Photo by Mitya Ivanov on Unsplash

Anatomy of Malignant Narcissism:

American White ‘Victimization’ Industry in the US: White Men as ‘Victims’

(Can Andy Serwer and Jeffrey Goldberg really view himself as objective anymore, when they publish this slop?)

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/09/holocaust-iran-president-ebrahim-raisi-remarks/671489/

In this recently published article by Yair Rosenberg (Sept ‘22), in the allegedly objective The Atlantic, the basic outlines of malignant narcissism are expressed in detail. Most importantly, Rosenberg illustrates his own complete participation in this profound hubris by illustrating his own self-deception: he presents all of this arrogance as if he is scolding the reader, as if the reader should be reminded that we, too, should participate fully in his perception of collective ‘unique’ and the resulting philosophy: that only some are ‘chosen,’ and these should always be prioritized over others.

Rosenberg illustrates his points by opening with rhetorical hints: he refers to Raisi, an Iranian, and then establishing his victimhood: his ancestors were victims of the Holocaust. From my perspective as the reader, I wonder first why an Iranian is named in an article about the Holocaust when most Holocaust deniers are white extremists? Why does Rosenberg feel the need to pull the Middle East into what is really a European crime: the German Holocaust? Then, he immediately frames himself as the forbears of victims.

Question 1: why conflate the Middle East with the German Holocaust, centering the comments of a Middle Eastern leader when MANY white leaders have exhibited more extreme views?

Answer: Rosenberg wants the reader to conflate the Middle East with German Jewish victims. That way, American readers subconsciously associate Middle Eastern people as perpetrators while Jewish people are victims — even in the Middle East (shame on you, Serwer: one of us knows you, and we know you can see this.)

Rosenberg’s subtext implies that Jewish people’s victimization by Germans should be shouldered by Middle Eastern people.

Immediately, the reader is able to perceive manipulative deception — before he has even started being more obvious about his collective narcissism.

Rosenberg Scolds: We should all set aside our historical genocides and center one: the Holocaust that affected him and his parents. The rest are generic.

Malignant Narcissism #1:

“Don’t Compare Things to the Holocaust That Aren’t The Holocaust.”

Why does Rosenberg suggest the rest of us not compare to the Holocaust?

“contemporary catastrophes do not have that cachet, and any effective advocate needs to use specifics and facts to impose the urgency of their cause on the public.”

To paraphrase, Rosenberg states that the Holocaust is a sort of Dolce and Gabbana of all genocides, and thus has appropriately already gained so much attention that we don’t need to explain how awful it is, and thus it becomes a useful ‘short-cut’ to describe genocide.

He does not elaborate in the least, interrogating the reasons why ONE genocide — a European one which caused the Holocaust of European Jews and a lot of nonwhite people — has that ‘cachet’ to begin with? The fact that it has that cachet — that one Holocaust has garnered this much attention at the expense of others — is the symptom of the larger problem: one group is centered at the expense of others.

Rosenberg claims that he doesn’t want to compare, yet centering one group — his historical trauma — at the expenses of others is an implied comparison: his essay is anchored in this basic hypocrisy.

Rosenberg claims that he doesn’t want to compare, yet centering one group at the expense of others is an implied comparison: his essay is anchored in this basic hypocrisy. The terms ‘unique’ and ‘chosen’ are comparative terms in and of themselves: ‘unique’ requires that others are mundane; ‘chosen’ requires that others are NOT (good enough to be) chosen.

Malignant Narcissism: the ASSUMPTION, in the first place, that one Holocaust would deserve an extra-special cachet. His casual acceptance — and promotion! — of this expressed narcissism reveals his own.

Answer: Center the Holocausts of one’s OWN native country, then foreign ones.

In America, we should center: 1. Indigenous Holocaust, called by some the WORST HOLOCAUST in the human race; and 2. The TransAtlantic Slave Trade. These are the topics which should have the cachet, were we a country of justice, which we are not.

2. Rosenberg scolds: “Don’t erase Jews from the story of their own genocide.”

Rosenberg’s definition of ‘erasing Jews’ simply means including others.

Rosenberg’s definition of ‘erasing Jews’ simply means including others. It means NOT centering him, his grandparents, and the many millions of others who also lost their lives in that Holocaust. Approximately 6.2 million Jews died — and 6–10 million other people.

Rosenberg’s idea of ‘erasing Jews’ simply renders one group of people equal to others, all other suffering incurred by those 6+ other people as also suffering. That is, he isn’t special anymore, and those others who were NOT ‘chosen’ are no longer untermensch compared to him (except in Israel, where it is now law for others to be untermensch.)

