In his op-ed, Todd L. Pittinsky explains why it is appropriate for Jews to adapt ourselves to the language of those who hate us (“Why I Don’t Love ‘Jew Hate’ as a Substitute for ‘Antisemitism,’ June 22).
This adaptation is explained by Kenneth Levin in “The Oslo Syndrome, Delusions of a People Under Siege” (2005, Smith and Kraus). We take a term, coined by a Jew hater in the 1870s, and adapt it as our own. We do it with many other terms, such as “West Bank” (which ceased to be accurate in 1967) and “settlement,” which was never an appropriate term for Jews returning to our ancient homeland.
As the jacket cover of Levin’s book states: “he demonstrates links between the evolution of Oslo and the long history of Diaspora Jews being subjected to persistent abuse. The reaction of many enduring such abuse was to seek to improve their predicament by endorsing elements of the surrounding societies’ bigoted indictments and embracing delusions of salvations through self-effacement and concessions.” I say that terms like “anti-Jewish” and “Jew-hatred” are more accurate than Pittinsky’s preferred terms.
Henry Frank, Philadelphia
