Full disclosure right from the start, I am a practicing Jew. So when my friend lent me this book, Gangsters vs. Nazis: How Jewish Mobsters Battled Nazis in Wartime America, I knew I had to read it. Many may not realize this, but the Nazi movement was quite strong in the United States in the 1930s, especially within the German American community. One of the first surprises this book had for me was who gave the initial impetus behind the Jewish mobsters attacking the Nazis: it was a Jewish judge. This judge asked for their help, and even brought in some rabbis to help persuade the mobsters to participate. He had enough clout that he was able to have the press be favorable towards the activities of the mobsters as they went after the Nazi sympathizers. One rule the judge and rabbis were strict about was no killing. And that rule was followed.
The story itself is fairly repetitive. Benson talks about the activities of mobsters across the nation. The East Coast was the initial focus but he does branch out to cover what mobsters in Minneapolis and the West Coast were doing as well. In all cases, the author talks about the background of each of the mobsters and then details some of the specific rallies or meetings that they broke up.
Reading this book, though, does raise some very serious moral questions for me. At what point is it acceptable to act outside the law to achieve a moral outcome? and whose morals will be enforced? Jews in the US are under attack with greater ferocity than at any other time since the 1930s. That isn’t my opinion, the FBI has gone on record as stating this. Is it morally justifiable for such actions to take place today against the Proud Boys, the 3%ers. or other hate groups? I worry about this because of the slippery slope argument, if it is done to them, where does it stop?
The counter to that comes in an example from the book. At the large Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden, Dorothy Thompson, columnist and wife of Sinclair Lewis, was in attendance and threw her head back and laughed in derision during a speech from one of the main speakers. Asked why she laughed so loudly she said, “I laughed because those Nazis were exercising the free speech which one day they would deny everyone” (page 239). It does put a twist on one’s actions when you know that the group you are opposing will strip you of all rights, should they prevail.
Did these mobsters act in an illegal fashion? Unquestionably. Did their actions help to prevent Nazis from gaining a greater foothold in US society? The answer is very likely, yes. I go back to a question I asked earlier, when is an illegal action morally justified? I honestly do not know the answer but I fear, based on the direction this country is heading, that certain targeted minorities may be faced with some difficult choices: endure violence/discrimination, fight back even if means breaking the law, or to leave if possible. None are particularly good options. The book is a look back at a dark period of time and provides a glimpse of what may still occur in the US. Even more, it makes you think, and that is the mark of a good book.