Rosenberg’s assertion is that 80 years after that foreign Holocaust, Jews haven’t ‘recovered.’ They lost two-thirds of their population. Well, over one century after the Armenian/Assyrian/Greek Pontic War, during which Assyrians lost three-quarters of their population, Assyrians are in diaspora, HAVE NO HOMELAND, and are completely and utterly ignored by the larger world. The planet is riddled with people in diaspora, minorities who have lost their homeland. MOST of them have not ‘recovered’ from those assaults, and unlike Jewish people, do not have a homeland, are not supported with billions from other countries, and are not constantly centered in the historical narratives of OTHER countries.

The planet is riddled with people in diaspora, minorities who have lost their homeland. MOST of them have not ‘recovered’ from those assaults, and unlike Jewish people, do not have a homeland, are not supported with billions from other countries, and are not constantly centered in the historical narratives of OTHER countries.

Rosenberg: NOBODY has recovered from the multiple Holocaust MANY of us have endured in the last century. Rosenberg’s constant assertions of exceptionality among one group express, once again, this penetrated collective malignant narcissism.

Rosenberg takes offense that a British leader wants to replace ‘Holocaust Memorial Day’ with ‘Genocide Memorial Day,’ once again making the assumption that of ALL the millions murdered by Nazi Germany, ONLY Jewish loss of life matters.

Rosenberg’s attitude is that ‘Genocide Memorial Day’ erases Jewish exceptionalism. He fails to mention that his exceptionalism — while it centers him decade after decade after decade, thus rushing resources to his collective group — also denies anybody else the gravity of our historical experiences.

Rosenberg’s attitude is that ‘Genocide Memorial Day’ erases Jewish exceptionalism. He fails to mention that his exceptionalism simultaneously denies the rest of us the gravity of our historical experiences.

Rosenberg’s implicit comparisons with others — his casual attitude that the rest of planet Earth should just understand that ‘real’ Holocaust only happens to Jews — is the potent expression of that profound malignant narcissism. It IS his Shoah — the same way our Holocaust is our Simele. To force the rest of us to center his Shoah is dangerous narcissism: it is anti-social. He erases others to keep himself safe.

How does the rest of the world feel when hearing that our genocides are not only generic, but as Rosenberg reminds us, SHOULD be considered marginal around Jews?

How should Roma, who lost 1.5- 2 million in that Holocaust, feel about Jewish exceptionalism?

Another sentence:

“The Holocaust is an indictment of humanity’s treatment of its Jews and its capacity for hatred of the other.”

ALL Holocausts are an indictment of humanity’s treatment of that minority AND its capacity for hatred of the other, so Rosenberg’s question does NOT interrogate the central issue: why is only one Holocaust centered?

Rosenberg’s profound narcissism on display: he assumes that we should center this Holocaust and is scolding us about how we should present it. He should be centering OTHERS in the US in the first place; if he did this, as appropriate, he would never have had to write this narcissistic essay.

ALL Holocausts are an indictment of humanity’s treatment of that minority AND its capacity for hatred of the other, so Rosenberg’s question does NOT interrogate the central issue: why is only one Holocaust centered?

3. Rosenberg: “Don’t deny the Holocaust”

Rosenberg divides this into two paragraphs: 1. Describing Holocaust denial — using a foreign leader instead of the many white ones here in the US; and then reveals his reason for mentioning Raisi: 2. ISRAEL is at risk.

Thus, Rosenberg’s tactical agenda is clear: he will underline a foreign ‘Arab’ person’s Holocaust-denying even though America is jam-packed with anti-Semitic Holocaust deniers who look much like Rosenberg himself (white), THEN he tells us all the bottom line: we are centering the German Holocaust to keep Israel safe. In America, we center a foreign war in a white country, Germany, to keep Israel — a foreign country — safe while we marginalize the Holocausts of our own country. Rosenberg is American, isn’t he? Why isn’t he writing an article about the Indigenous Holocaust in America and how little we talk about that?

Because he believes he is chosen, first in line, and his historical trauma is more relevant than any current trauma. He wants the ENTIRE population of the US — with all of our own histories of genocide and trauma, some of us at the hand of apartheid Israel — to put all of that aside and center HIS family’s foreign trauma.

Rosenberg scolds: he wants the ENTIRE population of the US — with all of our own histories of genocide and trauma, some of us at the hand of apartheid Israel — to put all of that aside and center HIS family’s foreign trauma.

Somehow, the rest of the American population is expected to swallow this without any sort of response to this malignant narcissism: eventually, those not chosen — ie, mundane — and whose Holocausts don’t matter will become angry and push back against the oppression of our silencing. It is of zero relevance whether that oppression is white or Zionist to the victim: it is not about religion or culture. It is about oppression: when individuals in the oppressor group perceive themselves as perpetual ‘victims,’ the real victims are marginalized.

