I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
This narrative requires us to believe that the Democrats by and large oppose Israeli policies but go along with them anyway out of political necessity and there's nothing much to support that.
Not really, It just requires us to understand that while there are certainly people who oppose them, the sheer power of the israeli lobby in DC makes taking a public stand against them politically masochistic.
Case in point: what's happening to Omar right now.
That her tone is why attacks against her have been sustained is very much in question.
It was never the tone; the substance of her arguments terrifies AIPAC. They're upset when she talks about dual loyalty because it hints at what they're actually doing, which is worse: asking US elected officials to subordinate their own country's constitution in favor of BDS legislation and threatening those challenging treatment of the Palestinians with political attacks and baseless charges of bigotry.
The folks pushing Israeli right-wing agendas in the US figure the opposition can't win an argument if they aren't allowed to speak, and there are more than enough politicians on both sides who are either ok with apartheid or can be persuaded into silence with a combination of AIPAC support/threats to their political futures. Conflating the act of pointing this out with antisemitism is all that this is (plus more than a dash of islamophobia in this specific instance).
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
MargaretThatcher on
I'm Jeremy Corbyn's #1 fan
+2
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
And make no mistake, US support is the primary reason for the lack of international action on this issue. Nothing will change without a change in US attitude/policy towards Israel.
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
This narrative requires us to believe that the Democrats by and large oppose Israeli policies but go along with them anyway out of political necessity and there's nothing much to support that.
If you're not paying attention it's easy to believe the narrative that Israel isn't doing anything wrong and that any criticism of them is baseless antisemitism, especially since it's so easy to pull out legitimate examples of real antisemitism.
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
Getting Trump out of office is the best thing you could do for this issue, since Trump is further to the right on Israel than any president in quite some time and nothing will change that while he is in office.
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
Getting Trump out of office is the best thing you could do for this issue, since Trump is further to the right on Israel than any president in quite some time and nothing will change that while he is in office.
Once he's gone we can get back to ignoring the issue.
+2
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
Getting Trump out of office is the best thing you could do for this issue, since Trump is further to the right on Israel than any president in quite some time and nothing will change that while he is in office.
I think it's very sad people are only seeing this in terms of what's helpful for the "Democratic coalition."
Essentially Omar is being attacked because she is 1. a black woman and 2. Arab.
I'm sorry if you expected black women to just dance around to Cardi B and not offer new perspectives on political situations. This is what diversity means, it's not a college brochure where they slap some POCs faces on there to appear diverse. It means that you have to deal with new opinions and attitudes based on different experiences.
I don't think anyone has argued that Omar is wrong in her response to this or that Israel should be beyond reproach but the unfortunate reality of politics is that you only have so much political capitol to spend while in office and the democrats ~who at present have a toe hold on the federal government~ need to be able to pick and choose their battles.
And make no mistake, Isarel's lobby is probably the strongest one in washington right now and it absolutely goes across both parties.
Beyond that, the reality is that the dem's have much more pressing issues then the continuing shit show that is US palestinian relations; The Mueller investigation, Trump's desire to antagonize every other ally the US has, His god forsaken wall... all of those have much more immediate impact on the thought process of the party.
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
Getting Trump out of office is the best thing you could do for this issue, since Trump is further to the right on Israel than any president in quite some time and nothing will change that while he is in office.
Absolutely not, remember Schumer supported moving the embassy to Jerusalem? Remember Schumer telling AIPAC the problem with the Palestinians is that they don't believe in the Torah? Remember all the congressional Democrats who slobbered over Netenhayu when he made his speech in front of Congress in 2015?
The Democrats are equally bad, if not worse, than Republicans on the issue.
JERUSALEM — Israeli security forces may have committed war crimes and should be held individually and collectively accountable for the deaths of 189 Palestinian protesters in Gaza last year, according to a report published Thursday by the United Nations.
The U.N. Commission of Inquiry criticized Israel’s rules of engagement and said the majority of the Palestinians killed “did not pose an immediate threat of death or serious injury to others when they were shot.”
