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
Thanks, @percival and @phenry, for reminding me that one is not a victim unless a person sees himself or herself that way. Whether Christian or Jew, black or white, rich or poor, we can embrace our lives just as they are, while at the same time striving to be the best we can be. In that striving, including calling out those who try to hold us down, we will be successful.
To oversimplify a nonsensical mindset…
Person 1:
Jewish: -1
Israeli: -1
Female: +1
White: -2
Person 2:
Muslim: +1
Palestinian: +1
Male: -1
Arab: +1
Total Intersectionality victimhood score: Person 1, -3. Person 2, +2.
So it is simply a matter of fairness that person 1 be discriminated against and yes, victimized, since they are ‘privileged’ by their status. We have to level the victim playing field, or something.
Who knew that you could calculate this stuff!? ;-)
What I find most disturbing is that the ultimate goal is to eliminate victimhood and discrimination by victimizing and discriminating against the ‘right’ group.
In the end, they don’t want equality, or fairness, or a world without discrimination and victims. They want previously mistreated identity groups to be able to mistreat the identity group they believe they were being mistreated by.
You’re going to be in real trouble, @phenry, if anyone on the Left sees what you’ve written! Seriously, you are right. Those of us who work hard, succeed, enjoy our lives, have mostly good relationships are pretty obnoxious. I’m sorry–it’s hard for me to be serious when their efforts are so ridiculous, as well as destructive and self-serving. You are correct. We all need to be punished. [sarc. off–finally]
Yes, it is a concern. I hope it’s just another cycle, but am afraid it’s not. I agree with others that it seems to be part of a larger attack on religion.
It’s kind of odd, because in the past, it always seemed that Democrats were very big on accusing any- and everyone of anti-Semitism. And if someone said something along the lines of, “Opposing Zionism” or “Opposing an action by Israel” is not proof of anti-Semitism the response was always – “That’s just a cover.”
Now those Democrats are anti-Israel, anti-Jews (of practically any stripe), anti-anything that criticizes the Palestinians, the PLO, etc. But……”they aren’t anti-Semitic.”
What do they perceive that they are gaining from taking this tack?
Thanks, @eb. I think a big part of it is Leftist doctrine, including fighting for the underdog (that means Palestinians and Muslims). Since the Muslim population is growing much faster than the Jews, the Left sees Muslims as their constituency. I think they take the Jews for granted, especially since many Jews criticize Israel and call out “Islamaphobia.” The rest of the Left doesn’t have to fight to engage the Jewish voters; I think they assume their support is “locked in.” I keep wondering when Leftists Jews will realize that they are supporting people who take them for granted and hate them?
and leftist Blacks, and leftist blue collar workers, and leftist females, and on and on. Somehow, they never seem to catch on?
I think, especially for Jews (and maybe for everyone else), they want so much to be accepted, to be like everyone else. The question becomes to any person: how much are you willing to sacrifice, in order to feel included?
I don’t mind being accepted, but not if it means changing.
The crazy is part of the total package.
Being a bit more cynical about human nature than you, I think it is a calculation on liberals part that their identity will be the one that comes out on top. Besides, they are hate driven. They don’t see the illogic of their worldview because they are consumed with getting even, destroying, eliminating their opponents (scapegoats). All those other issues will work out just fine when the evil white privileged right wingers are out of the way.
Plus, like all socialists they are convinced they will be part of the leadership, not one of the masses. Only the masses get starved- the leadership eats caviar and steak. Has any socialist ever said ‘I hope when socialism takes over I will be in a Siberian work camp mining for the good of the state’? They all are sure they will be among the elite, somehow.
. . . and we wouldn’t want you to change that for anything!
Huge concern. These idiots (and I’m being bipartisan here) make laws, and to voice official opinions based on lies can lead to sanctioned violence. The Dems are going down a path that can only lead to hate, and the two female Imams in the House shall lead them . . .
First of all. With regard to Ayanna Pressley idea that there is no hierarchy of hurt. Isn’t that what identity politics is about? A hierarchy of hurt. Secondly, Jews are the victims of hate crimes more than other minority groups. Thirdly, so what if there is other bigotry, anti-semitism is still bad and a member of Congress shouldn’t participate in it.
Those are great points, @henrycastaigne! Re “the hierarchy of hurt,” it wouldn’t be the first time that the Left contradicts itself. They do that regularly and like you, we need to point out their contradictions! Thanks.
Susan, great post. I have follow-ups to a couple of your comments.
I blame the Nazis. I don’t think that FDR can be held responsible in any significant way. There was some bad but non-genocidal mistreatment of Jews in Nazi Germany before the war, and I think that there were some civilian massacres during both the Polish and Russian invasions, but while bad, these were in the context of Jewish uprisings against Nazi occupation, which wasn’t distinguishable from the general horror of invasion and occupation suffered by the Poles, western Russians, and Ukranians (Jewish or non-Jewish).
