Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Jews: The Canary in the Coal Mine for the Democratic Party?
A number of posts have been written about Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib and their anti-Semitic remarks, including my own. Many of us have speculated on the reasons for Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer’s silence regarding those comments, or their apologies on behalf of these two representatives. I’ve looked into the reasons for their not condemning their behavior, and the results were even more disturbing than I anticipated. (For the record, I don’t separate attitudes about Israel and the Jewish community.)
The U.S. has been known, since its inception, as a country that welcomes all religions, particularly Judaism. It’s only in the last few years that we’ve seen a shift in support by Democrats and Republicans. From a 2018 opinion survey by Pew Research:
The partisan divide in Middle East sympathies, for Israel or the Palestinians, is now wider than at any point since 1978. Currently, 79% of Republicans say they sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians, compared with just 27% of Democrats.
Since 2001, the share of Republicans sympathizing more with Israel than the Palestinians has increased 29 percentage points, from 50% to 79%. Over the same period, the share of Democrats saying this has declined 11 points, from 38% to 27%.
With these numbers from our citizenry, it’s no wonder that the Democrats want to please their base. They are also trying to prevent an all-out war between their more moderate members and the far Left. Many people might ask why the Jews themselves are protecting Omar and Tlaib. Rep. Jan Schakowsky made this statement to Politico:
. . . she doesn’t think Omar is an anti-Semite. Politico makes much of the fact that Schakowsky is a Jew, and she is. She also happens to be a supporter and devotee of J Street, the Democratic organization that exists to criticize Israel and the pro-Israel community in the United States.
There is also Ayanna Pressley who spoke out about the resolution on anti-Semitism:
We need to have an equity in our outrage. Islamophobia needs to be included in this. We need to denounce all forms of hate. There is not a hierarchy of hurt.
The message seems to be that the Jews are not victims of hate more than any other minority group. Also, Democratic Jews are supposed to espouse tolerance, so how could they possibly be supporting anti-Semites?
Lastly, as part of stating the obvious, Republicans can be attacked for beating up on Muslim women:
Also, by judging critics based on the identity of those being criticized, rather than on the merits of the criticism, the left seeks to render debate in America impossible. Democrats have argued that scrutiny of Muslim congresswomen represents ‘Islamophobic incitement.’ This fits the European anti-free speech paradigm whereby ‘hate speech’—as defined by enlightened progressive leaders—somehow equates to violence, and is criminalized.
As the Democrats continue to move farther Left, they will have a built-in support system: college graduates. Besides the students’ inculcation by the professors on the Left, pro-Muslim and anti-Israel groups on campus (which are supposedly not anti-Semitic) have proliferated.
In terms of the U.S. population, Muslims are growing and Jews are declining:
Muslim Americans will be a political growth industry for the Democratic Party that will offset any losses attributable to Jewish voters and supporters of assumed Jewish causes.
Consider that a record number of Muslim Americans ran for state or national office in the 2018 election cycle, the most in nearly two decades. Nearly 70 percent of Muslims in America are Democrats. The U.S. Muslim population is expected to double by 2050. Presumably, the number of Muslim candidates and voters will only grow.
Conversely, the Jewish population, which also votes reliably Democrat, is expected to decline from 1.8 percent to 1.4 percent by 2050. The only Jewish cohort that is growing, Orthodox Jews, tends to vote majority Republican.
Certainly, the Democrats will take into account the nature of their constituents.
Finally, we have to wonder about the far-left wealthy financiers of Democrats. My guess is that they are willing to do whatever it takes to put Democrats into power and keep them there, no matter who or what they damage along the way.
So the situation looks dire not only for Jews, but also for all religions, those people who embrace free speech and a traditional understanding of the Constitution. I’ll end with a quote from Ben Weingarten of The Federalist:
One would be hard pressed to find any Democrat who would condemn Tlaib and Omar and face a political backlash among their constituents for doing so. The silence of the gutless Democratic establishment makes it complicit. As with Western civilization, Israel and the Jews are serving as the canary in the coal mine for the Democratic Party.
Does Weingarten speak in hyperbole, or are the Jews the canary in the coal mine for the Democratic Party? Even more important, what is he saying about the future of our country?
Published in Politics
Democrats in power is the means, not the ends. The wealthy backers are out destroy America and American culture using the Dems as a tool. If they had big dragons, they would use them. American must be destroyed to make way for their Utopia.