The report also noted that thousands of demonstrators have been maimed by Israeli snipers during the weekly protests along the border fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the report, saying it “set a new record for U.N. hypocrisy” and was “based purely on an obsessive hatred of Israel.”
The report estimated that as many as 23,000 Palestinians were injured by the Israeli military, including hundreds who lost limbs. It said Israeli snipers intentionally shot at journalists and health workers even though they were clearly marked as such.
So like, does this play into this whole thing in any way?
I doubt it's going to make a big deal in the U.S. unfortunately. The U.N. has a history of trying to call Israel out on how they treat the Palestinian people and the settlements, but the U.S. has done a pretty good job of blocking most all of the resolutions. I seem to remember that it was a big deal a few years ago when Obama was still president that we abstained from a vote on the issue instead of shutting it down like normal.
I doubt it's going to make a big deal in the U.S. unfortunately. The U.N. has a history of trying to call Israel out on how they treat the Palestinian people and the settlements, but the U.S. has done a pretty good job of blocking most all of the resolutions. I seem to remember that it was a big deal a few years ago when Obama was still president that we abstained from a vote on the issue instead of shutting it down like normal.
Interesting enough, if you were to use the metric of UN resolutions, America actually voted the most against Israel under the Reagan administration!
I realize this is getting somewhat far afield, but it looks like the resolution is being broadened to include all religious bigotry.
This was done earlier, and it doesn't matter, because people can understand context and know that it's still a rebuke to Omar, even if it's being phrased to not appear as such.
Yeah it's like when they override the church and state serration for government money going to churches because it "discriminates against religion", it's not something that wouldn't ever be evoked in defence of anything other than a small grouping of Christian religions
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I realize this is getting somewhat far afield, but it looks like the resolution is being broadened to include all religious bigotry.
This was done earlier, and it doesn't matter, because people can understand context and know that it's still a rebuke to Omar, even if it's being phrased to not appear as such.
Yeah, it's nice that the resolution doesn't explicitly say 'Fuck Omar', but anyone who is paying attention knows what the situation is. It's not like they were rushing to get something like this out last week.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+3
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
That's not it. The American Right likes the Israeli Right for the same reason they like the Russian Right - they have a lot in common. They think the same. There's nothing more "sinister" than that (although that is sinister in its own way) - no conspiracies involving the apocalypse or ugly anti-Semitic money conspiracies - just fellow-feeling and common beliefs. If Israel swings hard left in 20 years, they will suddenly become the devil itself to the American Right.
CelestialBadger on
+5
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
Neither. Within the space of middle-east politics the US behaves more like a client state for Israel. We give them all the military aid they want and unlimited use of our Security Council veto, and in return we get... some benefit that I've never been able to figure out. You could really see this weird relationship in play when the JCPOA was being finalized.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
Neither. Within the space of middle-east politics the US behaves more like a client state for Israel. We give them all the military aid they want and unlimited use of our Security Council veto, and in return we get... some benefit that I've never been able to figure out. You could really see this weird relationship in play when the JCPOA was being finalized.
Israel provides a lot of intelligence and acts as a backroom facilitator when, say, we absolutely need to get a suspect tortured in an Egyptian prison.
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
That's not it. The American Right likes the Israeli Right for the same reason they like the Russian Right - they have a lot in common. They think the same. There's nothing more "sinister" than that (although that is sinister in its own way) - no conspiracies involving the apocalypse or ugly anti-Semitic money conspiracies - just fellow-feeling and common beliefs. If Israel swings hard left in 20 years, they will suddenly become the devil itself to the American Right.
