Skip to main content

It must be said.

I will initiate the debate because I am Jewish. I suppose I feel somewhat immune from having heinous motives ascribed to me for what I think needs to be openly debated.

I certainly don't relish opening a discussion such as this. People often feel reluctant to wade into what usually becomes a bitter and furious brawl about Israel and Palestine.  Feelings are hurt, egos trampled. I am coming at this from the perspective of an American Jew. I am trying to describe how secular Jews react when some of their own rise to prominence under less than enviable circumstances.

The long anticipated implosion of the Bush regime will mark a new chapter in American history.  I fear this new era we are rapidly appraching may not be good for the Jews.

As an American Jew, I am a visitor in this great country. America is a diaspora, historically kind and welcoming to a multitude of ethnic groups. Jews have a more terrible historic narrative than most.  History has not been kind to us. Perhaps we fear being targeted, so we are more vigilent than others about what may seem unthreatening or remote.

Please recognize dear friends, that when some of us behave badly, it worried all of us. This is what is happening now in America.

Discussing what is for Jews the ever present reality of latent and actual anti-semitism, and lancing the boil before it gets too big, is important. If you're so inclined, please stay with me.

As a Jew myself, I am concerned about Jack Abramoff. Mr. Abramoff is an Orthodox Jew. Observant. Pious. A good and prosperous American citizen. Then he got caught. When the cloak of anonymity got stripped away, we saw not a man of God, not the religious ideal, but a man wearing  religion on his sleeve for very suspect ends.

Mr. Abramoff likely will develop into a maligned Jewish sterotype.  He will surely become fodder for the anti-semites just waiting for the opportunity to make an ugly comback.

Mr. Abramoff and all that he represents is, I fear lethal for American Jews.

Scooter Libby. What master does he serve? Will we hear in the coming weeks that he is on the "payroll" of Israel? Not exactly, but things will be said, connections drawn. Also very bad for the Jews.

Judith Miller. Who does she serve? Chalabi? Rove? Sharon?   Are we Americans? Do we sacrifice America for Israel? It always comes back to this.

The New York Times. The Sulzberger family.  Notice the number one diary today on Kos is one about why there is no mention of WHIG--ever in the Times? We may find out, or we may not, but people will wonder who is the Times serving.

Initially all this will be quiet--sotto voce, whispered.

But as Iraq implodes, as Bush implodes, as the New York Times implodes, as the dots get connected and blame gets assessed, you will, I fear hear about the Jews.

I hope what's about to happen doesn't get out of hand, but mind our history dear Kossacks. Mind our ugly history.  

Originally posted to nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:09 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Delicate but important (none)
    Nyceve has raised an important, if delicate subject with great diplomacy.
    •  I think it's very important . . . (4.00)
      especially with indictments coming up.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:14:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, thank you for this (4.00)
        It's not just the neo-cons, nyceve. I'm going to be honest, I've seen a lot of what I perceive to be latent hate on this site.

        For instance, any diary on Lieberman (for the record - I do not like Lieberman or his politics) is like throwing raw meat to the hungry lions. The diary will fill up with an enormous number of comments of such vitriol (including a few that call him a Likkudnik and accuse him of dual-loyalties) that I am literally taken aback by the level of hate.

        And then I ask myself why is it that we don't get too many of the same volume and tone of diaries on folks like Nelson (my often sell-out FL senator), Landreiu (an out and out disgrace as proven by Katrina) or Biden (credit-card co's are my friend), etc.?

        Now watch, someone will post a lengthy rebuttal to me pointing out how much more heinous Joe is than any other senator, thus explaining why he is deserving of many more diaries and posts.

        On a side note - last year, I watched the 2002 movie Sunshine with Ralph Fiennes about the three generations of Jews in Hungary who wanted so badly to be accepted and were scapegoated by the right and the left. I think about that movie a lot when I read some of the stuff posted here.

    •  Very delicate (none)
      Recently my family was victimized by anti-semitism. Not with a swastika grafftitied on my house but verbally in the middle of mass chaos.

      I diaried about the Topanga fire but not about my encounter with anti-semitism. One of our neighbors, keeps to themselves mostly made a comment to us while the fire was racing towards our house.

      She was concerned with getting cars out of her garage while a young man pulled up on the side of her driveway to look for his family. My mom stuck up for the kid, also mentioned that if we needed to evacuate all the cars would have to go, including the kid with the car who was only a couple hundred feet away.

      Thankfully the fire stopped so we didn't have to leave but I still felt burned. The lady across the street yelled at my mom, saying : "You Jew!" in the most awful way. I've heard that tone in movies highlighting anti-semitism but never in a manner such as that.

      I understand it was a high-pressure time for everyone with a major fire headed our way, but it seems that throughout history, its been easy for many to use the Jews as scapegoats in many instances.

      The Only Constant is Change

      by proudprogressiveCA on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:28:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The lady across the street? (none)
        A neighbor? Out of the blue?

        Have you any prior history with her?

        •  Nothing concerning my religion (none)
          The lady and her daughter are an odd couple I can attest. Very big on private property issues. To such an extent that if you turn your car around in their driveway they will take pictures of you doing so.

          Their cameras were especially busy that day since the fire department blockaded the street right next to her house.

          The Only Constant is Change

          by proudprogressiveCA on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:35:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for your story bcause . . . (none)
        If you go down the thread, LarryNYC thinks I'm overblowing things.

        I think people like myself and Larry don't experience anti-semitism becuase we live in NYC.

        I'm also supposing Larry is Jewish.

        Oh well.

        http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

        by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:32:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I dont live in hickville either (none)
          There is a considerable Jewish population in this part of Los Angeles, with three synagogues with a couple miles.

          The Only Constant is Change

          by proudprogressiveCA on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:36:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  What I think.... (none)
          I think there always has been a streak of anti-semitism out there...its never gone away.  Just like racism, its there underneath the surface.

          I live in a medium-sized mid-western city...and there are still times when you see it come to the surface.  Its not rampant, but there will be the anti-semitic literature shoved under the door of someone who's well known....

        •  Then he's wrong (4.00)
          Jews in NYC, or anywhere else where there are large numbers of Jews, are often insulated from the sorts of anti-Semitism we face in the hinterlands.

          One of my best friends grew up in a small town in Upstate New York where he was the only Jewish kid in school. Because of his religion, he was shot and stabbed by anti-Semitic classmates, and otherwise assaulted on several occasions. And I, growing up in rural Wisconsin, had similar experiences in my school. Both of us knew that whenever a Jew was in the news for doing something wrong, we could expect to be blamed for it by our classmates, and we had to be extra careful to watch for physical attacks. I remember when Michael Milken first got in trouble with the S&L scandal and was in the news, the next day in school I was beaten by a group of six thugs screaming about Jewish greed. And the school administration didn't do a damn thing to protect me.

          We Jews are oversensitive about anti-Semitism for good reason. Was it Groucho Marx who said it wasn't paranoia when there really are people out to get you?

          Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

          by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:09:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  OK. (none)
        Now, was she upset about the New York Times?  Jack Abramoff?  Scooter Libby (he's Jewish?  Who knew?).

        Of is she (like the people cited above) a shithead?  I'd guess the latter.

        George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

        by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:40:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I understand. (4.00)
    Again, a real double standard, huh?  As a white WASP no one expects me to be responsible for what GW does...not many people are blaming all of us with English heritage, are they?

    This is why I continually try to remind everyone that the Jewish bloc is one of the most reliably liberal in this country...they are a part of us, of all of our movements...and they'll continue to be so.

    •  The Jewish bloc (none)
      Has historically been very liberal and very democratic.

      What is happening now as the right wing embraces Israel, for very suspect and bad reasons involving the rapture and the second coming of Christ, large segments of the Jewish population in America are becoming Republican.

      Very bad devlopment.  Butthis helps explain the Abramoff connection to Delay.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:19:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bulldinky. . . (4.00)
    Jack Abramoff is a shithead.  So what?  Judith Miller is a sucky reporter who's only interested in scoring scoops, even at the expense of accuracy.  OK.

    The only people who have something to worry about from these losers are

    • People who somehow feel Jews should get credit for being morally superior to other people and are worried that these counterexamples indicate otherwise.

    • People who secretly feel that Jews really are a dangerous fifth column in America and worry that these individuals will expose that fact.

    The rest of us can simply see Abramoff, Miller, etc. for what they are -- shitheads.  It's not necessary to circulate old anti-Jewish conspiracy theories or create new ones (like the Times not mentioning the WHIG -- it wasn't mentioned on dKos until three days ago!).

    And not to confuse the issue by raising any facts but Miller if anything was working to benefit the Iranians against the interests of Israel while Abramoff is also know for some shady dealings with the Saudis.

    George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

    by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:18:15 AM PDT

    •  Larry, you hit the nail on the head (none)
      Plenty, massive numbers of Americans do indeed see Jews as the Fifth Column.

      You and I live in NYC so we don't see or experience this anti-semitism, but boy does it exist!

