Skip to comments.No Jews Or Dogs Allowed
Posted on 03/20/2014 1:54:11 PM PDT by idov
When I grew up in an east coast city in Canada post WWII I never experienced any overt anti-Semitism. In my father's day it was different. Anti-Semitism was woven into the warp and woof of society. The most blatant manifestation could be found at the entrance of a popular river beach. There was a sign there. It said: NO JEWS OR DOGS ALLOWED. That sign expresses the essence of anti-Semitism. Human rights of any kind are for, well, humans. Jews are sub-humans. They are no different in genus from the other dumb animals except like dogs they are domesticated. Dogs have no right to intrude into places which humans have designated are reserved for humans. Nor, according to anti-Semites, do Jews. This morning Likud MK Moshe Feiglin and an entourage went up to visit the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, the site of the destroyed Temple, which for many centuries was the centre of Jewish worship. The act for Jews was no different from Chinese wishing to walk on the Great Wall Of China except that as a rule the Jews go up to pray. What happened? Hundreds of Arab youths began rioting and pelting the Feiglin group with stones.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.timesofisrael.com ...
The Lord’s promise abides upon the Jewish people, and the devil who runs loose in this world hates it.
... but not totally loose. He has to stop when God says stop, and he won’t ever totally destroy the Jews (or Christians).
Color me skeptical.
Presumably this was eastern Canada in roughly the 20s or 30s.
I am unaware of any such blatant open anti-Semitism then. Tended to operate more on the "gentleman's agreement" level.
Would very much like to see a picture of this sign. I suspect it's similar to the supposedly ubiquitous "No Irish Need Apply" signs and ads that have been proven to be almost entirely an ethnic myth.
In many parts of Europe at the time, you betcha.
"Allright. We'll give some land to the N****** and the C*****, but we don't want the Irish".
No locale was stated but it could well have been Europe from which the grandfather migrated. Canada... I doubt it too, it might have been subtle but not signs.
At any rate my advice to Jews (and Christians) is to buck up, and call on the Lord God for salvation. That’s promised to all who call upon Him for it. You’re here for a much bigger reason than having it good on this mortal coil. You’re going to encounter stinkers. Guaranteed. This is a war zone. Bow to the Lord and pray, then hold your heads high.
Dang, but that movie couldn’t be made today! One of the funniest movies of all time, largely because it made fun of prejudice instead of just self-righteously denouncing it.
Richard Pryor did more for race relations, because he got blacks and whites to laugh at, and with each other.
Well, father rather than grandfather. It’s not impossible but it sure doesn’t sound characteristic for Canada, or anywhere in North America.
In fact the general Christian origins of the Americas proved to be an advantage for the Jewish people that they did not see in Europe. These were not just nominal or cultural Christians. Most cared enough about God to want to brave the voyage to the New World. George Washington put it very nobly when he wished the Jews at the synagogue in Philadelphia well. America has sometimes dropped the ball, but it got off on a good footing towards the Jewish people (and, I believe, was accordingly blessed).
Somewhat similar signs are documented, notably in Shanghai, where “No dogs or Chinamen” signs were common.
But not in North America, AFAIK.
Watched it on Netflix recently. Not a very good movie, really. Too earnest and preachy.
But the anti-Semitism, while very real, was subtle. Certainly no signs would be put up.
America has had some periods of very strong religious antagonism. But they tended to be anti-Catholic or anti-Mormon, not anti-Semitic.
We now appear to be working towards anti-Christian.
I think as Christianity went from devout to cultural this brought on the decline. Instead of seeing Jews as people of the bible, they saw Jews as unwanted out-of-sync culture busters.
Anything that has seriously to do with God, is getting hooted at.
The sooner Christians and Jews realize they are in the same boat, the sooner they can dig in against the ungodliness, even if awkwardly (most Jews don’t recognize the person of Christ explicitly yet, though I believe more and more are looking to God for salvation as the world gets wickeder and wickeder).
