I am a Christian and I am not an expert in anti-semitism by any stretch. That said, it is painfully obvious to me that anti-semitism and its basic mechancial structure is one of the major forces in play in today's politics. This week, Glenn Beck brought this more out into the open.
One of my first memories of anti-semitism was my neighbor from a NY suburb, telling me that he did not want to go to a fine NY public university because there were too many jew there. I was stunned. He went to a school that had a worse reputation, was farther away and cost more money all because of anti-semitism. Since that time I keep noticing how big an impact anti-semitism has in our lives. Onto today's news...
This morning's NY Times reports that Glenn Beck made remarks about George Soros that drew heat from the Anti-Defamation League.
I admit I did not watch his show. But I don't think its important. What is more important is whatever connations you have about me reading the NY Times rather than watching Fox News. What do you think it says about me? My position in society? How much I care for regular people? I hope to break this down a little more.
Here is what the NY Times has to say about the show:
Throughout three programs this week, Mr. Beck has portrayed Mr. Soros, a billionaire investor and philanthropist, as a "puppet master" who is "notorious for collapsing economies and regimes all around the world" and whose "next target" is the United States. Citing Mr. Soros’s statements about the decline of the dollar, Mr. Beck said, "Not only does he want to bring America to her knees, financially, he wants to reap obscene profits off us as well."
To this Michelle Goldberg on the Daily Beast describes Beck's comments as:
...a symphony of anti-Semitic dog-whistles. Nothing like it has ever been on American television before.
She aptly describes anti-semitism in general:
In classic anti-Semitic narratives, Jews control both the elites and the masses; they’re responsible for the communist revolution and the speculative excesses of capitalism. Their goal is to undermine society so that they can take over. Through the lens of anti-Semitism, social division, runaway inflation, and moral breakdown all make sense because they all have the same cause.
This brings me to my larger point: the role of anti-semitism in politics- in the 2010 elections and all elections in my lifetime. Wikipedia defines anti-semetism as:
In its extreme form, it "attributes to the Jews an exceptional position among all other civilizations, defames them as an inferior group and denies their being part of the nation[s]" in which they reside.
Let's look at this through the lense of Sara Palin and how she recently generated some press:
Palin wanted to "intro kids 2 beauty of laissez-faire via serving them cookies amidst school cookie ban debate." She called it "Nanny state run amok!"
Ok. so Palin says we have a bunch of bueraucrats run amok. Palin pushes it further:
"Who should be making the decisions what you eat, school choice and everything else? Should it be government or should it be the parents? It should be the parents."
Let's unpack Sarah Palin a little more. She thinks:
* There is a real America - rural, Christian and working class.
* by implication there is a "fake America"
* "Fake Americans" live in cities
* Fake Americans control everything
* Fake Americans are arrogant
* Fake Americans are the problem
If she came out and said "fake Americans" were Jews than this would fit perfectly in the definition of anti-semitism described above. The problem is that the Pennsylvania Board of Education could very well only have gentiles on it. So this would, theoretically, shoot down the whole "Jews control everything" theory.
The reality is that the mechanical structure of anti-semetism is being used to describe a wider population than just people who are religiously Jews. It can and often does include Jews, but it gets (sort-of) coded into things like Rick Sanchez and "everybody who runs CNN" thing until they really say what they mean:
I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they - the people in this country who are Jewish - are an oppressed minority? Yeah. [sarcastically]
I can't find a video or a transcript but I was watching the Lawrence O'Donnell a on November 4th. He was interviewing a tea party head honcho. The first thing that comes out of his mouth was that the problem with America are these people:
*bearucrats
*professors
*nonprofit employees
What just happened there? I believe the model of anti-semitism was just used. He could be talking about a Christian or a Muslim or a Jew but it functions like anti-semetism. It triggers an idea that some middle layer of society is conrtroling the strings, while in reality diverting attention from those really in charge. In other words, this group is a convienient scapegoat.
The use of anti-semetism as a scapegoat is, I hope, well known here. A google of "anit-semetism" and "scapegoat" turned up 166,000 results. What I think has been confusing to the left and has kept this topic quiet is that conservatives are not just targeting Jews. They just define the problem people as arrogant, wealthy (but notice that they are never really THAT wealthy), out-of-touch, greedy etc. You get it. For eaxmple, saying tenured professors live in an ivory tower. These same characteristics are often used to tar and defame Jews. It is the mechanical structure of anti-semitism.
I am writing this diary because I don't think that this model is challenged. Time after time I see it slide by unchallenged but it then drives 2.8 million people to watch Glenn Beck and millions more to vote Republican in order to stick it to the "arrogant elite."
I don't have a word for this model. I wish I did because I believe it is NOT anti-semitism. It is something different. But very close.
My family was not persecuted in the ways Jews have been. My mother was 3-years old when Nazi's invaded Belgium where she lived. She grew up collecting machine gun shells from her street outside. She had relatives die. That said, she did not have the same persecution. It was different. Both were awful. But different. I want to acknowledge that.
I also want to acknowledge that I fit into the group that conservatives want to scapegoat. I am part of that liberal elite they describe. I am poorly paid and don't have much real power but I can see how I could be lumped into that category. Honestly sometimes I can be a jerk- as my wife can attest. Now here is the funny thing:
* when I was a right-wing Republican, being a jerk was not a big deal for some reason
* when I shifted my worldview to being liberal, all of the sudden those same tendencies seemed to be awful.
I don't quite get what is going on. Maybe someone else can shed light on this. I just know that, yes, sometimes liberals are out-of-touch and elitist. I also know that we are not the real problem. We did not cause the deficit, the wars, etc. We are not the super rich. We are just often the people in the middle.
A core republican strategy is to turn an opponent's strength into a weakness. So the fact that a lot of people in the middle, in positions of semi-power, are trying to be on the side of working people has been turned into a weakness.
I hope that we can call this out more. Maybe we just call it anti-semitism. Maybe we give it a new name because it entails a wider population. I don't know.
I am just tired of letting it slide.