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:21:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bulldinky again (4.00)
        Can you show me a single piece of evidence that there has been an increase in anti-semitic sentiment in the United States?  Anything at all?  There's no factual evidence in your post -- only your musings about what you fear might happen when a few Jewish people get the punishment they so richly deserve for their misdeeds.  You yourself admit that you don't know what's going on outside of New York City.

        Where are the "massive numbers" of people who "do indeed see Jews as the Fifth Column."

        George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

        by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:26:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Larry, it's what i suppose is called . . . (none)
          anecdotal evidence.

          Do I have graphs and tables and charts-no.

          I have something much better,yes.  History.

          But look, you and I disagree, that's okay.

          http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

          by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:29:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  OK. so where is it? (2.50)
            Where is the anecdotal evidence?  You didn't cite any of the either.  Just imaginings which indicate to me not that you're seeing an increase in anti-semitic sentiment among the non-Jewish population but that you yourself feel the should be an increase because of the actions of a few miscreants.

            There are people who actually study this stuff and if there were a problem developing, believe me, it would get press -- or to put in terms more in line with your original diary, that cabal at the New York Times would certainly splash it all over the front page, right?

            George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

            by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:35:54 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Larry, I don't know why you take . . . (none)
              such a harsh tone.  

              Please read some of the comments, I think more people agree with what I said than disagree.

              But, I repspect your feelings. I can disagree with you without being unpleasant.

              http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

              by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:01:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Why the harsh tone? (3.00)
                That's an odd question coming from someone who posted a profanity laced screed directed at Barak Obama, one of the finest public servants in the country, because he dared to try to engage in a dialog at dKos!

                Why the harsh tone:

                1. I don't like people who make things up.  That's why I don't like the modern Republican party.  I hate to see dKos become some kind of left wing Free Republic with incredible statements about the state of the country or public sentiment routinely accepted.  (And please note, that doesn't mean I think you shouldn't be allowed to post them, only that the fact-based community should be allowed to object to them and to do so strenuously).

                2. As I've tried to make clear, I believe that you posted what you did because you yourself believe that the actions of ought rightfully to lead to a backlash against Jews because they constitute some kind of semi-official "Jewish" action against the United States.  I believe that since you seem to be awfully worried about an effect for which you cannot cite even anectodal evidence of its existence.  That, I believe, does a disservice to both the dKos community and the Jewish community.

                George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

                by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:50:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well Larry, I disagree totally (none)
                  My diary on Obama did not have one profanity in it. The title used the words "rat's ass". My Obama diary was utterly respectful and most of the comments said it was the best one in response.

                  But I'll tell you Larry I certainly don;t even know why I am defending it to you or anyone.

                  You are totally entitled to disagree.

                  Regarding this diary. I stand behind it 100%.  These were/are my opinions and you know what Larry, last time I checked in the good old USA, I'm still entitled to voice those opinions even on Kos and even if you don't happen to like or respect them.

                  Sorry I arouse so much anger in you. I suggest whenever you see my diaries you just hit the delete button or just go elsewhere, no one is making you read write I write.

                  http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

                  by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:08:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  The ADL has evidence (none)
            Every year, the Anti-Defamation League publishes an audit of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States. If you look at their audits from the past several years, you'll see a significant upsurge in incidents since 2001.

            Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

            by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:12:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The post below yours (none)
              has a link to the 2005 ADL report, which shows a slight decrease in anti-semitism since 2002.

              I'm not arguing anti-semitism doesn't exist, that would be stupid.  Only that the poster's claims of a wave of anti-semitism sweeping the country due to the actions of a few people, most of whom are probably not even widely known to be Jewish, are silly.

              George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

              by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:37:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not exactly (none)
                That post is a link to a report about anti-Semitic attitudes, not incidents. Attitudes are certainly important, and even the slight decline in the prevalence of anti-Semitic attitudes among Americans since 2002 is good news. But I'm more interested in incidents. And if you read the ADL's report on incidents, you'll see they're at a nine-year high.

                Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

                by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:59:00 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  re: Bulldinky again (none)
          Well.  Considering history, the current situation, and the cast of bad actors, I believe nyceve's concerns are well-founded.  

          Being a huge fan of the internets (I have 3 of them at home) and Google in particular, I thought it be keen to see what I could find, on my own, with little more than 5 minutes of effort:

          ADL Survey: Anti-Semitism Declines Slightly in America; 14 Percent of Americans Hold 'Strong' Anti-Semitic Beliefs

          Antisemitism in the 21st Century (Wikipedia)

          History of antisemitism, 2001 to present (Wikipedia)

          I'm a loyal reader of David Neiwert's Orcinus blog.  He does a great job of covering hate crimes, the rise of fascism, and the phalanx of right wing extremists.  I thought these two posts were probably relevant to your question.

          Divided Passions

          All our extremists is belong to you

          (I had all but forgotten about Gibson's gore fest film, The Passion of Christ.  What a waste.)

          •  Thanks zappini! (none)
            Larry seems to have vamoosed. He's outnumbered.

            He's 100% entitled to feel as he does. I only  objected to his very harsh tone, that's all.

            http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

            by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:37:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks, (none)
            I looked at the links, but there's no support there for the diarist's assertion that there is a wave of anti-semitism sweeping the United States due to the actions of Scooter Libby, Jack Abramoff, and Judith Miller.

            George W. Bush -- It's mourning in America.

            by LarryInNYC on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:42:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not what I said Larry! (none)
              Didn't say there is a wave of anti semitism sweeping the US.

              I did say, we need to be aware that many of the major players in the unfolding drama are American Jews.

              I said, we need to be mindful of our history.

              I said, we must recognize that there will be plenty of blame and we do not want all of it coming in our direction.

              This is essentially what I said.

              But why don't you and I call it a day.

              http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

              by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:19:06 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The diarist did not catagorically state (none)
              there was a wave of anti-semitism sweeping the United States.  Instead, the words: "fear", "worry", "concerned" etc... were utilized.  

              I fear this new era we are rapidly appraching may not be good for the Jews...it worried all of us...I am concerned about...will surely become fodder for the anti-semites...Mind our ugly history.

              The fundamentalist ugliness is very real and a cautionary eye on this reality is perfectly legit and understandable.  

              Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

              by bronte17 on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:23:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  re: Thanks (none)
              Well, maybe not a wave.  Even so, I'm a bit surprised and disappointed by the numbers in ADL's survey.  Assuming they're legit.  (I have no way to judge such things.)

              14% of the population have strong anti-semitic tendancies?  There's an applicable cliche: Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.  Note that something like 2% of the (North American) population is Jewish.

              Orcinus has a series about the rise of pseudo-fascism in America.  I think it won some awards or something.  Regardless, 14% of the population is a pretty good foundation for the whackjobs to build on.

              And the increase in anti-semitic incidents, both in Europe and North America, is disturbing in and of itself.  Kind of like a canary in a coal mine.

              Again, I think nyceve's concerns are well-founded.  Giving voice to one's concerns is the first step towards addressing them.

  •  I spoke to a friend about this (4.00)
    very subject last night.  Abramoff, Miller, Libby et al. have seemingly made an unholy alliance with the non-jewish neo-con/oil/corporate community, but if and when the WHIG/Plamegate matter breaks I imagine the AIPAC/PNAC connections are going to lead some to believe there is a secret jewish cabal trying to undermine the U.S. government for their own ends.  Nevermind that large numbers of important neo-con players aren't jewish (Cheney, Rove, etc.) and that large numbers of American jews and Israelis are not happy with Sharon and Israel's position with respect to the Palestinians.  I hope it doesn't get ugly.   But I worry too, and I am not jewish.
    •  That's exactly my point (none)
      I think we are going to butt heads with some very ugly talk in the coming days and months.

      As a Jew we feel rightly or wrongly rather protected in America, but as I said, we are guests.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:24:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Guests? (4.00)
        You stated a couple of times that Jews are "guests" in this country.  I hope you really don't feel as insecure as this suggests, because I don't think many Americans, no matter how critical they might be of Israel and the catering to Israeli ocncerns that marks much of our Middle East policies, really see American Jews as anything other than full citizens who have  as much right to live here, and to engage in politics, as any other American.

        Personally, I think that the US has been harmed by policies that have served Israeli rather than American interests, and that the actions and connections of some who have influenced and implemented these policies, particularly in the current administration, justifiably raise concerns over dual loyalty.  But I also recognize that it has been Jewish Americans who have been among the most outspoken critics of these policies, and indeed some of the most courageous defenders of the Palestinians, and I think just about everyone else recognizes this as well.

        I think that, to the extent that this issue comes up in the ongoing re-examination of the Bush administration and its handling of the Iraq war, it will be appropriate to look into such things, but that the right approach will be to look at the policy mistakes that were made and how to avoid them in the future, rather than at the role of Jews per se, especially as, as others have pointed out, many of the architects of the Iraq debacle are not Jewish.  Abramov may be corrupt, and Jewish, but every other ethnic and religious group has plenty of similar figures to be ashamed of, and I don't think he will be a catalyst for widespread anti-Semitism.  