The Evangelical support is definitely a big part of it too. As far as polling goes, overall support for Israel is actually the highest it's been since like the 90s but it's driven almost entirely by the issue becoming vaguely partisan. The right are all in, especially the evangelical community who care a LOT about this issue. The left are getting more skeptical, especially the younger types. (The numbers on how much actually seems to be a bit wild from the polls I saw. It's kinda all over the place)
Yeah 'apocalypse cult partially drives American support for Israel" sounds pretty wacky but it's not like they're even coy about it, talk to an Evangelical about it
I mean don't but if you do they'll totally tell you about their apocalypse hopes, at length they will tell you
Hobnail on
Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
That's not it. The American Right likes the Israeli Right for the same reason they like the Russian Right - they have a lot in common. They think the same. There's nothing more "sinister" than that (although that is sinister in its own way) - no conspiracies involving the apocalypse or ugly anti-Semitic money conspiracies - just fellow-feeling and common beliefs. If Israel swings hard left in 20 years, they will suddenly become the devil itself to the American Right.
The Evangelical support is definitely a big part of it too.
Evangelical = right.
They wouldn't like a hypothetical left-wing Israel either.
Notice how Maduro is the only dictator Trump isn't chummy with?
I'm curious whether folks think it's more accurate to describe the US as being loyal to Israel or to describe Israel as a client state / foreign policy proxy of the US
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
That's not it. The American Right likes the Israeli Right for the same reason they like the Russian Right - they have a lot in common. They think the same. There's nothing more "sinister" than that (although that is sinister in its own way) - no conspiracies involving the apocalypse or ugly anti-Semitic money conspiracies - just fellow-feeling and common beliefs. If Israel swings hard left in 20 years, they will suddenly become the devil itself to the American Right.
The Evangelical support is definitely a big part of it too.
Evangelical = right.
They wouldn't like a hypothetical left-wing Israel either.
Notice how Maduro is the only dictator Trump isn't chummy with?
Evangelicals and hardcore conservative republicans lean hardest towards pro-Israel support and evangelicals rate it as a very important issue at like twice the rate of non-evangelical conservatives. They are full bore on this issue and basically the biggest rocks of support Israel has in the republican voter base. And as this becomes more and more of a partisan issue, that becomes even more important.
Putting Israeli support on evangelicals doesnt make much sense given the general blank check the country gets from Dems.
The Democratic Party captured 74 percent of the American Jewish vote in the '16 election. Israel has cultivated a similar but deeper relationship with Jewish religious and civic organizations that they have with the American government, and that has translated to a lot of American Jews being taught that identification with Israel is central to Jewish identity.
That connection has been slipping in the last couple decade or so. Considering the growing political split between Israel and American Jews, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a major breach as the Boomer generation (who are extremely supportive of Israel) die out.
Putting Israeli support on evangelicals doesnt make much sense given the general blank check the country gets from Dems.
The Democratic Party captured 74 percent of the American Jewish vote in the '16 election. Israel has cultivated a similar but deeper relationship with Jewish religious and civic organizations that they have with the American government, and that has translated to a lot of American Jews being taught that identification with Israel is central to Jewish identity.
That connection has been slipping in the last couple decade or so. Considering the growing political split between Israel and American Jews, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a major breach as the Boomer generation (who are extremely supportive of Israel) die out.
We are already seeing this happen. There is, as far as I remember, an age gap even in the jewish community when it comes to support for Israel in polling. There is a growing general gap between Israeli Jews and American Jews opinion on a ton of issues too.
JERUSALEM — Israeli security forces may have committed war crimes and should be held individually and collectively accountable for the deaths of 189 Palestinian protesters in Gaza last year, according to a report published Thursday by the United Nations.
The U.N. Commission of Inquiry criticized Israel’s rules of engagement and said the majority of the Palestinians killed “did not pose an immediate threat of death or serious injury to others when they were shot.”
The report also noted that thousands of demonstrators have been maimed by Israeli snipers during the weekly protests along the border fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the report, saying it “set a new record for U.N. hypocrisy” and was “based purely on an obsessive hatred of Israel.”
The report estimated that as many as 23,000 Palestinians were injured by the Israeli military, including hundreds who lost limbs. It said Israeli snipers intentionally shot at journalists and health workers even though they were clearly marked as such.