The “Final Solution” had two major components: (1) annihilation of Jews in Russian territory in approximately June-December 1941, by the Einsatzgruppen death squads, and (2) the death camps approved at the Wannsee Conference in January 1942, with the horrid, industrial-scale slaughter beginning around March-April 1942.
It’s hard to see how FDR could have acted any faster in response to these events. We were already at war with Germany beginning on December 11, 1941, and FDR did adopt the “Europe First” strategy advocated by Churchill. As a military matter, there was simply no way to raise the armies and build the equipment necessary to defeat Nazi Germany faster than we did.
[Cont’d]
[Cont’d]
I choose to view the anti-Semitism in Congress in an optimistic way. I think that this is a major area in which the radical Left is exposing itself as evil, and I think that they will suffer serious political consequences.
I think that it is part of something larger. It is a manifestation of the post-modern victimhood agenda. I think that PHenry’s comment comes very close to hitting the nail on the head:
My modification to this theory is that I don’t think the claims, in reality, have anything to do with being a member of a “previously mistreated identity group.” The goal is simply special treatment and special preference, generally among people and groups who are doing poorly, often because they have adopted bad habits and bad cultural ideas.
You don’t have to be a member of some historically mistreated minority, or perhaps more accurately, if you split the world into a sufficient number of identity categories, you’ll be able to claim victim status in some group. The main theme is that people doing poorly today, in a very free society where they have great opportunity, don’t want to be held responsible for their own failures. Identity politics lets them blame someone else for their own failures, and to claim special treatment, while pretending to be virtuous advocates of equality and fairness.
It’s quite an effective racket.
The Jews don’t fit well into this victimology hierarchy because they’re too darned successful. This is principally a result of: (1) superior values and cultural beliefs (compared to poorly-performing groups), and (2) a quite unusually high average IQ (which may well be genetic or biological in origin, at least in part).
David Rubin and I believe that the hard left will eventually go against Asian-Americans. Asian-Americans are incredibly successful so they must have done something nefarious to get ahead.
Read Erik Larson’s In the Garden of Beasts. It’s the story of Ambassador William Dodd and his family during his posting to Berlin from 1933 to 1937. It was worse than just bad. it was barbaric.
FDR knew; he had to know.
Would you elaborate? I can’t read an entire book. My point is that it was not organized mass slaughter until: the Russian invasion in late 1941, and the death camps from early 1942 onward.
What was FDR to do? Use reports of the mistreatment of Jews in Nazi Germany to launch a war in 1935 or 1937? That was politically impossible. We didn’t even enter the war when France was crushed and London was being bombed to rubble.
I’m not much of a fan of FDR, but I don’t think that it’s fair to blame him for the Holocaust in any way.
It seems like they may already be starting. Look at “elite” schools that have quotas on how many Asians to admit.
Israel is pretty gay friendly.
I remember the riots in South Boston.
I would like to believe that the congress as a whole is not anti-Semitic. It is clear that these two young women are. This is easily explained by the fact that they grew up Muslim, and were indoctrinated from birth. It is very hard to escape the prejudices of your milieu. I think the Dem leadership is genuinely pained by their utterances, but reluctant to censure them because they are young women “of color,” a category that the party needs for electoral success.
I have no idea how their anti-Semitism plays in their respective constituencies, though I doubt it was an explicit element of their campaigns. Nor do I have any inkling of what else they bring to the table, though I suspect Muslim and female were important in their electoral success.
They are freshmen. I’ll be more concerned if they are still here in two years.
Courtesy Peter Beinart:
He could be right, he could be wrong, but the point is – people disagree about whether anti-zionism is just a variation of antisemitism or whether it is a separate thing, and also about whether you can address the root causes of anti-semitism without also addressing zionism.
Also from Beinart’s article:
I would expand this to read:
I march to the beat of a different drummer.
Name’s Nigel. Steel drums.
Every one of Susan’s posts are civil, intelligent and well reasoned. I do reserve a friendly reservation or two. I don’t always equate anti-Israel attitudes with anti-Semitism, partly because I know plenty of Jews who criticize Israel and Zionism. There certainly are hate Israel/hate Jews people around, though it’s more common in Europe, the traditional home of anti-Semitism.
American Jews have put up with rank anti-Semitism from Blacks, their alleged political allies, for decades. They don’t like it. It has softened somewhat but it is still an element in what’s happening today in Congress. It wasn’t enough to turn Jews away from the Democratic party because a whole lot of issues go into voting decisions. Social issues, trade unions, and welfare programs are also important to them, and Republican policies generally are in opposition. That–to me–is why Jews are not canaries in the Democratic coal mine. Israel alone is not enough to drag them over the line to conservatism.
Right, and that’s an example of why American Jews are not likely to flock to conservatism. Plenty of well meaning Christian fundamentalists kid themselves that, underneath the beards and the skullcaps, “the real Jews” see things their way. By and large, they don’t.
The Orthodox pretty much do.