        In any event, no matter how much you might disagree with me in terms of the Middle East and the question of "dual loyalties", I hope you will consider yourself just as much at home here as anyone, and not feel you are a guest who has to keep quiet.  I think that most of those who are most critical of the Iraq war, and of Israel, will be among the most forthright in standing up against any resurgent anti-Semitism as well.  

        •  daristani, what a fabulous comment! Thank you. (none)
          I suppose it's hard for a non-Jew to fully appreciate what I mean when I use the word "guest".

          I mean things like, always having your passport updated. I mean that there is an ever present reality that some day, this country might not be the haven it is.

          Things could become ugly, I hope they won't, we have checks and balances in this country but I think everyone acknowledges we are sailing in unchartered waters.

          http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

          by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:42:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You are not a citizen? (none)
            Do you have a visitors or workers' visa? A green card? If you are a citizen, why must you have your passport updated?

            You speak about the Jewish community in the US regarding your worries, and generalize this term "guests". Most are full fledged citizens, not guests, arent they?

            Should a liberal Dem blog be driven into "safe zones" by a tame party, or should it drive a tame party to break out?

            by NYCee on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:11:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, I'm a citizen (none)
              Something like a fourth generation American.

              http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

              by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:15:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Wow! (3.40)
                Respectfully, I say to you that your concerns strike me as more of the "What can my country do for me?" and as a "guest"(???) than "What can I do for my country?" (What is this "guest" status you keep giving yourself and fellow Jewish Americans, anyway?)

                Since you are a citizen of the United States, it's rather curious and irritating to me that you are worrying/warning about anti-Semitism, hoping the associated bad words that are so RARELY spoken in the US will not be heard more often, rather than worrying about those other words that are so rarely spoken (often because the specter of antiSemitism is waved around), but MUST be said -- about our extremely destructive and dysfunctional relationship with Israel. It is hurting America! It is hurting Israel! (Wont even go into the Palestinians here.)

                Isnt it time that you and more Jewish Americans, a LOT more, start stepping up to do more for YOUR country (or relinquish citizenship if you still feel only "guests") by helping American society to remove the MAMMOTH taboo around discussing Israel and the problematic aspects of our alliance? This would be much more contructive than yet again feeding that big wooly elephant in the middle of the nation with red herrings of (could be, might be, what if ...) antiSemitism.

                Your country, AMERICA, is in big trouble precisely because there are so FEW Jewish Americans and non Jews, many who have power, who dare to break the taboo. Some dont want to, but I am not speaking to the "Jewish with a Vengeance" crowd, to quote Woody Allen. "Dont Dis Israel!" That is the cry. And it seems that to honestly discuss the problem of our relationship with Israel and its diehard rightwingers becomes blurred into disrepecting it and Jewish people. This problem has allowed very bad policy and associations to continue unchallenged and to worsen.

                The silence of the Jewish community and those afraid of speaking out beyond that community, have let ugly AIPAC and other unhelpful Jewish groups take the lead. Here, this problem is so outrageous that you cant have Howard Dean say that the US, as THE broker for ME peace, must be more "evenhanded" and "settlements must go" (that's for the I/P parties to decide, damn you Dean, shut up!),  without getting stomped on and rebuked by his own party, On the other hand you can have Sharon unilaterally claim some settlements are Israel's forever, and Kerry and most everyone in both parties go along, either verbally or by shutting up. That is but one example among thousands of this sort of taboo feeding and perpetuation of the poisonous policies.

                The Jewish people, overall, have a safe place in the US and have been very successful in this country. Please stop with the red herrings and lets unveil that fucking mammoth in the middle of our nation's living room: our unevenhanded treatment of Israel re the I/P conflict and just how unhealthy it is for all involved.  

                Should a liberal Dem blog be driven into "safe zones" by a tame party, or should it drive a tame party to break out?

                by NYCee on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 01:44:06 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh bullshit (4.00)
                  First of all, I can't help but to have little but contempt for your ill-informed and inflammatory statement that American Jews need to think more about what they can "do for their country".  Open a history book for heaven's sake.  Jews have been leaders in the United States since their arrival.  The things in American history that you would likely be most proud of, as a self-described "liberal Dem", are movements often led by many Jews, such as the organized labor movement and the civil rights movement.

                  Second, what possible reason do you have to believe that the "guest" status that many American Jews feel, including the author of this diary, is a self-imposed sentiment?  When the comments section you are posting in contains statistics, hard data, that 14% of Americans have anti-semetic tendencies, that anti-Semetic incidences have reached new highs in this country in 2004, what basis do you have for your suggestion that such words are so "rarely" said?  Or are you simply using your own (non-Jewish) experience?  You know, I am a Jew who lives in the East Village.  I don't hear black people called "nigger" too often.  I guess that means racism isn't a real issue anymore.  What asinine logic leads to your conclusion, in a country where the "Left Behind" books are best-sellers, where "Passion of the Christ" garners over $300 million at the box office, leads you to believe that we are raising this spectre unprovoked?

                  Lastly, if you think that Jews aren't speaking and writing about justice for the Palestinians, or having an honest discussion of the problems of Israel, you simply aren't listening.  Elie Weisel and Tony Kushner are leaders on this subject.  Just this week, Ha'aretz, the leading Israeli newspaper, wrote an editorial calling for the withdrawal of all settlements.  Israelis sought out negotiations with Yasser Arafat, a terrorist who had killed more Israeli civilians than Osama bin Laden has slain Americans.  What utter hypocrisy is it that Israel has not reached out, that Jews have not spoken?

    •  JINSA (none)
      probably doesn't help the cause either. It's a neo-con organization that has Jewish in its title.
    •  Listen folks (none)
      What we know is this:

      Israel has pursued a violent strategy with regard to the palestinian question for years. I'm not saying they don't have a right to take up arms against their enemies, but there's no comparison. There's also little evidence it works to make Israel more secure. It also cannot lead to long-term peace. Since you all seem keen on bringing up the history of anti-semitism to support eve, perhaps you'll indulge me and look at the history of protracted sectarian conflicts. See any that were solved by both sides engaging in constant conflict?

      AIPAC had operatives in place who are currently being investigated on espionage charges. Whether or not this comes to anything, their influence as a lobby group on behalf of Israel is well-known. And Israel is the only country in the world that gets the VIP treatment from the US that they enjoy. This is not a "perception", it's the way things are.

      Many of the neo-cons are on record belonging to strong pro-Israel groups, and to having seen American foreign policy as an instrument to support Israel's own policies. This is on the record. So if anyone wants to lay some blame at the feet of Libby, Perle, Worlfowitz, Abramoff et al, there is some justification. And justification that ties directly into their being Jews.

      As I said in my other comment, the kvetching over anti-semitism has to stop. It serves no purpose. It won't help Jews win the PR battle. In fact, it actually buys into many of the same talking points. We should be able to criticize Abramoff, Perle and whomever just fine for what they do and have done, Judaism has nothing to do with them being, as Larry put it so delicately, shitheads.

      But Judaism does have something to do with the avenues they pursued, and it is disingenuous to pretend it isn't so.

      "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

      by thingamabob on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 02:42:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (none)
        First of all, I defy you or anyone else to explain how Jack Abramoff's actions have anything to do with his Judaism.  There is nothing Jewish about fraud.

        Second, suppose you are right that Perle and Wolfowitz and Libby (who I don't know if he is actually Jewish) feel how they do in part because they are Jewish.  So what?  I'm sure that Bush and Cheney and others feel how they do because they are Christians.  Does that make all Christians or Christianity itself a "fifth column" in this country?

        In 2004, Bush-Cheney received 200,000 more votes from self-described homosexuals than from Jews.  Overwhelmingly, Jews don't support the supposedly "pro-Israel" policies you are describing.  Their Judaism doesn't lead them to the same conclusion that a tiny minority of the tiny minority that Jews are suggested.  Obviously, Judaism itself does not have anything to do with the avenues they pursued, since almost no one else's Judaism led to the same conclusions.  You are the disingenuous one.  Sorry.

        •  Good misdirection (none)
          You know, when someone complains that others will look at the actions of some of these neo-cons and claim that they hurt the US for reasons relating specifically to their being pro-Israel, this is not anti-semitism. It's a statement of fact. The interpretation that a few Jewish individuals with a particular axe to grind represent the great Jewish conspiracy IS anti-semitism.

          Now, while I never suggested that Jews deserved to be trashed because of the actions of these few, I DO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE for the views they ascribe to others. Which includes Jews, as well as Baptists, Buddhists, Hindus and whatever. Refusing to acknowledge the facts because some use them as a smokescreen for their virulent anti-semitism does not do Jews a favour.

          Nor does your highly defensive, illogical, untrue and somewhat "over-the-top" outburst. That you don't see the disingenuousness is part of the problem. I can't hope to change your mind, evidently, so I won't try.