The situation does look more dire than it used to be, but it has been much worse in the past. I don’t see this as a 1st Amendment issue, but a cultural issue. I think and hope this cultural Marxism will pass like a bad fever. It is not sustainable.
We mostly agree, @dong, The reason I mentioned the First Amendment is because the Left uses any disagreement with them as an excuse to attack that person in nasty ways. I know that has always been true to some extent, but I think it’s more virulent than ever. At some point people could not only back away from these attacks for personal reasons, but also because they put them in a bad light, e.g. Islamaphobic.
It could have been better in the run-up to World War II. Far better. For the most part though, that’s accurate.
That’s true, @percival, although I hold FDR mostly responsible for trying to ignore what Hitler was doing. FDR knew, his ambassador was giving him reports (or maybe those reports went to State), but I believe he knew.
I wonder if there were not some similarities to today’s views in sentiment, pro-communist anti-semitic, in the decade before WWII. Are economic disparities, although at a different place on the scale, simply an excuse that is handy?
I think that the anti-communist angle was used to justify the anti-Semitic nonsense. No proof; just a supposition on my part.
I don’t follow the logic of that, how does that justify?
I’m not that versed on it, but hasn’t socialism been traditionally anti Semitic? I have a Jewish friend who came from Russia in his early 20’s, and his main reason for leaving, he said, was the anti semitism in Russia- it seems inherent in Socialism…
If Socialism is anti semitic by nature, and Democrats are mainly Socialists now, I would expect to see anti semitism rising in the party.
( Socialism is anti religion altogether. Thou shalt have no g-ds before the state. )
Jews were prominent in the communist movements. Jews were and are prominent in a lot of stuff. The idea that Jews were more apt to adopt the communistic outlook was given by some people as a reason to keep them out. It was a common trope of the Nazis as well.
Talented people do well. Jews as a group have a lot of talented people. This is not a conspiracy, it’s an observation.
That’s what prompted my previous reply, #7. I grew up in Georgia before 1960. Public schools were segregated by law at that time, I don’t know the precise language of the law but schools were referred to, IIRC, as white or black. In any event, to the best of my knowledge, there was only one Catholic and he was also the only Hispanic in my high school. I don’t think I ever knew any Jews then. I suspect the white population there was somewhat homogeneous with respect to ethnic origins so not much diversity and consequently no real reason for prejudices to flourish as they did so much in the more populous and ethnically diverse northern cities. But, somehow, I suppose from the historical period of slavery and ‘Jim Crow’, racial and religious prejudice was attached to Southerners whether it existed or not. Most people today don’t realize that once the civil rights hurdles were overcome in the sixties, the actual problems related to the processes of integration were not confined to the South.
I think the socialistic leaning of the population is exactly the force behind the anti-religious and anti-semitic movements.
Your last sentence sums it up. Any authoritarian state shall have no other gods before it (unless a particular god is part of the authoritarian state – think Islam).
@phenry, Russia was anti-semitic; one only needs to see their history of pogroms and their forbidding faith practice. But if I’m not mistaken (and as you indicate), they were against all religions. It’s interesting that you suggest linking socialism as opposed to the Russian culture.
The history of the Jews, especially when Marxism got to this country, is mixed. First the Jews were lauded; then they were condemned. I can’t remember the reasons for either position, but that would also assume that “reason” was behind those decisions.
I went to high school in Atlanta in the late 60’s. The schools were segregated, but by then it was more by practice than by law – people went to the school closest to where they lived. It took active reassignment and bussing to get full integration.
But I would say that probably 20% of the students in my school were Jewish and the cafeteria always served fish sticks on Friday. Maybe it was because Atlanta was a large city, but it never occurred to me to think anything about going to school with Jewish or Catholic students.
Well, the Jewish people are, as @percival said, a lot of talented people, and energetic, as well. This formula leads frequently to achievement well beyond the norm and results in the impression to some that the Jewishness is the factor that is causing the inequality of result rather than ability, competitiveness, and energy. Now this is affecting anglo-Christian men who have reached an unwarranted privileged state.
I don’t remember Atlanta having the intensity of conflict over bussing for integration that went on in northern cities like Boston. Am I misremembering this?
Atlanta changed significantly in those 15 years following my high school days.
