Search the Lounge

Categories

« Migrant Shelters, Federal Land, and Federalism | Main | Steven Salaita's New Blog Is Worth Reading »

February 19, 2019

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

anon

I would add that it is quite obvious that the new Left (that is, the wing gaining ascendency) hates, in addition to Israel and Jews, all Republicans, most male white people (especially old male white people), and above all, Donald Trump.

This is not political opposition. This is hate.

Don't think so? Watch Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC for few nights (or, actually, any panel on any of its "news" shows). The unrestrained venom is really quite something.

Let's call hate for what it is. The haters on the Left are proud of their hate. Let's not deny them their satisfaction. Their hate mongering makes them feel superior.

a non

I feel very confident in saying that "the new Left" does not "hate" "Israel and Jews, all Republicans, [or] most male white people (especially old male white people)." This is an unfortunate emerging trope of the Right -- one that has the effect, either intentionally or unintentionally, of avoiding Left critiques that often have a kernel (or more) of the truth.

There are valid critiques of Israel. There are valid critiques of Republican positions and of Republic politicians. There are valid critiques of the way "whiteness" and masculinity often manifest in today's culture. Lumping these valid critiques all into the category of implicitly unreasoned "hat[red]" invalidates these critiques on non-substantive grounds. Presumably if you're posting on this board, you're a law professor. Regardless, you can do better than this.

anon

Again, perhaps we are using the term "hate" differently.

Once again, I invite you to spend a week watching prime time MSNBC.

Let's check back with each other then.

In the meantime, it occurs to me that there are some striking parallels between hating Trump, and therefore all Trump supporters, and hating Israel, and therefore, Jews (who are presumed to support Israel).

When the last president was in office, I remember the wails and gnashing of teeth from the Left (who ultimately, it seems to me, finally saw him for what he really was, which was not their messiah) about any criticism of him. Many times I heard folks like Eric Holder calmly explain that the white people of America only found fault with this faultless man because they are racist.

Now, we see the logical extension. Trump is evil, therefore, that kid in the red hat attacked an Indian man, white men in red hats in Chicago attacked a black man, etc. The "white people" (read Republican) people of America are evil, and there's your proof. Right?

What has this to do with Israel? A lot. Just as leftists rush to judge hoaxes and misinformation true because they hate Trump and his supporters so much, these paragons of virtue rush to believe any and every calumny about Israel, are completely uninterested in the truth, and refuse to believe that there is any defense for the Jewish state. The New Left (and, of course, so many millions world wide) revile Jews anyway (do you actually deny this?), but the New Left now has Israel-hate to rationalize their hate and give their Jew-hate cover.

If hoaxes are increasingly prevalent to stir up hate of Trump and republicans, do you not think the incentives are that much greater in the Middle East?

Let's not mince words here. You are spinning to say "oh, c'mon, it isn't that bad ... nobody actually hates anyone because of republican or jewish affiliation" but, you seem quite able to understand racism, for example. Why is it so hard to understand this? I'm not speaking about finding fault with these groups: I'm speaking about hate.

I would respectfully request that if you want to take an even-handed stand, you might start by acknowledging the sort of shocking level of hate speech and anger on the new Left and stop pretending that this isn't motivated by hatred (see, definition above).

I think the answer is plain: the moral superiority that is associated with the policies of the Left (controlling everything people say, do, think, eat, etc.) depends on the those who rule over everyone else being superior in every way to those they control. To admit their base emotions and aspirations to power would undermine the control of others they seek.

a non

anon -- quickly, because it's late, I don't see any "hoax" regarding Nathan Phillips. I watched the videos. The kids there were being kids, but they were also plainly being disrespectful kids. A lot of that probably comes from ignorance. But I don't think there's any question that doing the "tomahawk chop" in that moment, for example, was not intended as a respectful gesture.

To be clear, I'm not offering a full-throated defense of the Left. My original posts here call out Rep. Omar. My point is that there's a real different between offering valid critiques of things that should be critiqued -- including some of Israel's policies -- and disproportionately targeting a minority group using longstanding invidious stereotypes -- as Rep Omar did regarding Israel.