          "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

          by thingamabob on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 03:06:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Look (none)
            You suggested that certain Jews in the Bush administration believed in certain policies (I'm guessing the Iraq war) because of a pro-Israel sentiment that has its roots in the Judaism.  And maybe you are right.  I don't know these men.

            But again, what does that have to do with anything?  As the numbers I previously posted suggest, they are extremely exceptional for American Jews.  Which means that Larry is right; they are pricks first, and Jews second (if that).  Most Jews are pro-Israel, yet most Jews do not support the Iraq war and overwhelmingly did not vote for the President.  You seem to be suggesting that somehow, even though being pro-Israel Jews did not turn myself or the vast majority of American Jews into neo-cons, in the case of Wolfowitz and Perle, there is a direct relationship.  You are making that suggestion in the absence of any facts, without refuting the facts I have presented.

            In addition, please use specifics when you suggest I am making statements that are untrue.  Even if you don't hope of changing my mind, you have an obligation to the other readers whose minds you still hope to alter.

            •  Please refer to your own notes (none)
              Your refusal to believe that what I wrote is what I wrote, and that what you wrote is what you wrote is making my head explode. If this is how you reason with people in general, I wouldn't be surprised if you have more than your fair share of heated arguments. And it is really annoying me right now. That's the only reason I am going to go to the trouble to "unmask" your repeated baseless assertions. Not to condemn you, but to try and get you to see where you have erred.

              Here's my first comment:

              www.dailykos.com :

              Listen folks (none / 0)

              What we know is this:

              Israel has pursued a violent strategy with regard to the palestinian question for years. I'm not saying they don't have a right to take up arms against their enemies, but there's no comparison. There's also little evidence it works to make Israel more secure. It also cannot lead to long-term peace. Since you all seem keen on bringing up the history of anti-semitism to support eve, perhaps you'll indulge me and look at the history of protracted sectarian conflicts. See any that were solved by both sides engaging in constant conflict?

              AIPAC had operatives in place who are currently being investigated on espionage charges. Whether or not this comes to anything, their influence as a lobby group on behalf of Israel is well-known. And Israel is the only country in the world that gets the VIP treatment from the US that they enjoy. This is not a "perception", it's the way things are.

              Many of the neo-cons are on record belonging to strong pro-Israel groups, and to having seen American foreign policy as an instrument to support Israel's own policies. This is on the record. So if anyone wants to lay some blame at the feet of Libby, Perle, Worlfowitz, Abramoff et al, there is some justification. And justification that ties directly into their being Jews.

              As I said in my other comment, the kvetching over anti-semitism has to stop. It serves no purpose. It won't help Jews win the PR battle. In fact, it actually buys into many of the same talking points. We should be able to criticize Abramoff, Perle and whomever just fine for what they do and have done, Judaism has nothing to do with them being, as Larry put it so delicately, shitheads.

              But Judaism does have something to do with the avenues they pursued, and it is disingenuous to pretend it isn't so.

              Here's your first reply:

              www.dailykos.com :

              No (none / 1)

              First of all, I defy you or anyone else to explain how Jack Abramoff's actions have anything to do with his Judaism.  There is nothing Jewish about fraud.

              Second, suppose you are right that Perle and Wolfowitz and Libby (who I don't know if he is actually Jewish) feel how they do in part because they are Jewish.  So what?  I'm sure that Bush and Cheney and others feel how they do because they are Christians.  Does that make all Christians or Christianity itself a "fifth column" in this country?

              In 2004, Bush-Cheney received 200,000 more votes from self-described homosexuals than from Jews.  Overwhelmingly, Jews don't support the supposedly "pro-Israel" policies you are describing.  Their Judaism doesn't lead them to the same conclusion that a tiny minority of the tiny minority that Jews are suggested.  Obviously, Judaism itself does not have anything to do with the avenues they pursued, since almost no one else's Judaism led to the same conclusions.  You are the disingenuous one.  Sorry.

              How do I know Abramoff's actions have anything to do with his Judaism? Well, that's a pretty broad question. It's too bad there's no broad statement corresponding to that in my post. Abramoff is pretty connected to many of the neo-cons; does that mean he shares any of their goals? No, perhaps not. If that's the case I am guilty of adding his name to a list on which it does not belong. For which I should be upbraided, sure. But it doesn't change the basic point one whit. Furthermore, the suggestion is clear that the actions I am linking these people to are those performed on behalf of Israel, or pro-Israel lobby groups--not "fraud", not necessarily crimes (though some are suspected), either. But actions which suggest putting Israel or their own interests ahead of America's. Suggesting that I equated fraud with Judaism was not just disingenuous, not just false, it was malicious.

              Your second "point" was that the accident of Perle, Wolfowitz's Jewishness was comparable to the accident of Bush et al's Christianity. While it might inform their actions, it is not something that can be used to characterize all members of that faith or ethnic group.

              My question: What mental contortions do you have to engage in to ascribe to me an idea which is exactly opposite of the one I promulgated? For future reference, note that I agreed with Larry that these people are shitheads first, whatever else a distant second. Another piece of your anger doing the talking before your brain has recognized that it's full of shit.

              The rest of your post is meandering non-sequiturs not supported by evidence. What are the pro-Israel policies you think I'm talking about, and how do you know how many Jews do or do not support them? In any event, where, oh where have I ever suggested that it matters? You are once again calling me an anti-semite for reasons known only to yourself. I don't take that lightly--as I said, it's patently false as well as malicious.

              But this kills me: "Obviously, Judaism itself does not have anything to do with the avenues they pursued, since almost no one else's Judaism led to the same conclusions." So, ignoring the absolute lack of logical clarity here for a second, the motivations of a few individuals are better known by generalizing about a whole people to which they belong in some measure, than by looking at their stated goals and actions? Once again, testosterone is proving not to be your friend. Settle down, have a cup of something comforting, and try to clear your mind for a second.

              So, this is where my second post came in. At the time I wrote it I wasn't so much angry as disappointed that you had misinterpreted (badly) my post. Nevertheless, aside from being a little piqued at having you tell me I was the disingenuous one, I was working on the assumption that you had gotten ahead of yourself, and could be reasoned with. That's the context of the second post.

              www.dailykos.com :

                  

              Good misdirection (none / 0)

              You know, when someone complains that others will look at the actions of some of these neo-cons and claim that they hurt the US for reasons relating specifically to their being pro-Israel, this is not anti-semitism. It's a statement of fact. The interpretation that a few Jewish individuals with a particular axe to grind represent the great Jewish conspiracy IS anti-semitism.

              Now, while I never suggested that Jews deserved to be trashed because of the actions of these few, I DO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE for the views they ascribe to others. Which includes Jews, as well as Baptists, Buddhists, Hindus and whatever. Refusing to acknowledge the facts because some use them as a smokescreen for their virulent anti-semitism does not do Jews a favour.

              Nor does your highly defensive, illogical, untrue and somewhat "over-the-top" outburst. That you don't see the disingenuousness is part of the problem. I can't hope to change your mind, evidently, so I won't try.

              As you can see, I didn't so much address the inconsistencies I address above, as try to clarify and inform. The basic message: the facts are the facts, how people choose to interpret them is where the problem lies. We shouldn't be afraid of the facts, we should absolutely combat spurious and malicious interpretations of them. In fact, refusing to acknowledge the facts because of how some might interpret them is what has created the fantasy world we live in currently. It does not provide a platform on which to build a stable edifice of mutual respect and dialogue.

              Giving you the benefit of the doubt at this point, I still treat the problem as the relatively milder one of disingenuousness on your part. And at that point I was not prepared to carry things any further. I doubt very much that you are open to these arguments, logical and factual as they are, but now I'm just mad. People who take others to task based on thin air, baseless assertions, and a complete misinterpretation or manipulation of what they have said, particularly when racism is an implicit message, have no business doing so, and need to hear it loud and clear.

              Your last request to me was:

               "You seem to be suggesting that somehow, even though being pro-Israel Jews did not turn myself or the vast majority of American Jews into neo-cons, in the case of Wolfowitz and Perle, there is a direct relationship.  You are making that suggestion in the absence of any facts, without refuting the facts I have presented.

              In addition, please use specifics when you suggest I am making statements that are untrue.  Even if you don't hope of changing my mind, you have an obligation to the other readers whose minds you still hope to alter."

              No, I didn't include a long list of facts supporting this assertion. To be honest, it's a lot of work to dig up the URLs, and much of what I asserted is widely known, which you allude to yourself. So the "absence of facts" which you claim can easily be remedied. And strictly speaking, it is not an absence of facts, but an absence of references.

              As for the "facts" you presented, where are they? Where is the empirical evidence? Where are the references? Or are you simply holding me to a standard of evidence which you need not maintain? As for statements which you made which were untrue, I hope I have helped you see what I meant.

              Last, it shouldn't matter one iota, but would it surprise you to know that I'm Jewish? Or "pro-Israel" (on a fairly broad reading of that)? I hope it doesn't matter, but I suspect that if I had stated that up front your response might have been less angry. And an apology in advance for my anger: I can be a shithead too. As long as I'm not an anti-semite.