In the history of the world there has probably never been a more enthusiastically pro-Semitic group than conservative American Protestants. Yet most Jews fear and hate this group more than any other in America.
The objections come because Protestants evangelize vigorously. To become a Christian, for a Jew, is like to become a nullity.
The great argument will be ended during prophetic times when all Israel, after a very grueling trial (which will be at the hands of pagans, not of Christians) will believe. In the meantime, individual Jews are convinced one by one that Christ is authentic.
Me too. I can't say that no such signs or ads existed, but there's a lot of folklore involved here. There were ways that businesses or employers could convey who they wanted, ads or signs saying "Protestant Only" or "Protestant Clientele Welcomed." I suspect parents equated those ads or signs with "No Irish Need Apply" or "No Jews or Dogs Allowed" and the children they told took the parents literally and passed down the story.
A lot of business and employers discriminated, but it was bad business to discriminate too loudly and too vulgarly. In the folklore, people tend to take things too far. Tip O'Neill claimed to see "No Irish Need Apply" signs in Boston in the 1920s and 1930s when the Irish were already a large part of the cities population. Eddie Fisher claimed that Arthur Godfrey's upscale Miami Hotel had a sign out front saying "No Dogs or Jews Allowed." I'm not saying that you couldn't have seen such a sign somewhere in America, just that prejudice in mainstream America was at least a little more subtle than that.
You could see such signs in Hitler's Germany. Apart from Nazism and other extreme movements, I'm not sure they were that common, though. In much of Europe there just weren't that many Jews, and in some of the areas where there were likely to be more than a few Jews, Jews were likely to be the innkeepers. It has been said, though, that "No Colored" signs were common in London in the 1950s and some added "No Irish."
What I do notice lately, though, is an attempt to dismiss claims of hard times and prejudice against "ethnic" or immigrant Whites as mythical along with the "No Irish Need Apply" signs. Sometimes I suspect there was more truth in the old ethic folklore of prejudice and discrimination than in the present-day dismissal of such claims.
I think Zanuck thought the subject matter alone could carry the movie and, for the day, it was considered groundbreaking.
I just got back here. The sign was in the 30s. It was posted at Gondola Point beach in Saint John, N.B.
Why didn’t Feiglin’s group open fire on them?
Now Jews or Dogs. Sounds like the 5th district of Minnesota.
I remember that in the 1960’s many of the country clubs, which were big stuff at that time, had a no Jews allowed policy. Country clubs were for WASPS primarily.
Thanks for the info.
I do not claim the story is untrue, but I remain skeptical.
Google knoweth not of this sign, pulling up only five references, four to this thread and the other excerpts from a book of essays that doesn’t seem to be relevant.
Most of the big resort hotels in the Catskills got their start because Jews were barred from the older hotels “white people” went to for the summer. So they started their own.
I never witnessed it because I was born in the 40s. But it was one of these things everyone talked about: how Gondola Point had changed from the bad old days. I couldn’t make that up. As for the anti-Semitism pre-WWII my father acquired the reputation of a legendary street fighter. As kids they had to go from their slum neighborhood to a synagogue for Hebrew School after school in another part of town and had to fight their way there and fight their way back. He became extremely proficient as he grew up.
I guess what I objected to most strongly in the article is this particular sentence, “Anti-Semitism was woven into the warp and woof of society.”
This implies that it was a central fact of Canadian (and I presume, by extension, US society), an organizing theme. I just don’t think this is accurate, with perhaps a few localized exceptions.
Anti-Semitism was central to society in much of Europe, particularly (before the Nazis) in the east and southeast. But I don’t think it was ever that central to life in North America.
I will, however, be glad to agree that to a Jew, who actually had to deal with the issue daily, it appeared to be a great deal more central than it was to everybody else.