There are, undoubtedly, those on the Left who do hate Donald Trump and, by association, hate at least some of his supporters. If that's different from the Right and Obama, it's only because there was also an invidious racial element to that hatred. I don't think, however, that the sort of "hate" that you describe is nearly as widespread as you believe.

Most crucially, I think that you are attributing numerous valid (or at least good-faith) criticisms of Republican policies, of Republican politicians, of "whiteness," of toxic masculinity, and of other such cause célèbres of the Left to hatred.

anon

RE: the "kids harassing an elderly Indian man" all one can say it, you haven't done your homework and you are getting your news, apparently, from only one-sided sources ... Stay tuned. The libel suits have been filed. Let's see how those suits come out.

" If that's different from the Right and Obama, it's only because there was also an invidious racial element to that hatred." Again, way to miss the point! See, above, re: Holder's take on it. Yours is likewise. I recall a whole lot of criticism of Obama, like any president. But, I don't recall the full scale demonization of his supporters. That is the parallel with Israel:Jew hate that I think is telling.

You seem to be in error about the fact that legitimate criticism can be leveled at one who is the target of hate, at least if the target is Israel or a republican. If you believe the criticism is valid, then it seems you deny the hate. This is logically unsound.

You excuse Obama, for example, by saying "there was also an invidious racial element to that hatred." You find it quite easy to characterize criticism of him as motivated by racism, but you seem to go on and on about the fact that we should only speak, when we address Israel hate, about legitimate bases for finding fault with the country's self-defense.

In this discussion, one thing is plain. You are applying a double standard. Please give it some thought before just claiming, over and over, that there are some faults with Israel.

Perhaps you might start with finding faults with the New Left.

a non

***"RE: the 'kids harassing an elderly Indian man' all one can say it, you haven't done your homework and you are getting your news, apparently, from only one-sided sources ... Stay tuned. The libel suits have been filed. Let's see how those suits come out."***

I didn't say anything about "harassing an elderly Indian man." I said the kids were being disrespectful. That's not based on where I'm getting my news; that's based on watching the videos myself. I really don't think there's a reasonable point of disagreement about it either. There are legitimate points of disagreement about to what extent their disrespect (towards an elderly Native American gentleman) was provoked by the nearby Hebrew Israelites or even by Philips himself; and there are legitimate points of disagreement about what sort of consequences 16-year-olds should face for disrespect (death threats, for example, are far beyond the pale). But I really don't think there's any question re the fact of the disrespect.

Also, what's the libel here? Irrespective of how you feel about who got a fair rap in the media, the libel case seems utterly without merit.

***" If you believe the criticism is valid, then it seems you deny the hate. "***

Let me clarify: I think it's possible for legitimate criticism to be motivated by hatred and bigotry. To be clear, I think that's a lot of what happens in the case of Israel. There are a lot of legitimate bases for criticizing Israel's policies and practices. The way that these critiques are made, the disproportionate focus on Israel over many other similar or worse human rights offenders, and the exaggeration of claims against Israel, reveals the likely bigotry that is often at the heart of these critiques. But the existence of this bigotry does not invalidate the critiques. In a non-bigoted world, there would be a lot more criticism directed at the human rights practices of a lot more countries and, even if it would not receive anywhere close to the focus or vitriol that it gets today, Israel would not be entirely spared.

My concern with your attitude is that you imply that a critique motivated by bigotry or hatred is rendered invalid because of that bigotry or hatred. And, moreover, you extend the label of "hatred" to cover many if not all of the Left's social critiques. The implication of what you write is that concerns about, for example, the effects of toxic masculinity expressed by the Left may be ignored because they are simply just "hate" for men.

Turning to Obama, I absolutely think that there is a kernel of legitimacy to many of the critiques of him from the Right. I wasn't trying to invalidate those critiques in the manner that I believe you potentially do for the Left. I was just pointing out that hate directed at a president by the opposition party is nothing new (and I strongly disagree that the level of the hate from the Left towards Trump today is materially different from the level of the hate directed from the Right towards Obama). I also think that the racial bigotry at the root of much of the anti-Obama vitriol is not at all dissimilar to the religious bigotry that is at the root of many critiques of Israel.