So like, does this play into this whole thing in any way?
Putting Israeli support on evangelicals doesnt make much sense given the general blank check the country gets from Dems.
The Democratic Party captured 74 percent of the American Jewish vote in the '16 election. Israel has cultivated a similar but deeper relationship with Jewish religious and civic organizations that they have with the American government, and that has translated to a lot of American Jews being taught that identification with Israel is central to Jewish identity.
That connection has been slipping in the last couple decade or so. Considering the growing political split between Israel and American Jews, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a major breach as the Boomer generation (who are extremely supportive of Israel) die out.
There's a few reasons for that.
One, the majority of the Jewish American population is starting to hit the 3rd/4th generation point where the American side of one's identity takes hold over one's ethnic roots. (We're seeing something like this with the Cuban American community as well.) As a result, younger Jewish American individuals are identifying more with American culture and beliefs, which is putting them in opposition with the shifts in Israeli politics over the past two decades.
Two, the Israel lobby, as part of the greater rightward swing in Israeli politics, has moved from being more bipartisan to choosing to side with Republicans, for a number of reasons. The problem with this is that they're starting to see Democrats being elected to office who don't fear the lobby trying to push them out, similar to what we've seen with the NRA. This is in part why Representative Omar scares them - not only is she not beholden to them, the demographics of her district make attacks on her difficult to land. And if the Democratic Party as a whole shifts like this, they could find themselves without a seat at the table, like the NRA has with the current House.
Putting Israeli support on evangelicals doesnt make much sense given the general blank check the country gets from Dems.
The Democratic Party captured 74 percent of the American Jewish vote in the '16 election. Israel has cultivated a similar but deeper relationship with Jewish religious and civic organizations that they have with the American government, and that has translated to a lot of American Jews being taught that identification with Israel is central to Jewish identity.
That connection has been slipping in the last couple decade or so. Considering the growing political split between Israel and American Jews, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a major breach as the Boomer generation (who are extremely supportive of Israel) die out.
There's a few reasons for that.
One, the majority of the Jewish American population is starting to hit the 3rd/4th generation point where the American side of one's identity takes hold over one's ethnic roots. (We're seeing something like this with the Cuban American community as well.) As a result, younger Jewish American individuals are identifying more with American culture and beliefs, which is putting them in opposition with the shifts in Israeli politics over the past two decades.
Two, the Israel lobby, as part of the greater rightward swing in Israeli politics, has moved from being more bipartisan to choosing to side with Republicans, for a number of reasons. The problem with this is that they're starting to see Democrats being elected to office who don't fear the lobby trying to push them out, similar to what we've seen with the NRA. This is in part why Representative Omar scares them - not only is she not beholden to them, the demographics of her district make attacks on her difficult to land. And if the Democratic Party as a whole shifts like this, they could find themselves without a seat at the table, like the NRA has with the current House.
There are also internal Israeli issues that are impacting the relationship heavily. As part of the Orthodox influence on Likud due to the coalition, the ultra-Orthodox belief that Reformed Judaism isn't actually Judaism keeps creeping into government policy to the point that the Orthodox are attacking the Reformed's right to return. Since Reformed Judaism is, at 38 percent, the largest Jewish denomination in America, that is increasing the rift.
This is, on a more limited scale, influencing the relationship between Conservative Judaism and Israel, as well. While the rift isn't as deep, many Orthodox also do not recognize Conservative Jews as being Jewish, and Conservative Judaism is 33 percent of the American population. Orthodox is 22 percent.
All of which reminds me a lot about Margaret Atwood's warnings about fundamentalist governments. Everybody in the faith is of the same faith until the faith takes over the government, then it becomes time to sort out which denomination is the "real" one.
It looks like leadership hoped the resolution or whatever it ended up being would quiet everything down so they could move on and other members of ths party cried foul.
I agree with the thrust of Omar's points, and I'm very much in opposition to general Democrat support for the state of Israel as it currently conducts itself.