The movie Gentleman’s Agreement, despite my panning of it (as a movie) in a post above, I thought did a pretty good job of showing how anti-Semitism worked here. It was almost entirely underground and unmentioned, something that polite people of good breeding just didn’t talk about. When forced out into the open and confronted, it pretty generally collapsed.
I wasn’t there in the 20s and 30s so I can only report what I was told. One small example from my family. An uncle who had a wife and small child and unemployed in the 30s went to a steel mill to see if he could get a job. The answer, “you Jews take care of your own” and they turned him away. My experience was philo-Semitism. In our part of town we were the only Jewish family, me the only boy. The Catholics and Protestants did not play with each other. I went to school with the Protestants but my neighborhood was mostly Catholic. I was the only kid who could go between the groups seamlessly. If I looked out in a field and saw someone playing baseball I just grabbed my glove and went.
That's too bad.
However, I'd like to point out that the guy who turned him away may have had a fairly decent point. Jews, at the time and still to a considerable extent I believe, prefer to hire other Jews rather than Gentiles.
Back when I lived in KC in the 70s, there was a huge uproar in the press when a number of churches got together and published a list of businesses operated by their members, on the theory that Christians might prefer to do business with Christians.
The local Jewish groups went ballistic, charging discrimination, anti-Semitism and such.
Then it came out that these same Jewish groups had been producing a "Jewish Directory" for decades, doing exactly the same thing.
I'm glad you had a different experience. I don't think I came along much later than you, and when I was growing up none of the kids cared in the least whether you were Protestant or Catholic. In fact, mostly we didn't know. Just wasn't an issue.
Anti-Semitic European chrstianity was not cultural. It was as devout as can be and serious as a heart attack. It's just that European chrstianity was never the American Biblicist variety. Ever.
American Biblicist chrstianity is an exception, not the rule. This is something American chrstians can't wrap their heads around because they consider their religion the "authentic" chrstianity.
True. All too tragically true.
Meanwhile, Abe Foxman can't wait to have his picture taken with the Pope or the Patriarch of Constantinople. But at least the Pope and the Patriarch aren't creationists, so he's less embarrassed associating with them.
Anti-Semitism declined in Europe as Christian devotion went down, until its rebirths first in Nazi racial theories and then in today’s leftist version. Neither has a thing to do with Christianity, devout or cultural.
No it wasn’t a decent point of view. That was the pattern. But unemployment was enormous. Everyone was suffering. They only wiped it out when the war came.
I don’t know what “chrstianity” is but you certainly seem to be a student of cursed-ianity. A feeble self righteousness of mongrel religion.
In the meantime I very much advocate Christianity — the true faith of the Savior.
One sign of being cultural is the all too common phenomenon of acting like one has to employ Satan’s rage to keep Christ from getting attacked, rather than using occasions of such attack to present the true role of Christ which is as Savior to rebels who will repent because He loves.
And yes, Jesus offers love to you. It is up to you to accept or to continue with fallacious, lying strawmen and refuse.
You have been led astray.
It was a religion of self righteousness and the touchstone of this was what happens when Christ is attacked.
I’m not sure what you think I’ve been led astray on.
Could you explain?
I pointed it out very clearly. But will do so again.
What happens when an outsider dares to malign Christ.
The answer will show whether you’re dealing with people who treat Christ as a Savior, or as a mascot.
Mascot “Christianity” isn’t Christianity.
I.e. it is not “Whom will you kill for” but “Whom will you sacrifice yourself for.”
That said, even those who know the rottenness of such things as the Inquisition would still sooner choose to be there in a New York minute if the alternative was to be in atheist Marxist countries whose purges of anyone who dared to talk about God were in the millions.
I agree, so I’m not clear how I’ve been misled.
I said anti-Semitism went down, prior to WWI, as “Christian” devotion declined. This is a historical fact.
I did not comment on whether these anti-Semitic “Christians” were true followers of Christ and his teachings, only on the intensity of their belief.