Nope, we never had the “race riots” of other cities. The one riot that happened was incited by SNCC in the Summerhill area. Mayor Allen (against the advice of his aides) went down in person during the riot, got up on the hood of a car and pleaded with rioters. He worked with police and local black leaders to restore order in the area.
Atlanta’s motto was “The city too busy to hate.” Yes, of course, there was prejudice (and some times worse) but the Big Mules (Atlanta businessmen) knew that racial unrest was bad for business and bad for the city. And most of them genuinely loved the city. They had meetings with black clergy (usually discreet). Whenever pressure started to get too much, a concession would be made. That eased the city into openness without conflagration (Selma or Birmingham, anyone?)
One of the ways the Atlanta system handled integration was to change from 5-year high schools (8-12) to middle schools and high schools. Half the schools were changed to middle schools and the geographic assignment of which schools changed meant that the schools became integrated.
FYI, I was graduated from Fulton High in Lakewood Heights in 1956. I also attended O’Keefe and Murphy high schools for short periods. Last I looked I didn’t recognize any high school names as those when I attended.
So, to pose some of the OP questions, is the anti-Semitism manifested in Congress a concern? Or is this just another cycle? Or even more important, is it part of something larger?
I said this earlier:
Well, the Jewish people are, as @percival said, a lot of talented people, and energetic, as well. This formula leads frequently to achievement well beyond the norm and results in the impression to some that the Jewishness is the factor that is causing the inequality of result rather than ability, competitiveness, and energy. Now this is affecting anglo-Christian men who have reached an unwarranted privileged state.
I think the anti-Semitism as well as the failures of the Democrat leadership to address it all come from a focus on equality, and that means equality of outcomes to these socialists. It is a bigger problem in higher education than it is in Congress.
There are two things about which to be concerned: one is the powerful federal politicians who fail to condemn anti-Semitism and other conditions falsely blamed for societal inequities and the second is the voters who will be the ones who elect these evil people. The second is the bigger threat and they operate mostly in ignorance.
So I’m not sure I’m clear about your point. Lots of groups are successful; I assume the Democrats figure they can take money from all of them. If that’s true, why focus on the anti-Semitism? Just label them with the rest of the 1%. I think there’s something I’m missing here.
Do you have thoughts about the consequences of the lack of politicians condemnation? In this country, as much as I despise the anti-Semitism, it’s hard to imagine our turning into a Nazi Germany. I wonder what the steps in between would look like. Would we recognize what was happening? Yes, I do worry about the voters. I assume at least some of them knew of Omar’s anti-Semitism and voted for her anyway. I wonder if they voted for the other positions she held, or if they saw her hatred as an attribute?
BTW, anyone can answer–I’m not intending to gang up on Bob!
Just as President Trump plays 3D Chess causing those who oppose not to recognize the effects until too late, the rest of us will have just as much trouble trying to understand completely the insanity of the Left.
Of course its a concern! But it may be just another cycle, that is up to the voters. If they are willing to ignore, or accept the blatant antisemitism from Omar and her ilk, it will grow and spread. If, as I want to believe, the voters know it when they see it and reject the candidates for their prejudice, it will go away, as it has in the past.
All of it I see stems from this intersectionality worldview, where victims are graded as to their ‘overlapping’ claims to victimhood. Apparently, in that viewpoint, Israelis are way behind Palestinians, and Jews behind Muslims, etc. As long as it is ‘my victimized identity status trumps your victimized identity status’, the discrimination against Jews will continue on the left. The deck is stacked against them… But it isn’t just Jews. They actually come out above white Christian males. So while it is understandable that Jews would see it as mostly a rise in anti semitism, that is just a symptom of the bigger trend, and that can be described as ‘reverse prejudice’, if you will. If you aren’t the top of the victim heap, you are in for discrimination and hate.
Fascinating, @phenry. Good points. And you are correct, they are coming after all of those people who are religious. I hadn’t thought of the comment I bolded abpve–who’s the worst victim in the intersectionality game. It’s funny–in general, I don’t see myself as a victim–voicing concern about anti-Semitism doesn’t seem like speaking out as a victim. Interesting thought, though. I also wonder whether other Jews see themselves as victims, and also wonder about white Christian males–whether they feel victimized, and how they could characterize the hatred sometimes directed at them.
White Christian males are under attack. One isn’t a victim of these feebs until one allows oneself to be.
they don’t see you as one either. That is why you are so far down on the list. It is those who are consumed with their victim status who win in the intersectionality game.