She did herself no favors, however, with the way she went about making those points. She started with Jewish money, then went right into cosmopolitan foreign allegiance accusations. That's the one-two punch of classic antisemitism stereotypes, and it needs to be called out.
Whether a resolution is the right way to go about it, or even committee stripping a la Steve King, I don't know. There are tons of valid points to be made about her being treated more harshly because she's black, female, and Muslim. It's a pretty narrow line there to find the fair path, and I think no matter where you aim, people will have legitimate grief that you went too far one way or the other.
I want something to be done, because I don't want to see the Democratic Party wind up like Labour. On the other hand, they're so far away from that, it doesn't seem like much of a risk at this stage. Things can change quickly, though, and setting the right precedent is important. It's a bit of a dance to "correctly" criticize in this case due to the need to avoid those stereotypes, but that's just how it is when you're dealing with any group that has suffered / is suffering from oppressive bigotry.
Triptycho: A card-and-dice tabletop indie RPG currently in development and playtesting
She technically (specifically?) accused politicians of chasing the money.
I don't know that makes me much more comfortable. That's 2 for 2 on the biggest Jewish stereotypes, just adjusting the aim to the politicians working with those Jews. And a number of those politicians, including some of the current loudest voices about this, are themselves Jewish.
It's a far cry from (say) King's open support for white nationalism. But we should have a higher bar for stuff like this.
Fleur de Alys on
Triptycho: A card-and-dice tabletop indie RPG currently in development and playtesting
She also, technically (specifically?), accused politicians of chasing the money.
I don't know that makes me much more comfortable. That's 2 for 2 on the biggest Jewish stereotypes, just adjusting the aim to the politicians working with those Jews.
It's a far cry from (say) King's open support for white nationalism. But we should have a higher bar for stuff like this.
They're not Jewish stereotypes when you're not describing Jews with them man. She didn't even say anything about Jews as far as I can find, only Israel and the lobbying groups that work on its behalf. We might consider that equating the two is what's actually objectionable.
She also, technically (specifically?), accused politicians of chasing the money.
I don't know that makes me much more comfortable. That's 2 for 2 on the biggest Jewish stereotypes, just adjusting the aim to the politicians working with those Jews.
It's a far cry from (say) King's open support for white nationalism. But we should have a higher bar for stuff like this.
They're not Jewish stereotypes when you're not describing Jews with them man. She didn't even say anything about Jews as far as I can find, only Israel and the lobbying groups that work on its behalf. We might consider that equating the two is what's actually objectionable.
Yes, saying Jewish people = Israel is (also) objectionable. That's different from recognizing that Israel is a Jewish nation. If you're going to criticize it, you don't use anti-Jewish stereotypes as a part of that criticism.
This would also apply to, say, a given nation in central Africa. A politician calling the government of the nation of Chad "lazy" (or even suggesting that their influence on American politicians is making them "lazy") should be subject to ample criticism, especially if they follow it up with some other stereotype in their next critique. Not a perfect comparison since antisemitic stereotypes are a bit more global but I hope it communicates the idea.
Triptycho: A card-and-dice tabletop indie RPG currently in development and playtesting
Posts
Case in point: what's happening to Omar right now.
It was never the tone; the substance of her arguments terrifies AIPAC. They're upset when she talks about dual loyalty because it hints at what they're actually doing, which is worse: asking US elected officials to subordinate their own country's constitution in favor of BDS legislation and threatening those challenging treatment of the Palestinians with political attacks and baseless charges of bigotry.
The folks pushing Israeli right-wing agendas in the US figure the opposition can't win an argument if they aren't allowed to speak, and there are more than enough politicians on both sides who are either ok with apartheid or can be persuaded into silence with a combination of AIPAC support/threats to their political futures. Conflating the act of pointing this out with antisemitism is all that this is (plus more than a dash of islamophobia in this specific instance).