              "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

              by thingamabob on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 07:01:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  i think you're right (4.00)
    scapegoating the neocons will be an attractive way for the right to wash their hands of the whole impending mess they've created over the past decades, because most jews are, after all, liberal democrats anyways. watch the pro-israel fundies snap back to the old anti-semitic habits, and deny they ever knew the likudniks three times before the cock crows. ranters like pat buchanan weill have a more receptive audience.

    these neocon/AIPAC assholes have placed a lot of people in danger, just as sharon and netanyahu's militarism has endangered israel.

    as one who is a hard critic of the state of israel's behavior in palestine, and of the unquestioning support too many of our politicians have for the policies and strategy of likud and their neocon fellow travelers, i will be out there standing up for you, my friends and neighbors, when the bigots start the backlash. i'm confident other kossacks (terrible coincidence, that autonym) would do the same.

    crimson gates reek with meat and wine/while on the streets, bones of the frozen dead -du fu (712-770)

    by wu ming on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:21:03 AM PDT

  •  What You Remind Me Of (none)
    Woody Allen in Annie Hall worrying that someone meant an anti-semetic slur by asking, "d'jyou see that?"

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:24:51 AM PDT

  •  Good points but unlikely scenario.. (none)
    First, I think you are giving far too much credit to the knowledge of the general public. Sure, I'll bet if people thought about it, they'd realize that he is Jewish but I will make a strong wager here that, even when all is said and done, with the media filtering that goes on, most Americans will not be able to say 2 sentences about Abramoff.

    Second, you must realize that the Jewish voters are considered very important to the Republicans and it is the perception of Jewish voters in the US that is a major force behind a lot of US policy toward Israel. I highly, highly doubt that BushCo will let this meme get out there - as part of their Iraq mission - this is the perceptions of some Jews I have spoken to - was also to protect Israel. You will not see this message being spread about a conservative Republican. Now, the times is a different kettle of fish - I hear racist Republicans   talking about that "Jew paper" but they already hate the Times for its perceived liberalism anyone and on a real level, probably hate Maureen Down as much as the Sulzbergers.
    But given that the Jewish vote is so important, I absolutely do not see the Republican noise machine promoting this talking point as it could haunt them.

    Third, why do you see this as being a backlash against Jews because of one really corrupt Jewish man? We have seen nothing but hypocracy on the religious right - support of murder, war, lying - yet it does not seem to have really affected the image of these evangelical Christians. You can produce evidence after evidence and it does not seem to rub off on the group itself.

    I think the meme we should be promoting is that Bush is to born-again Christianity as Abramoff is to Orhtodox Judaism - both are a sham and an embrassment to the great religions they allegedly follow.

    •  Gladkov, this is all true . . . (none)
      but as I tried to stress in the diary, as Jews I suppose we are hyper vigilant. We see storm clouds before others.

      I see storm clouds.  It seems inescapable to me that the media will have to at some point focus on the Jewish angle.

      I hope it doesn't get out of hand, as I said.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:39:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well I can see (none)
        ..why you might feel some concern.

        I imagine Arab-Americans went thru some of the same sort of apprehension after 911 as Jews went thru previously.

        However,.. consider the fact that so far, "mass hatings" of Arabs and Muslims in America have not happened, only isolated incidents...despite the incitement by some fringe groups to demonize Islam and Muslims.

        Part of the reason for this I attribute to people having learned from the past, as in the holocaust and other historical events, that there is no such thing as "ALL" of any group.

        Not all whites/christians are Neo nazi KKK members, but some are.

        As long as people understand the difference between "some" and "all", and I think 90% of people do, I doubt any mass outbreak of anti-semitism is likely to occur. If all the Jews in the neocon group were sent to prison for treason it doesn't mean that I am going to view any Jewish friends I have or all Jews as spies and traitors.

        I do think critism of Israel has increased because people have learned more about US policy and Isr's influence in certain areas of our poitics...however aside from obvious Aryan world type anti-semitic rants, Jews need to undestand and not take personally or as a threat what is essentially a "political policy" arguement against too much foreign policy influence by any one "favored" or "foreign country" and their lobbies. Of course that might be easier said by a non Jew, than done if you are Jewish, but that is the bottom line of what the Israel/AIPAC/mid east arguement and issue is all about.

  •  I heard about the Jews at ANSWER's (none)
    anti-Israel rally a few weeks ago! or was it pro-Palestine rally? hard to tell -- ;)

    ...Tengo una remera del Che y no sé por qué...

    by PhillyGal on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:28:05 AM PDT

  •  It was about Israel (none)
    People are already saying it. He forgot to mention Paul Wolfowitz and Joe Lieberman. While I sympathize with you sir, but these people are not repentant until they get caught.  On the hand most Jews in the Senate like Levin, our own  Senator Paul Wellstone voted against the war.
  •  If it is any consolidation (4.00)
    many of the same people you hate Jewish people hate other people as equally or more. Hatred against Jewish people is a serious problem but so is hatred of African-Americans, Arabs, Gays... unfortunately the list goes on.

    I think a generalized theme of uniting in our shared humanity, yet including an emphasis on multi-cultuaral pluralism as a subset of humanity, is ultimately our best hope in educating.

  •  If you won't blame English Americans (none)
    for Bush, I certainly won't blame Jewish Americans for Abramoff.

    "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

    by Steven D on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:32:08 AM PDT

    •  Or Blame Episcopalians... (none)
      ...or Methodists?  What the heck is he anyway?  Doesn't sound like any Episcopalians or Methodists I know...

      Maybe a non-denominational?  I don't know.  All my evangelical friends are strictly anti-war.

      And my co-worker who is a major or something in the National Guard is pissed because he has a list and he is supposed to pick out 175 names off of it to send to Iraq.

      They just use religion to distract us from the war on us.  The war against the vast majority.

      Bastards.

      "Ninety-nine miles of solid-gold track, lay on the whistle and don't look back..."

      by InquisitiveRaven on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:27:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Backlash (none)
    Yes ...

    Almost impossible for me to write about this as a non-Jewish person without being accused of something.

    But I wrote a diary entry a while back called "Jews for Jesus" that analyzed the "marriage of convenience" between Conservative and neo-Conservative Jews in America and Evangelical Protestants.

    My summation was that a backlash -- not against Evangelicals, but against Jews would be part of the inevitable result here.

    Interesting article in the English version of Ha'aretz about this a while back, too.

    When the whole thing crumbles, there will be an element of society that looks for puppetmasters working behind the scenes, controlling the "innocent, every day Americans" who were conned into supporting all of this crap.

    It will be sad to see.

    On the other hand, I feel that the position of Jewish Americans in this country is strong enough that there will be little real danger to people on an individual level.

    But I don't know.

    "When you starve the beast, you starve the people. And the bathtub was a reference to New Orleans." -- bink

    by bink on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:32:34 AM PDT

    •  Bink, write on! (none)
      You should absolutely say what you think, your points are excellent and well taken!

      There is a very unholy alliance between Christian extremists and Jewish conservatives--the Orthodox, most notably.

      It has do do with the rapture and the second coming of Christ. The viability of the state of Israel.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:42:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Blink is right (4.00)
      I have commented on the "Jewish" question numerous times, mostly concerning the AIPAC investigation and the players in the OSP leading up to the Iraq invasion.

      I think it is obvious that some "Jewish" players in politics are first concerned with Israel and/or some idea of America ruling the world because they are consumed with the idea of another Hitler or holocuast type event happening in the world. Although I doubt their being Jewish, as in religious, has much to do with their agenda except for their possibly identifying with  having been victims in the past plays a part in their view of the world. More likely these individuals are delusional about their own power and maintaining what they see as their protective advantage in America and American politics and thru America to the world at large.

      I also agree that we are approaching dangerous times in terms of not just Jewish- hyphen- Americans but every other hyphen-American. With people in this country squaring off into their own ethnic- religious- political interest groups the sense of being just plain American first and foremost has fallen by the way side and is fracturing the country.

      No doubt there will be some type of blowback, maybe just the groups aligned to push their own agendas will turn on each other. But the only way to stop it is for the voters and every citizen in the various group to reject the pandering of the politicans to all these seperate groups and the leaders of these groups who are promoting these ideas for their own power advantage. The politicans aren't going to stop aiding and abeting these divisions until they are rejected by the voters in these groups themselves.

  •  You've made a good point nyceve. (none)
    I've been concerned for a while, even before the Iraq War, that Perle, Wolfowitz, Libby, and countless other neocon Jews in this administration and the Pentagon, would eventually create a backlash for American Jews. Some of them seem to have conflicting loyalties between America and the Likud.
    Let's hope we're wrong.
    •  Except that your point undercuts hers (none)
      Insofar as you recognize that there is justification in wondering whether they are Americans or Likudniks.