Finally, you accuse me of applying a double standard. I want to point out, again, that this discussion started out with me criticizing the statements of a member of the "New Left" (without directing any similar criticism to the Right).

anon

a non

First, I believe that you clearly are misinformed about the Sandmann incident. The fact that you base your opinion on a brief clip of what appears to be a smirking boy(s) and repeat nearly verbatim the spin that was promulgated about it (just like the incident in Chicago), and the fact that you seem to know nearly nothing at all about what actually happened, and what was said about what happened (two different things) that forms the basis of a lawsuit that you have dismissed without knowing anything about it, makes it impossible to discuss this incident with you. It is you being very disrespectful.

As for the lawsuit, CNN reports " the lawsuit claims that the Post "wrongfully targeted and bullied Nicholas because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red 'Make America Great Again' souvenir cap on a school field trip to the January 18 March for Life in Washington, D.C."

You are, sorry to say, repeating some the same canards that form the basis of the suit. We'll see how the suit fairs, given the issue of whether Sandmann can be deemed a public figure. You say the suit has no merit. There will be money paid, I suspect. We'll see. Let's debate this when you know more, and the likely motion to dismiss by the Post is heard.

With all due respect, you are just talking past my main two points. First, you are quite ready to attribute criticism of Obama to racism but you won't back off the notion that criticism of Israel and Zionist is but a legitimate form of critique (one could not even say Obama's full name without being accused of racism!), even if motivated by Jew hate.

After paying lip service to the unfair way that Israel (and "Zionists") are often portrayed by haters, you say: "the existence of this bigotry does not invalidate the critiques." So, all in all, Israel deserves it, you say (but Obama didn't, one infers). You fail to acknowledge the difference between legitimate critique of actions and the demonization of Jews and other supporters of Israel, the point of the original post above.

Second, yes, it was my point was that Obama was, like Bush and Trump, the subject of criticism and hate. But my further point was that I don't recall those finding fault with Obama demonizing his supporters in the same way that Trump supporters are demonized. This is, in my view, analogous to Israel:Jew hate, and you haven't really addressed that point.

As I read your comment above, I think that you go half way in conceding that hate is at the root of many critiques of Israel ("I also think that the racial bigotry at the root of much of the anti-Obama vitriol is not at all dissimilar to the religious bigotry that is at the root of many critiques of Israel.") But, I don't see that you concede that hate toward supporters of Israel is justified in the same way, and justifies the demonization of its supporters: just as in the case of Trump, republicans, in the case of Israel, Jews.

You are prepared to believe the worst, and say the worst, about that kid in the red hate because of your attitude toward Trump. Some are just as prepared to say and believe the worst about Jews because of their attitude toward Israel (even more unjustified, of course). And, as you say, hatred of Jews motivates many to find fault with Israel on bases that may have no merit.

So, all in all, I think we've exhausted the subject on both sides. I brought up the New LEft because: a. it is marked by a distinct form of zealotry, hate speech and provocations which appear to include a lot of Jew hate, b.) it is a long, long way away from the democratic party of JFK. It is time that "liberals" turn their sharp tongues and constant criticism of others on themselves.

a non

anon -- I am basing my conclusion re the Covington Catholic kids off of watching HOURS of video. I've actually read reasonably little coverage on either side. Tell me, seriously, how the 'tomahawk chop' is not disrespectful in this context?

Also, I seriously question whether you understand libel law. If the Washington Post pays anything -- and I highly, highly doubt that they will -- it's not because their attorneys think that there's a reasonable chance that they will be held liable.

***"you are quite ready to attribute criticism of Obama to racism but you won't back off the notion that criticism of Israel and Zionist is but a legitimate form of critique"***

That is simply untrue. I have explicitly stated that there is legitimacy to critiques of both Israel AND Obama -- and I have explicitly stated that I believe that bigotry underlies and motivates the extent and vitriol of BOTH critiques.

***"I don't recall those finding fault with Obama demonizing his supporters in the same way that Trump supporters are demonized."***

I simply disagree with the factual predicate to your point here.