I understand that but the fact is this really isn't an issue that can wait, the plight of the Palestinian people gets worse by the day. The killings, the economic blockade, the settlement expansion.
This isn't an issue that can wait, people's lives are at stake. Honestly I say it takes precedence over Mueller.
And make no mistake, US support is the primary reason for the lack of international action on this issue. Nothing will change without a change in US attitude/policy towards Israel.
If you're not paying attention it's easy to believe the narrative that Israel isn't doing anything wrong and that any criticism of them is baseless antisemitism, especially since it's so easy to pull out legitimate examples of real antisemitism.
Getting Trump out of office is the best thing you could do for this issue, since Trump is further to the right on Israel than any president in quite some time and nothing will change that while he is in office.
Once he's gone we can get back to ignoring the issue.
But congress can pass anti-BDS laws, Trump can't.
Absolutely not, remember Schumer supported moving the embassy to Jerusalem? Remember Schumer telling AIPAC the problem with the Palestinians is that they don't believe in the Torah? Remember all the congressional Democrats who slobbered over Netenhayu when he made his speech in front of Congress in 2015?
The Democrats are equally bad, if not worse, than Republicans on the issue.
So like, does this play into this whole thing in any way?
Interesting enough, if you were to use the metric of UN resolutions, America actually voted the most against Israel under the Reagan administration!
This was done earlier, and it doesn't matter, because people can understand context and know that it's still a rebuke to Omar, even if it's being phrased to not appear as such.
Yeah, it's nice that the resolution doesn't explicitly say 'Fuck Omar', but anyone who is paying attention knows what the situation is. It's not like they were rushing to get something like this out last week.
The former, because client states work to benefit the policies of their benefactor, not vice versa. That's why the relationship is so unusual - normally, the smaller state is the one getting orders, not giving them.
How much of it is still being driven by hard right evangelical folks who are utterly convinced they can fast forward the Apocalypse?
That's not it. The American Right likes the Israeli Right for the same reason they like the Russian Right - they have a lot in common. They think the same. There's nothing more "sinister" than that (although that is sinister in its own way) - no conspiracies involving the apocalypse or ugly anti-Semitic money conspiracies - just fellow-feeling and common beliefs. If Israel swings hard left in 20 years, they will suddenly become the devil itself to the American Right.
Neither. Within the space of middle-east politics the US behaves more like a client state for Israel. We give them all the military aid they want and unlimited use of our Security Council veto, and in return we get... some benefit that I've never been able to figure out. You could really see this weird relationship in play when the JCPOA was being finalized.
Israel provides a lot of intelligence and acts as a backroom facilitator when, say, we absolutely need to get a suspect tortured in an Egyptian prison.
The Evangelical support is definitely a big part of it too. As far as polling goes, overall support for Israel is actually the highest it's been since like the 90s but it's driven almost entirely by the issue becoming vaguely partisan. The right are all in, especially the evangelical community who care a LOT about this issue. The left are getting more skeptical, especially the younger types. (The numbers on how much actually seems to be a bit wild from the polls I saw. It's kinda all over the place)
I mean don't but if you do they'll totally tell you about their apocalypse hopes, at length they will tell you
https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
Evangelical = right.
They wouldn't like a hypothetical left-wing Israel either.
Notice how Maduro is the only dictator Trump isn't chummy with?
Evangelicals and hardcore conservative republicans lean hardest towards pro-Israel support and evangelicals rate it as a very important issue at like twice the rate of non-evangelical conservatives. They are full bore on this issue and basically the biggest rocks of support Israel has in the republican voter base. And as this becomes more and more of a partisan issue, that becomes even more important.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/05/ocasio-cortez-omar-israel-1203506
The Democratic Party captured 74 percent of the American Jewish vote in the '16 election. Israel has cultivated a similar but deeper relationship with Jewish religious and civic organizations that they have with the American government, and that has translated to a lot of American Jews being taught that identification with Israel is central to Jewish identity.