Rosenberg is a white man in America: why is he forcibly centering himself and his group as victims, when his victimization happened elsewhere? What does this mean for the narratives of US victims? Why isn’t he talking about current victims instead of focusing on himself, AGAIN?

Rosenberg is a white man in America, a white supremacist country that favors white men and women: why is he forcibly centering himself and his group as victims, when his victimization happened elsewhere?

4. Next ‘I’m such a victim’ whine: “Don’t blame the Holocaust on the Jews.”

I agree with this — when it is true. Icke, a well-known schizophrenic British athlete and celebrity, has exhibited anti-Semitism. Mahmoud Abbas, a leader of Palestinians, has been subjected historical Holocaust/Al Nakba and decades of expulsion and oppression at the hands of apartheid Israel. Any observer should understand why Abbas would see a connection between the Holocaust and the manipulation used to steal land and assets from Palestinians. It is a fact that Balfour stated he didn’t want Jews around so he thought it better if they were sent to Palestine, and signed documents leading to the mass violence that led to the establishment of Israel, the CORE root of Israel: violence.

The establishment of Israel, from a factual political standpoint, is Europe’s failure to shoulder their OWN responsibility for their internal (white) genocide: the Holocaust.

Europe f***ed up at home, in Europe, just as they had been for centuries all over the world. Yet, the latter is considered mundane, acceptable while ‘THE Holocaust,’ because white people were murdered, has greater gravity. Why didn’t Germany give Jewish people the Rhineland? How about a piece of London? The Bible is a personal narrative: whatever it says about ‘land’ and who owns it belongs in Sunday school discussion — NOT in a political arena. The rest of us should not be subjected to this nonsense.

Rosenberg’s conflation of the Holocaust and Israel only further underlines and exposes the rotting sociopolitical corruption: Europe, and in particular Germany, is constantly subjected to collective guilt by Zionists and uses this guilt as an Uzi to commit continuous genocide against another group, Palestinians. Palestinians are victims NOW, while Rosenberg, a white man, represents the zenith of unjust enrichment, of unearned privilege.

Rosenberg’s treatment of Israel as ‘victim’ reveals his profound malignant narcissism: again, in banal fashion, he makes no distinction between Israeli perpetrators and Palestinian victims: he is ONLY a victim, and everyone else is erased.

5. More scolding: “Don’t reduce anti-Semitism to the Holocaust.”

Once again, Rosenberg reminds the rest of us that Jews have experienced prejudice long before the Holocaust. In the gestalt, Rosenberg centers himself again. The erosion for others — the rest of us, whose histories are marginalized, diminished, and our own Holocausts rendered ‘genocides only’ compared to THE Holocaust — is that when one group is ‘unique,’ the rest of us aren’t; when one group is ‘chosen,’ by implication the rest of us aren’t; when one group is centered, those who should be centered are not.

Another quotation which creates an equivocation between African-American and Jewish people: “Just as American racism rests upon a deep-seated bedrock of white supremacy, Europe’s Nazi machinery was constructed upon an ancient edifice of anti-Jewish ideas.”

Rosenberg’s conflation is common in the US, and it serves to erase the difference between African-Americans and Jews because it isn’t accurate: European countries existed as European for millenia; anti-Semitism was a product of one period of time in this country, during the rise of theocracies, NOT since their inception. The US is based ENTIRELY on the Holocaust of 50+ million AND the labor of African-Americans; Jewish people have not been the oppressed source of European success. This conflation is absurd, especially when it comes from a white American male.

Conflating European anti-Semitism with the global reality of anti-Blackness and the establishment of white supremacy is an equivocation: it ERASES African-American oppression to claim that a group which has power — people in the oppressor group — are similar to those they oppress. Rosenberg’s ‘victim’ stance erases authentic victims.

Conflating anti-Semitism with the global reality of anti-Blackness and the establishment of white supremacy is an equivocation: it ERASES African-American oppression to claim that a group which has power — people in the oppressor group — are similar to those they oppress. America is NOT Germany: Germany existed as its own entity long before Holocaust; the US did not and is based entirely on Indigenous Holocaust.

Rosenberg claims he doesn’t want to make comparisons, yet his entire essay is about comparisons: how to center HIS important history by constantly harping on his victimization as if he is Betty Friedan. White men in America whining about their victimization while African- and Indigenous Americans continue to be deprived of resources: PURE MALIGNANT NARCISSISM.

Rosenberg calls the Holocaust of 20th century Germany THE Holocaust, but by ‘THE,’ what Rosenberg really means is ‘ME.’

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Mia George

She/Her: Distort lies until they amplify truth. CryBaby: As loud as necessary.