      "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

      by thingamabob on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 02:44:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We both fear a backlash, perhaps for different (none)
        reasons. The thievery of Abrahmof (sp?) doesn't worry me.
        But, many of those neocons who helped speed us into war in Iraq and destroy our international credibility worked for Netanyahu in the 90's and did everything they could to derail the Israeli peace process. A backlash against that worries me.
        Of course it is always wrong to make a minority group pay for the misdeeds of a few of its members. But that's history.
  •  Eve, I wrote about this back in April... (none)
    When things go south, guess who usually takes the blame?

    It's the Jews

  •  Pat Robertson comment (none)
    A few months back, Pat Robertson made a comment attacking "the 'so-called' neo-cons".

    Made me shudder, as to what he really wanted to call them...

    With the way things are falling apart, the risk of there being a mass turning on a scapegoat is very high  --  just which minority group it will be will probably be a mattter of convenience to those in power -- whomever is most vulnerable at the moment in time that the "turning of the aspens" is ripe;  and Abramoff et al don't help the odds for the Jews.

    "Cold hearted orb that rules the night, removes the color from our sight... but we decide which is right -- and which IS an illusion" The Moody Blues

    by spinarama on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:45:26 AM PDT

  •  I think the diarist makes some valid points, (none)
    and has reason for his concern.
    One might also mention that an increasing number of Americans, as they begin to object to Bush's Iraq policy, may begin to feel that our country's entire middle east policy is orchestrated out of deference to Israel. Inevitably, some will choose to extrapolate further, that any perceived flaws in our nation's policy towards Israel, whether legitimate or not, are somehow to be blamed on the entirety of the Jewish people.
    Scary times indeed.

    Let's shrink Grover Norquist down to where he can be drowned in the bathtub.

    by jazzmaniac on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 10:49:21 AM PDT

  •  According to the ADL (none)
    anti-Semitism has declined slightly since 2002.

    Of course, the survey also says that 14% of Americans still hold strong anti-Semetic beliefs.  I really don't think Jack Abramoff is going to be the catalyst for an increase in anti-Semetism.  Most people still have no idea who he is, much less that he is Jewish.

    •  correction (none)
      That link is about attitudes. If you look around their site for the most recent audit of anti-Semitic incidents, you'll see that anti-Semitism was at a nine-year high in 2004.

      Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

      by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:46:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  An important point (4.00)
        which suggests that even as anti-Semetism becomes less prevalent, the virulence with which those who hold anti-Semetic beliefs take action has increased.
        •  It doesn't even necessarily mean... (none)
          ...that anti-Semitism is less prevalent. It may just mean that people have gotten better at recognizing the questions the ADL uses to measure anti-Semitic attitudes, and that they lie about their beliefs to avoid being outed as bigots.

          Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

          by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 03:08:00 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Good diary. (4.00)
         Gmar tov. (Several days late, maybe...)

         And the hate continues among the young too: check out maybe the scariest site on the Internet, at http://www.prussianblue.net/index.htm ...

  •  anti-semitism is alive and well (4.00)
    but jews at least can breathe a sigh of relief, because the wrong-wing ideologues have moved to the other branch of anti-semitism: hatred of arabs.

    if you can stomach it, try checking out the speeches and rhetoric being spouted in the 30's and earlier about "international jewry" and the "zionist conspiracy."  i think you'll find it mirrors almost exactly what you'll find today on hate sites like LGF and AIR, only now "zionists" have been replaced with "islamo-fascists."

    these same wingnuts today support israel, but jews would do well to avoid "friends" like these.  keep in mind there are two types: the so-called christian right, who think the "end times" are right around the corner, and a more amorphous mob of falangist thugs who just to see america "kicking some ass" to show "those people" who's boss.  in both cases their support of israel, and more importantly likudnik policies, is based on a private wish that israel's actions will provoke some kind of showdown with the muslim world.

    for the SCCR, the end result would be dynamiting the dome of the rock in order to build a new temple, co-incident with the conversion of 144,000 jews to christianity.  they believe this will drag jesus back to earth (kicking and screaming if need be) and spell a painful and bloody death for all unbelievers.  look at the last installment of the left behind series if you think i'm exaggerating on that last point.

    the other crowd looks to a more secular apocalypse, generally involving nuking mecca and najaf and the slaughter of millions to put an end to the "green crescent menace."  i've seen one such use the end of the bugger war in card's ender's game as an example of what we should be doing (he was unaware of the irony of this).

    in either case, these are not "friends" you want to have.

    and i'm not denying that the more traditional anti-semitism is still around among the right-wing - groups like stormfront and others prove that.  it's just that most of the right-wing are currently focused on the destruction of a different group of semites. and the parallels are scary.

    what happens if the so-called "conservative movement" fractures is anybody's guess, of course.  and as the american imperium continues to collapse and economic malaise picks up steam, history shows that dangerous political ideologies are frequently spawned.  

    so be cautious, yes, be prepared; but i don't think you need to be scared about this.  not right now, anyway.

    we'd better decide now if we are going to be fearless men or scared boys.
    — e.d. nixon, montgomery improvement association

    by zeke L on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:05:14 AM PDT

  •  Some people in this diary seem to think (4.00)
    that anti-semitism died with the Nazis. That's a load of bullshit. I am an atheist, but consider myself ethnically a Jew. My parents are Jewish, their parents were and so on ad infinitum as far as I know.

    However, I grew up in very conservative, very Christian Southern Indiana... and the town I grew up in, Bloomington, was the most liberal part. Still, here are just a few of the things that happened to me growing up there in the 80s and 90s (class of 95):

    • When I was in Kindergarten, the teacher forced me to sing Christmas carols, including some very religious ones like Silent Night and Away in a Manger. When I complained, she said, "well we sang one Hannukah song for you, so what more do you want?" They sang the dreidel song, by the way. A minor song for a minor holiday. (As a side anecdote, this particular bitch of a teacher also once told the class that her grandfather had a slave and he enjoyed being a slave.)

    • When I was in Elementary school, despite reading at a high school level, my teacher (same teacher for six years, private school) would always assign me books for very young children (far below my actual grade level) about Jewish themes and ask me to do book reports on them which he would watch me read aloud with a big shit-eating grin on his face.

    • The town synagogue, Beth Shalom, was firebombed when I was a kid. Thankfully it was empty at the time.

    • When I was in middle school, a kid stole a book I was reading, drew a swastika on every page, then gave it back to me. It was very obvious who had done it and when I reported it I was told, 'well, you just need to stand up to bullies and not come crying to us.' by the principal.

    • I frequently had kids in high school, if they found out I was Jewish, tell me I was going to burn in hell or tell me I was evil for killing Jesus. These were said with a straight face.

    • In high school band, the teacher announced the Christmas program the band was going to start on, looked at me and said, "and YOU can go to study hall for six weeks" in front of the whole class.

    • For most of my teenage years, a 'military surplus' store just off the town square had a huge window display of nazi regalia, flags, etc.

    • When I was working for a company just after college in the same town, a guy from a marketing company came in to sell us their stuff. After his pitch, I said, "Well I am very interested, but I'd like to know the costs." He looked at me, and without even any forethought, he said, "That's just like a Jew."

    • Finally, two days before I moved out of that town to L.A., I walked into a gas station and the attendant was proudly displaying the huge swastika tattoo on his arm.

    Anti-semitism is alive and well, my friends.
  •  Return to fallback positions of bigotry (none)
    Larry, I think that while you may not be feeling the effects of bigotry right now, we need to be on the lookout for the Rightists return to their fallback position of bigotry and fearmongering.

    As a Mexican American living in Texas, I am not personally feeling any effects of rightist fearmongering right now, but I am noticing that the Republican party of Texas, dogged as it is by scandal and incompetence, is returning to it's never-losing strategy of Mexican-bashing.  Last night on the local FOX affiliate, there was an extended report on the VIOLENCE of the BORDER, and how ANYONE could get into this country (like your gardener, or your nanny, or the rich Monterreyans who come here to shop and keep the economy afloat, eh?).  These are all codewords for what would have once been openly called a brown horde of TERROR, and nowadays, couldn't there be terrorists mixed in blah blah blah.

    Perry has nothing to run on here but fear and "stay the course."  In order to foment fear, they have to bring out the old whipping horses, namely immigrants, Mexicans and Salvadorans and Arabs and Jews.  They need to maintain public fear of the other to protect their own asses.  We need to be on the lookout for the moment when they start flinging about puppetmaster conspiracies-- for one thing, its a sign that they are on the run.  For another, the signs of their desperation is the sign that things are about to get dangerous.  We need to watch our collective back.

    Thanks, nyceve, for bringing this up.

    Doing it right is what fascism is all about. -- Lynda Barry

    by pedant on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:24:51 AM PDT

    •  Pedant, your comments are so right on! (none)
      Yes, today Mexicans and illegal immigration morphes into some rabid anti-semitism tomorrow.

