THE PRESS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1981. Attack on Jewish centre

Press, 17 November 1981, Page 20

THE PRESS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1981. Attack on Jewish centre

The attack of vandalism and sloganpainting on the Jewish Community Centre and synagogue in Wellington during the week-end will be greeted with outrage by all but a very few in New Zealand. By itself, the vandalism would have been bad enough; but the fact that it was obviously directed against, the Jewish community, is sickening to all with a sensitivity to what happened in Europe during the 1930 s and early 19405. To those members of the Jewish community who had close or even first-hand experience of that time, the experience must be frightening. They will have great regrets that some of their children or grandchildren have seen Jewish people singled out in this way. Many in New Zealand will sympathise with them on this point.

The nagging fear of some Jewish people must be that this daubing of slogans and swastikas, and the damage to furnishings, indicates an anti-Semitic view. It cannot be assumed that the perpetrators have any real grasp of the significance of their actions. Jewish people, like other minorities in society, have had labels of little meaning stuck on them before. Because there have been other similar incidents in. Wellington it must be hoped that those responsible are caught. Until they are, the incident will be unnerving as well as distressing. The fact that certain people who happen to be Jewish in New Zealand apparently do not feel secure enough to allow the publication of their names in giving their views on the incident is a sad reflection on the whole of society. Suggestions have been made that television films might have triggered the week-end action. Probably anything could be used by a sick mind to justify such behaviour, or be the immediate cause of an action. It is doubtful, however, whether any of the films which have recently appeared on television could be said to have incited anti-Semitism as such. The whole question raises the issue of freedom of speech and information. There must be few indeed who would want to see a whole episode of

European history, not treated on television at all because some sick-minded person somewhere or other might act irrationally. The same argument must be applied to a few cranky books that turn up from time to time.

One of the most important aspects of any Western society is its diversity. New Zealand has, perhaps, been less diverse in religion than some. According to the 1976 Census about 72 per cent of the population belong to what may be roughly described as mainstream Christianity; but that still leaves a large number who either objected to stating their religion, were agnostic, atheist, or Hindu, Hebrew, Buddhist, Islamic or members of another faith. When the 1981 figures are published, probably in January next year, an even greater diversity may be seen.

In recent years New Zealanders have given more formal attention to race relations and human rights as they may be ignored or upset because of old prejudices or indifference. Most emphasis has been put upon the relationships between people of European and Polynesian origin. The possible sources of friction, prejudice, and vindictiveness are obviously much wider than this racial difference.

■ Giving legal form to a social goal of suppressing or removing .prejudices is one thing; rooting out or moderating,attitudes of mind, sometimes unspoken or rarely spoken of, is another matter. While it is fairly common to blame books, films, and television for harmful attitudes and even crimes it must not be overlooked that they are also the sources of ideas and the stimulators of feelings that do much to remedy mistaken attitudes. One of the risks of exposing the real or supposed causes of hardships and oppressions in the world is that the exercise may create new objects of contempt and prejudice, just as misdirected as earlier prejudices based on rough labels that stick to people as a class. This can only be a reminder that opinions founded on generalities about race, faith, or nationality are profoundly dangerous.