The Ashkenazi Revolution

26conflict and contention with large empires. They sought to make thePeople of Israel fit in with the reality of existing politics through surrenderto the powerful forces with which it interacted. This was a policy ofappeasement, of the sort that is well known to those of the twentiethcentury: A policy of the bending of the knee before he who is strongerwhich defends itself through unmatched logic and linguistics. But, in spiteof this, the policy of Jeremiah and Isaiah, a pacifist policy, was held indisdain since it accomplishes nothing, for it was impossible for the Peopleof Israel to survive for long as lowly vassals, like a Canaanite slave of oneof the great kingdoms. The path of Jeremiah has features that remind us ofthose of the French Marshall Petain. But there is no doubt that theliquidating pacifism of Isaiah was worse than the destruction of that ofJeremiah. The latter preached submission to Babylon because it wasstrong, but Isaiah went so far as to coronate Assyria as the “staff of Hisanger” (10:5) and he gave legitimacy to the actions of this kingdom. TheAssyrian empire was an oppressive empire that lacked constructiveness,ruled with an iron fist over conquered states and followed a policy ofexpulsions and population exchanges – and Isaiah defines this evil empireas a helpful tool in the hands of the Holy One blessed be He! The cry ofthe prophetess Deborah “thus should be destroyed all your enemies ohLord!” and the cry about Babylon, “happy is he who smashes your infantsupon the rocks” (Psalms 137) - these are typical of the spirit of Israel. Notthe words of the prophet Isaiah about Assyria.The pacifist preaching of Isaiah and Jeremiah are the fruits of a later eraand the results of a feeling – and this was a correct feeling – of the abyssinto which the People of Israel would fall because of the outlook of “apeople that dwells alone and considers not the other nations.” But thedanger that awaited the People of Israel had it taken the route of the vassal,and of absolute humiliation toward the giant kingdoms, would have beeneven more severe. The prophetic pacifism was directed mainly toward thekings and the ruling classes. But, in reality, this was a conflict between theintellectual class and the general population. The wars and the rebellionsof the Jews, in the days of both the First and Second Temples, were popularwars in the fullest sense of the word. Only the conscription of the entire