***"You are prepared to believe the worst, and say the worst, about that kid in the red hate because of your attitude toward Trump."***

Not at all! I don't care in the least bit what hats they are wearing, and you have no idea about my attitude towards Trump. I found their conduct disrespectful based on watching hours of tape. I was a high school teacher for a many years, and it's pretty easy to spot disrespect. These kids were, simply put, not on their best behavior. Had they gone to my (public, right-leaning) school, there would have been real discussions about respect. Again, there are reasonable points of debate about this incident--including what, if any, consequences they should face. I find it unreal that anyone seriously believes these kids were acting in an entirely commendable way.

I don't think I'm going to change your mind, because you seem entirely unwilling to view my comments outside of the narrative that you've constructed for yourself about the Left and about who you think I am. And that's really, really unfortunate.

anon

Please, before you accuse me of ignorance about defamation law and the lawsuit, please note: "tomahawk chop" is completely irrelevant to the context and the suit under discussion. You have the wrong party and the wrong basis for the claims in mind. You are repeating, almost verbatim, the talking points repeated over and over on the "news.")

REcently, a more accurate picture is appearing. See, e.g., Washington Post, Feb 14, "Investigation finds no evidence of ‘racist or offensive statements’ in Mall incident":

Although some of the students "perform[ed] a “tomahawk chop to the beat of Mr. Phillips’ drumming” (long an issue at baseball games, for example), Sandmann, the plaintiff in the suit we are discussing, according to his attorney:

"[D]id not approach Nathan Phillips — he was confronted by Phillips who picked Nick as his target. Nick did not block Phillips’ path — Phillips made no attempt to get around or avoid Nick. Nick did not verbally assault, taunt, mock, harass, disparage or threaten Phillips in any way — Nick remained calm and well-mannered despite Phillips’ loud chants and drumbeating inches from his face. Nick did not utter one word."

As I said above, we'll see if Sandmann is held to be any sort of public figure. In the meantime, I think it is fair to say that you seem to be still smearing him (the plaintiff in the suit) by, among other things, referring to conduct by other persons. That sort of broad brush is what we are talking about here.

For the record, I have no interest in "who you are." You have personalized the conversation by speculating about whether I'm a law professor, accusing me of ignorance of the law, etc.

My main points have been made. The main thrust of this thread was "condemn bad behavior, but don't tar a whole group of people with the same brush." My points have been:

1. That hatred is behind many efforts to tar all Jews with age-old "Jewish conspiracy" theories, and that haters use criticism of Israel and Zionism as a pretext (citing the recent statements of Macron, etc.);

2. Therefore, it isn't sufficient to say, "well, there's some truth to it"; there may be; but recognizing the hatred is important too;

3. Leftists and Democrats can easily accept this point when it comes to someone like Obama (i.e., noting the racism is important and can't be shrugged off by noting that some of the criticism was well-taken), but seem to find it hard to accept when it comes to Jews;

3. Demonization of Jews as "supporters" of Israel seems to fit a pattern of demonization by the Left of Trump "supporters"; this demonization of supporters of Obama was not mirrored in the Obama era (i.e., by demonizing all Obama supporters in the same way).

Frankly, I don't think you've refuted any of these points. So, I think we can leave it at that for now.


David

You all need help.

Former VP Spiro Agnew in 1980 Asked Saudi Leader for Money to Fight U.S. ‘Zionists’
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/former-vp-spiro-agnew-in-1980-asked-saudi-leader-for-money-to-fight-us-zionists-1.6959767

MSN
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/fmr-vp-agnew-sought-saudi-millions-to-fight-zionists-document-1446525507834

anon

Rachel Maddow did almost her whole show on this subject the other night.

She wanted to smear the Saudis and Trump and republicans, of course.

As if the democrats have had no hand in Saudi pockets. (bowing to them? no way that will be mentioned.)

And, if I heard the report correctly, it wasn't "Zionists" that were the targets. This issue is mentioned above, in this thread, with respect to what Agnew's boss had to say. I think they were more honest about the target of their hatred.

The comments to this entry are closed.

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad