’s really consider and drill in on the word: “antisemitism”. If you grew up like me, listening to Mrs. Steinberg tell you all about the horrors of the Holocaust, then you know how serious antisemitism is. If you’re Kelsey from Bradford though, I don’t think it resonates at all the same way.

Here are the reasons why:

1. The word "antisemitism" itself. No one knows what a “semite” is, so the word is kind of meaningless in isolation. The word "antisemitism" is not evocative of anything. If you’re a typical Canadian and have had some education on antisemitism, the word antisemitism might remind you of your ten minutes of middle school history on the Holocaust. If that’s the case, the history, and the term itself are pictures in black and white, antiquated, a remnant of the past. No longer relevant.

2. It’s maybe not such a bad thing. Being “anti” something sounds like a good thing. Think about the other “anti’s” in the discourse. “anti-racist”, “anti-fascist”, "anti-bullying" etc. It’s easy to adopt the mode and jump to “anti-zionist”. In fact, the word anti-semitism was initially invented to help discriminate against Jews. It’s been changed to antisemitism (no hyphen) to try and bolster its power.

3. It doesn’t include Israel. “Antisemitism” can be interpreted in many ways and it doesn’t encapsulate Israel. The term antisemitism actually predates the modern state of Israel by about 75 years. This means you can in fact be against Israel and not be antisemitic. It’s a really compelling argument, because it is totally possible. There are Jews who are anti-Israel or anti-Zionist. It is challenging saying that these people hate Jews because the language prevents it. Making headway on the notion that anti-zionism = antisemitism is really tough, because technically, it isn’t the same thing.

I’m not suggesting we get rid of the term “antisemitism”, but it's clear to me that it has serious limitations. Given those limitations, I am proposing that you follow my lead and start to adopt the term “Judaiophobia”. I would like to resurrect this term and reinsert it into the discourse.

Judaiophobia is defined as: An irrational fear and/or hatred of Jews, Judaism, Israelis, and/or Israel.

To expand and contrast it to antisemitism:

The prefix “Judaio” is immediately clear to people when they see it. It is evocative and logical, especially when compared to another common term of the day: Islamophobia. If someone has never heard this term before and you use it in a sentence - they immediately know what you mean. The suffix “phobia” in the modern parlance is equally evocative. No one wants to publicly be “phobic” (afraid) of anything. It means you are weak, its dismissive, it is powerful. If someone states that you are afraid of something, your first reaction is in your gut. It takes you back to a childhood version of yourself and you exclaim “no, that’s not me!”. If you are, say, arachnophobic or claustrophobic - it is a point of shame. Unlike Antisemitism the word “Judaiophobia” is clear and evocative.

When we say “Judaiophobia” there is a not so subtle accusation there that feels much stronger than antisemitism. The accused is being put in the position of someone that is irrationally afraid. They are painted as if they are letting their worst instincts overtake them. The notion that they are afraid and that it is irrational puts them on the back foot. The precedent is there with the term “Islamophobia”. If you are called Islamophobic, you are being accused of being afraid of and/or prejudiced against this entire abstract concept of Islam or Arabs. It is much harder to evade because it can mutate depending on its context. Think about why there is no term like "anti-Islam" instead of islamophobic. Being “anti” something could be a reasonable or good thing. Having a phobia is unreasonable and a very bad thing.

Finally, “Judaiophobia” de facto encapsulates Israel and Israelis. When we use this term, we eliminate the gray area. No longer is anyone allowed to blanket hate Israel without being Judaiophobic. The Judaiophobe is irrationally afraid of a culture and a country.

When the conversation is about Judaiophobia instead of antisemitism there is no hiding the hatred. You can’t say “I’m not Judaiophobic. I’m just anti-Zionist” because Israel is a central component of Judaism. To be against the notion of a Jewish state when it is the only state you don’t think should exist, is to be Judaiophobic. They are one and the same.

This applies an elegant solution to the Jews who hate Israel. You can easily be Jewish and Judaiophobic. No longer do you get to use the circumstances of your birth as a Jew to shield you and others from espousing fear and hatred. It is not at all uncommon for people the world over to resent and be afraid of the culture that raised them.When we change the language it eliminates their ability to hide behind and evade the truth: that there hatred of Israel means that they are Judaiophobic. Antisemitism is an inferior term because Judaiophobia clearly includes Israel.

So for these reasons and more, I am changing the language I use around hatred of Jews and Israel. I am using the term Judaiophobia. The more I think about this and the more I say it, the more clear it becomes. After all, words have power. They really matter. I want to effect change, and this is the next great effort.

At the end of the day though, this is just one step, and people out there who are a hell of a lot smarter than I, will find even better ways to innovate around the new rules of emotion. We have to stop trying to be perfect all the time. We need to acknowledge that tactics matter when executing our strategies. Incorporating Judaiophobia into the language is my next tactic.

Modern conflicts require modern tools and weapons. Right now we’re approaching the propaganda battle as if we were the British cavalry charging towards German machine guns at the battle of Mons. (If you’re not up on your WWI history - It went poorly for the cavalry to say the least). That war became all about getting in the trenches, getting dirty, and doing what needed to be done not because it was good and moral, but because it was effective. We should take a lesson from that war. We must respect that the tactics of our foes are working better than ours. We need to borrow those tactics, innovate, then enhance and perfect them.

We need to get in the mud.

So, a challenge for my fellow Jews and allies for the new year: Are you sick of the BS? Maybe it's time you do something about it. Are you suffering and wondering why your friends have completely abandoned you after you have supported them for so many years? Stop despairing and realize it is because they’ve been successfully influenced by somebody else. The good news is: you can fight back. Do you want to know how to change their minds? Start by meeting them where they’re at. Appeal to the same sensibilities that motivated them in the past. Appeal to their emotions.

That means not always taking the high road. It means adjusting our strategy for the modern context. It means using terms like Judaiophobia. If we get in the trenches of emotion, and win in those trenches, eventually, we’ll bring the world back around to a place of sensibility.

I say all of this with love and care. I am wishing you and your family the best in this new year. This essay is at its core a message of hope. Though, admittedly, I am very much channeling my inner Johnny Casper from Miller’s Crossing as I head into the high holidays this year, because I’m sick of the high hat.

Shana Tova,

Jacob

If you found this valuable, share and subscribe