Melanie Phillips: From Congress to classrooms: Reframing the Israel narrative
Those who consider themselves to be centrists because they back a “two-state solution” may not grasp the full extent of the big lie about Israel because they themselves have swallowed it, at least in part.Jonathan S. Tobin: When Israel’s haters endorse a Jewish candidate
For fundamental to this benign-sounding rubric is a lethal misreading of the problem to which it is the purported solution. It assumes that this is a conflict over the parceling out of land between two sides with a legitimate claim to that land.
Not so. This is an Arab war of extermination against the State of Israel. The only proper response to such a war is to defeat it. A state of Palestine that was instead created for those still bent on Israel’s destruction would merely hand them the means to achieve their unconscionable aim.
Reconceptualizing this existential war as a conflict over territory creates a false moral equivalence between the actual Arab aggressors and their actual Israeli victims. As a consequence, Israel’s refusal to accept what would be terms of surrender to those still aiming to destroy it has been transformed into a stance of unforgivable belligerency.
This, in turn, has facilitated the whole narrative of colonialist dispossession, illegality, occupation, aggression, abuses of human rights and all the rest of the crimes so falsely laid at Israel’s door, in addition to the anti-Jewish venom that inevitably bubbles up to the surface in that particular sewer.
If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, the path to the resurgence of anti-Semitism in the West – now so brazenly paraded by the hard-left – has been laid by the so-called centrist advocates of the “two-state solution.”
That’s why this resurgence would not be stopped by the disappearance from the political scene of either Jeremy Corbyn or “the Squad” of U.S. congresswomen. It will not be stopped by better pro-Israel advocacy on campus. It will not even be stopped by removing certain education materials from British or American schools, desirable or necessary as all such developments are in themselves.
This poisonous tide will only begin to be turned if those who think themselves to be custodians of the center-ground realize the extent to which they too have drunk the Middle Eastern Kool-Aid.
It’s not clear whether the Squad, let alone Sarsour and Amer, can help Sanders keep up with Warren, who seems to have eclipsed the fading Joe Biden as the Democratic frontrunner. But she may not be radical or anti-Israel enough for AOC and her friends, as well as the likes of Sarsour.Michael Medved: ‘I Will Make of You a Great Nation’
But more important than the fate of his candidacy is the way that these anti-Semitic Israel-haters are using Sanders to legitimize their positions and further advance their efforts to ensure that support for BDS is a mainstream, rather than a marginal, force within the Democratic Party. Indeed, we should expect that Omar and Sarsour will trot out their endorsements of Sanders in the future as fake proof that they are not anti-Semites, despite an abundance of evidence to the contrary.
Right now, most Democrats are transfixed by the competition among their presidential candidates and their debates over how big they want government to be, as well as how much they will allow radical identity politics to dominate public discourse. Yet the steady advances made by peddlers of intersectional myths that demonize Israel, such as Tlaib, in mainstreaming their noxious ideology is a story that’s not getting enough attention.
The failure of the other Democratic candidates to call Sanders to account for his embrace of anti-Semites is discouraging. But in a party where Omar and Tlaib are treated as heroines and victims of right-wing smears rather than purveyors of hate, that isn’t realistic. Indeed, Warren’s efforts to snatch Tlaib’s endorsement away from Sanders indicates that despite the support of most of their congressional caucus and a plurality of their voters for Israel, the future of radical anti-Semites in the Democratic is all too bright.
Starting in 1881, some 2.5 million desperate, destitute eastern European Jews washed up on American shores to connect an ancient text to a young nation’s sense of its own special destiny. For the implacably confident citizens of the surging United States, these exotic newcomers provided new perspective on three mystical Genesis verses that had resonated with their forebears since the earliest days of British settlement.
“Go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you,” God commands Abraham (still called Abram at that point in the text). The Almighty reassures the puzzled patriarch by pledging a world- changing outcome to this directed journey into the unknown: “And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing.”
The Pilgrims and Puritans prayed for similar benedictions and connected their own “errand into the wilderness” with Abraham’s fateful mission to build a new, godly life in a promised land he hadn’t even seen. Proudly identifying themselves as “New Testament Hebrews,” they also cherished the biblical idea that the other tribes of earth would one day earn reward or punishment based on their treatment of the new nation God had decreed into existence. “I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse,” the Lord assures Abraham and, by implication, his descendants, far into the future. “And all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you” (Genesis 12:1–3).
With this formulation in mind, many of the radical Protestant doers and dreamers who ultimately planted a new civilization in North America embraced the notion that their cosmic purpose involved the protection of the children of Abraham—an idea they expressed in sermons and scholarly treatises long before any actual Jews turned up in their struggling New World outposts.
In 1648, for instance, a member of Parliament named Sir Edward Nicholas wrote an influential pamphlet that blamed England’s present problems on “the strict and cruel laws now in force against the most honorable nation of the world, the nation of the Jews, a people chosen by God.” This startling new attitude and Sir Edward’s bold description of the Jews as “our brethren” represented a striking departure from the well-established medieval view that they constituted “the spawn of Satan” and were worthy of torture, genocide, and expulsion.