      There will always be a scapegoat.  Politicans need to throw chum to the populace in the guise of hate and fear.

      http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

      by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:34:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There doesn't have to be a consistent campaign (none)
        They don't yet need to make just one group a scapegoat yet.  All they need to do is get everyone a little nervous, a little fearful, and then present themselves as the party of the fiction of  "How it used to be when things were orderly and made sense."  So they make these small gestures, fear Israel, fear the border, fear the Catholics, fear the Arabs, fear India... the Republican party feeds off nervousness and anxiety.  The fact that there is not yet an over-the-top media campaign against one population does not mean that bigotry is not being used as a political tool.

        Now, didn't this one famous democrat once say, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself?"  

        Frank, darling, where are you?

        Doing it right is what fascism is all about. -- Lynda Barry

        by pedant on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:36:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  My feelings (none)

    I'm a Jewish Dem (and this is my first post).  I don't know if I'm typical of Jewish Dems.. but I think I am. I'm pro-choice and for separation of church and state and for so many other Democratic economic and social priorities.  And I'm not orthodox--far from it.  But this whole foreign policy issue is really difficult for me.  I couldn't support an administration that didn't allow Israel to protect itself, its people and its capital.  To that end, I think the fear in the Jewish community doesn't come from the Democratic Presidential candidates.  Whomever you support in 2008: Hillary, Clark, Bayh, Vilsack, Warner, Biden, Feingold, etc...  They all strongly support Israel.  All but a few Democrats in Congress support Israel.  But really in the last 10 or 15 years there has been a stronger and stronger strain of anti-Israel sentiment in the unelected Democratic party.  It started on college campuses--and while it hasn't really "trickled up" to anyone of any power at all--the worry is there.  To the extent Jews are aligning more (or considering to align more) with the Republican party or the neocon movement, I think it is because of the worry that eventually this anti-Israel strain of the Democratic party might actually start electing more than de minimis numbers of officials.  And while I support unions and the environment and gay rights, Israel takes precedence to me over all these things.  Its not a worry at all in 2008--but it certainly is a long-term worry.
  •  Among the many who think this is or should be a (none)
    Christian country, how popular is any minority - especially non-christian minorities? Atheists are in no safer position than Muslims and Jews. I have worried about the likely rise of anti-semitism ever since religion became so important in US politics. Remember when a politician could give a speech without referring to god or his faith - it's been a while.
      There are too many virulent strains of anti-minority or rather anti-other-than-me think out there to presume that some version of good old anti-semitism is not just around the corner. The real problem is that genuine tolerance is not part of the zeitgeist these days. Them against us; good against bad, thinking leads right into a sound justification for the arguments of this diary.

    You don't get to keep democracy unless you fight for it.

    by artebella on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:32:03 AM PDT

    •  Passion of the Christ: Huge Box-Office Hit (4.00)
      I think that alone is evidence that anti-semitism could be just around the corner. That was about two steps from being an old-style German passion play with out-and-out condemnation of Jews.
      •  A small observation (4.00)
        In a diary a week or so ago, Cindy Sheehan alluded to seeing that movie and the "evil" group of men who betrayed Christ. I did not know if there was even a hint of anti-Semitism in her intent, but it made me uncomfortable. Scapegoating and stereotyping Jews exists. My father's family lost their lives because of Hitler. Zionism is complex. Israeli leaders do not speak for me. I am obviously all over the board with this. But regardless, I admire Eve for her diary.  
        •  CtDem, I didn't know that Cindy said this . . . (none)
          It makes me sad to hear this.

          Is it possible that she didn't know that her comments were oh I don't know, inappropriate.

          I think she considers what's happening between Israel and the Palestinians an occupation by Israel. She equates this the the US occupation of Iraq.

          But seems she needs some good advisers.

          http://www.epluribusmedia.org/donate.htm

          by nyceve on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 02:39:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  More food for thought: (4.00)
    By a sizable majority, most of the people brought in front of the House Unamerican Activities Committee in the 1950s were Jews. It is not discussed very much, but there was a very major underlying force in McCarthyism that was anti-semitic. Remember that before America joined WWII, many, many people were big fans of fascism. Charles Lindbergh (yes, that Lindbergh) even considered running for president under the American Fascist Party ticket. It's not like those people suddenly gave up their Nazi ideas the second the war started and never looked back.

    Now the people in office idolize HUAC and McCarthy. Food for thought.

    •  Not without reason (none)
      I'm no expert on the topic, but a little bit of research indicates that a lot of the membership in the Communist Party of the United States during the period in question was Jewish.  (The other largest group, for some reason, was Finnish Americans, but I think they were largely in the upper Midwest, whereas Jewish members were most prevalent on the East and West coasts.)  A large percentage of the Soviet spies convicted during the Cold War, especially during the period up to the HUAC meetings, were also Jewish.  And I recall reading somewhere (perhaps in Whittacker Chambers' book "Witness"?) that the Soviet intelligence organizations used Jewish officers for espionage purposes in the US because they could handle their American agents in Yiddish.  

      I make these points because I think it's important not to assume that a disproportionate representatation of Jewish "interviewees" in the HUAC investigations NECESSARILY represents anti-Semitism.  It was a witch-hunt, but a witch-hunt for suspected communists, many of whom happened to be Jewish, rather than a witch-hunt for Jews.  

      •  Link between Jews and Communism (none)
        One of the strongest boosts to German anti-Semitism came in 1919 with the founding of the Munich Soviet Republic.  It lasted for two weeks before it was crushed by the German Army.

        Most of its leaders were Jewish, and later on the Nazis and other anti-Semites used the Munich Soviet Republic to tar all Jews with the brush of Communist treason.

  •  a WASP, middle-of-America viewpoint (none)
    I'm a WASP (or WASA: White Anglo-Saxon Agnostic) living in the mid-south, in a city large enough to have a fairly sizeable Jewish community. I've had enough Jewish friends over the years to, at least, not be a complete idiot about Jewish culture, or to be unaware of anti-Semitism.

    I'm also smart enough to know that, not being Jewish, I'm not exposed to anti-Semitism, and I'll never know the true extent of it or how it feels.

    But I can tell you that it never even occurred to me that Jack Abramoff was Jewish. And I can tell you that, the first times I heard the rumblings that criticism of Wolfowitz, Perle, et al for the actions was tantamount to anti-Semitism, my reaction was, "Whaaa?!?"

    Maybe I'm just blind to it, but I tend to think that the overwhelming majority of the people who find Abramoff repugnant for his actions are liberals like myself who find the idea of anti-Semitism just as repugnant as Abramoff.

    Please keep in mind, I'm not denying the existence of anti-Semitism, nor am I suggesting that it's on the wane. I'm just saying, I don't think recent events involving Republican ne'er-do-wells who happen to be Jewish are going to create a spike in anti-Semitism, especially when there are a hell of a lot more neo-cons and Republican crooks who are gentile.

    ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

    by snookybeh on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:53:34 AM PDT

  •  Scorecard? (none)
    I gather from your diary that the following are Jewish:
    Mr. Abramoff... Scooter Libby... Judith Miller... The Sulzberger family.

    How do you know that?  Is it common knowledge?

    If it seems otherwise, I actually mean that as a serious question.

    I'm guessing that it may be common knowledge to Jews and Jew-haters but the rest of America does not pay much attention.  Am I just excessively ignorant?

    Television is the opiate of the masses.

    by i dunno on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 11:54:40 AM PDT

  •  My dear nyceve, (none)
    I'm not going to read all the comments; the etiquete (sic) diary has exhausted me.

    Have a little faith.

    I know handicapped people that are evil. Does that make me anti-disability in some way?

    I know gay people that are disgusting. I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire. Does that make me a homophobe?

    So there's a fucked up or sick or criminal Jew running around loose. You think that can't happen?

    You've been in nyc too long maybe. Come out here where no one cares.

    I've got my eyes on this kos crowd. Anti-semitism isn't going to fly on my watch. I think that is true of many others.

    Faith. Trust. That's all we've got.

    -7.88, -7.74 In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends.

    by melvin on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:01:59 PM PDT

  •  my brother's 9th grade history class (none)
    My brother called me the other day, very upset. He goes to a very Wasp-y college prep school in La Canada. When I went there, they had a policy forbidding tests on Rosh Hashona and Yom Kippur, the high holy days. Not this year.

    This year, my brother had three tests scheduled on those days. The burden was placed on him to make them up. In his Spanish class, the teacher even acknowledged that it "might be a problem," but didn't bother to re-schedule her test. 2 days (3 for purists) out of the whole fucking year. 3 tests. My dad called the school. They're going to "re-evaluate" their decision.

    In my brother's world history class, they have a new textbook. There's a chapter on the Jews. Apparently they view everyone other than themselves as inferior. At least that's what HIS FUCKING TEXTBOOK SAID! (I don't have the name at present, I will ask) This is not some school in a country that re-writes history in its textbooks. This a major textbook in THIS COUNTRY. My brother challenged the book, and the teacher went back to reteach the chapter and correct the inaccuracies. Maybe others will not be so lucky.

    In his English class, he got a handout detailing the "history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict." I read that handout. Know what it said under "Six Days War"? "Israel doubles its territory." ISRAEL DOUBLES ITS TERRITORY! No mention of the fact that Israel was ATTACKED by Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan et al. "Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are displaced." Wow.