That connection has been slipping in the last couple decade or so. Considering the growing political split between Israel and American Jews, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a major breach as the Boomer generation (who are extremely supportive of Israel) die out.
We are already seeing this happen. There is, as far as I remember, an age gap even in the jewish community when it comes to support for Israel in polling. There is a growing general gap between Israeli Jews and American Jews opinion on a ton of issues too.
That goes in the Middle East thread.
There's a few reasons for that.
One, the majority of the Jewish American population is starting to hit the 3rd/4th generation point where the American side of one's identity takes hold over one's ethnic roots. (We're seeing something like this with the Cuban American community as well.) As a result, younger Jewish American individuals are identifying more with American culture and beliefs, which is putting them in opposition with the shifts in Israeli politics over the past two decades.
Two, the Israel lobby, as part of the greater rightward swing in Israeli politics, has moved from being more bipartisan to choosing to side with Republicans, for a number of reasons. The problem with this is that they're starting to see Democrats being elected to office who don't fear the lobby trying to push them out, similar to what we've seen with the NRA. This is in part why Representative Omar scares them - not only is she not beholden to them, the demographics of her district make attacks on her difficult to land. And if the Democratic Party as a whole shifts like this, they could find themselves without a seat at the table, like the NRA has with the current House.
There are also internal Israeli issues that are impacting the relationship heavily. As part of the Orthodox influence on Likud due to the coalition, the ultra-Orthodox belief that Reformed Judaism isn't actually Judaism keeps creeping into government policy to the point that the Orthodox are attacking the Reformed's right to return. Since Reformed Judaism is, at 38 percent, the largest Jewish denomination in America, that is increasing the rift.
This is, on a more limited scale, influencing the relationship between Conservative Judaism and Israel, as well. While the rift isn't as deep, many Orthodox also do not recognize Conservative Jews as being Jewish, and Conservative Judaism is 33 percent of the American population. Orthodox is 22 percent.
All of which reminds me a lot about Margaret Atwood's warnings about fundamentalist governments. Everybody in the faith is of the same faith until the faith takes over the government, then it becomes time to sort out which denomination is the "real" one.
It looks like leadership hoped the resolution or whatever it ended up being would quiet everything down so they could move on and other members of ths party cried foul.
She did herself no favors, however, with the way she went about making those points. She started with Jewish money, then went right into cosmopolitan foreign allegiance accusations. That's the one-two punch of classic antisemitism stereotypes, and it needs to be called out.
Whether a resolution is the right way to go about it, or even committee stripping a la Steve King, I don't know. There are tons of valid points to be made about her being treated more harshly because she's black, female, and Muslim. It's a pretty narrow line there to find the fair path, and I think no matter where you aim, people will have legitimate grief that you went too far one way or the other.
I want something to be done, because I don't want to see the Democratic Party wind up like Labour. On the other hand, they're so far away from that, it doesn't seem like much of a risk at this stage. Things can change quickly, though, and setting the right precedent is important. It's a bit of a dance to "correctly" criticize in this case due to the need to avoid those stereotypes, but that's just how it is when you're dealing with any group that has suffered / is suffering from oppressive bigotry.
I don't know that makes me much more comfortable. That's 2 for 2 on the biggest Jewish stereotypes, just adjusting the aim to the politicians working with those Jews. And a number of those politicians, including some of the current loudest voices about this, are themselves Jewish.
It's a far cry from (say) King's open support for white nationalism. But we should have a higher bar for stuff like this.
They're not Jewish stereotypes when you're not describing Jews with them man. She didn't even say anything about Jews as far as I can find, only Israel and the lobbying groups that work on its behalf. We might consider that equating the two is what's actually objectionable.
This would also apply to, say, a given nation in central Africa. A politician calling the government of the nation of Chad "lazy" (or even suggesting that their influence on American politicians is making them "lazy") should be subject to ample criticism, especially if they follow it up with some other stereotype in their next critique. Not a perfect comparison since antisemitic stereotypes are a bit more global but I hope it communicates the idea.