    I am afraid, my friends. Some may call this coincidence. What else are we supposed to think?!?

    •  strange, because... (none)
      when I grew up (70s), Israel was thought of as "the good guys," and the Palestinians were considered to be somewhere on the order of just below child-molesting serial killers. I remember a guy in one of my high school classes suggesting that maybe the Palestinians had some legitimate concerns, and being looked at as if he'd just defended Manson. Or Hitler. Or both.

      ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

      by snookybeh on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:44:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Revisionist history... (none)
        ...is the best friend of people who would support terrorists. Or Republicans.

        I agree that Palestinians have legitimate grievances, but as far as I'm concerned, if they're not willing to give up supporting suicide bombers and denying Israel the right to exist (let alone denying Jews the right to live), I'm not particularly inclined to feel any sympathy for them.

        Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

        by wiscmass on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 12:51:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  they feel the same way (none)

          about Israel taking land away from them.  In their (agrarian) view, lives are replaced fairly straightforwardly but people thrown off the land they root in is a similar or worse level of spiritual destruction of life.

          Renewal, not mere Reform.

          by killjoy on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 01:14:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  re: Revisionist history... (none)
          but as far as I'm concerned, if they're not willing to give up supporting suicide bombers and denying Israel the right to exist

          Nothing is that simple.

          Do Americans support Bush's Folly in Iraq?  Some did, for a while.  Are all Americans now guilty for the actions of their leaders?

          We recently saw The Son's Legacy, a documentary about Parent's Circle, a group of bereaved Palestian and Isreali parents who have lost family in the conflicts.

          Parent's Circle

          The Son's Legacy (scroll down)

          Bereaved Parents for Peace

          I have to believe that more people want peace and reconciliation, on both sides, than want war and revenge.  There has always been a dove movement in Isreal.  And Palestians are just people, like everyone else, the majority of whom simply want to enjoy playing with their healthy, happy grandkids during their twilight years.

          But rejects like Sharon, Arafat, and many others who profit from the conflict, stoked the fires of hate and war, renewed the conflict, and kept the tragedy alive.

          Sound familiar?

  •  well (none)

    I am one of those critics who has watched this picture developing for quite a while and occasionally shoots a dart in the directions you so worry about.  Exposing Sulzberger's foolishness and corrupt ethic on Middle Eastern reporting and editorializing at the NYT, however well and humanely intentioned the ends of it were (or perhaps they weren't, who knows), is IMHO crucially necessary to restoring ethics in American journalism in general and keeping the Jewish Right honest in public in particular.  It's not Sulzberger personally or New York City or political issue(s), it's the peculiar stature and place of the Times in the national media as the inofficial print archive of the national history on a day-to-day level that makes its distortions important.  

    Every major ethnic and religious group in the country has been broken in two politically during the past 15 or so years, with one side going unabashedly Right and socially reactionary, then spending all of its time fighting Liberals in-group in the present and living in the past refighting The Archenemies outside the group.

    I was with the Michael Lerner crowd during the Nineties- not a subscriber to the particular beliefs being trial ballooned, but sure (which I remain) that protecting/aiding in whatever small way possible the evolution of Judaism into Modern conditions was the most crucial particular thing in Jewish life.  (The center of the effort has shifted from California to Israel in recent years.)

    It has been painful and sad to watch all the exposure of the conservative or elder side of American Jewish society and its bad judgment, behavior to stereotypes, medieval coping strategies, dogmas, opportunism, tribalism, its dysfunctional relationship dependence exploited by the Israeli Right, its acting out against The Gentiles, its anti-Nazi compulsive obsessions, and all the rest.  It's terribly pathological stuff.  And then there's the corrupt alliance it has made with the pathological American Right, which also follows in all its particulars a Diaspora pattern in which it invariably gets betrayed, exposed and sacrificed, by that ally.  

    One political side to it is still very much what Hannah Arendt said as comment on Rathenau and Disraeli and Dreyfus (and applied to Judah Benjamin as well): that whatever Jewish politicians tell themselves, as individuals they attain some predictive power but as groups they are simply not strongly connected to the logic(s) by which their host Gentile societies operate, which leads to running series of large and small misjudgments.  It's a structural problem that is inherent in the choice or legacy of being a People Apart.

    Out There are still a lot of Americans whose outlook and understanding of the world is in many, if not most, ways that of 13th century European serfdom.  That is what 'Christian Right' means as a condition.  That's where the root is that all the Western varieties of anti-Semitism spring from.  It's a horror to contemplate Jewish alliance with that...but one shouldn't forget that the Ashkenazim of the Jewish Pale, who are the ancestors of most American Jews, are not purely descendents of the Jews of the Rheinland and Byzantium.  Their ancestors are also in culturally significant part small, defeated, remnants of Slavic and Asiatic peoples, Chasars and Sorbs and some Tartars and in some instances Gypsys.  If you look at various Orthodox Judaisms in their forms and practices with an informed anthropological eye, it's not particularly difficult to see patchworks of cultural connections and survivals.  That these create an additional amount of complexity between Jewish communities about what constitutes tradition is obvious.  That these culturally connect eastern Orthodox Judaism to the defense of Ancient World paganism(s)- which is, in general terms, the central (but not admittable) center of Christian Right theology and politics- is an unfortunate fact.  And it's not just Orthodox Judaisms that have unfortunate attachments and roots of the kind, of course.  All do in various ways.

    I think that's the psychological route out of the anti-Semitic stuff that has been climbing and is yet to peak.  It's not about Judaism, nor has it ever been.  It's all about medievalisms that encrust both sides, ignorance and traditionalisms on the group level which are running out of viability.

    And maybe the political correlates are the best view to take on the political side.  It may be most intelligent to just let go of a lot of the tribalist defenses of members that have gone too far that are so usual- the grouped public excoriations as well as the group-backed public assertions and the public group outrage, much of which is not actually believed in in-group.  E.g. Jonathan Pollard and OJ Simpson.  Initially it takes a lot of courage and confidence to do this, but e.g. black leaders and average black people have started going over to emphasizing the individual point of view.  That is, they now present their views as those of individual moral people with sympathy and skepticism of what appears to be the group view, an attitude defined by familial-ish personal loyalty to flawed people they are connected with rather than the absolute alignment and adamant claim of infallibility.

    Renewal, not mere Reform.

    by killjoy on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 01:08:02 PM PDT

  •  as a jew (4.00)
    i am actually ashamed that this whole bullshit neocon thing has been in large part jewish

    i am ashamed of perle, wolfowitz and ken edelson, and the whole israeli spy lobby

    it's amazing to me that jews are in part the catalysts towards a movement from freedom from facism

    sharon, though in a diffcult place, is a brutal ironman

    it's just amazing

  •  for what it's worth (4.00)
    I am very concious of your worries. but there are lots of people who can make distinctions between the actions of an individual without attributing blame to their religious background. enough to prevent a backlash? I hope so.

    The sock puppets are extraordinary.

    by Miss Devore on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 01:37:24 PM PDT

  •  With such a clear road-map (4.00)
    ...as you provide, the anti-semites should have no difficulty making Jews to blame.

    Still, as an ethnic Jew myself (I am not religious and reject all religions on an absolutely equal basis), I can't help but feel that you are part of the problem, without recognizing it.

    "As an American Jew, I am a visitor in this great country." Really? A visitor? It's interesting you should make this statement since it confirms one of the principles that many anti-semites often enumerate: that Jews are a society apart, secretive and arrogant. It's a non-sequitur to be sure, but the fact that the premise is accurate is part of the problem.

    You worry about how Abramoff will make regular Jews look. Well, my friend, anyone who wants to hold a race responsible for Abramoff's crimes is willing to hold the same views for free. In other words, it ain't about Abramoff's being a Jew. Furthermore, the kind of thinking that worries about guilt by association in this manner is somewhat paranoid. yes, there are plenty of historical precendents where Jews are concerned, but you are putting the cart before the horse, and in so doing making such associations for folks who might not otherwise have made them.

    As for worrying about Iraq, Bush and the rest falling upon Jewish shoulders, let me run a few words by you: Kristol, Perle, Wolfowitz, Franklin.... If you want to be taken seriously, own up to the fact that there were actual Jews involved in promoting these bad things, and they did so for reasons linked to their Jewish heritage (Israel?!) I didn't even mention AIPAC. If you want to worry about how Jews will suffer harsh criticism or worse, at least worry about the justified provocation, not some tenuously vague threat.

    Some Jews do bad things. Replace "Jews" with any kind of categorization you like, it's still true. There is implicit racial discrimination in your viewpoint, and you need to recognize it. And if you want to do something to fix the problem, ask our fellow Jews to be good human beings, and good citizens first. And try not to characterize all non-Jews (implicitly or otherwise) as potential anti-semites. Who do you think it helps?

    "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

    by thingamabob on Sat Oct 15, 2005 at 02:27:33 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site