Caroline Glick: Democrats and the politics of projection
The Left's denunciations of Trump as an anti-Semite have come at the same time that the Democrat Party's hostility towards Israel and its supporters in America has become more pronounced with each passing day. Leftist anti-Semites have captured the party's base and control the progressive grassroots. They have intimidated pro-Israel Democrats into near silence on Israel and have made hating Israel an electoral advantage in primary races.Douglas Murray: The sly dishonesty of Owen Jones
The Left's rejection of Israel is now so overwhelming that last weekend, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez canceled her participation in a Peace Now memorial marking the 25th anniversary of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's assassination. Her move demonstrated that even Jewish progressives and an Israeli Nobel Peace Prize laureate who was killed for his efforts to appease the PLO are beyond the Pale for progressives today. Only Jews who reject Israel's right to exist are acceptable among the smart set in the party.
The Left's embrace of anti-Semitism demonstrates that its hysterical claims that Trump loves Nazis is nothing more than projection. And this isn't surprising.
Since 2016, the Democrats have repeatedly projected all of their prejudices, malicious actions and plans onto Trump and the Republicans.
Consider the issue of collusion with Russia. During the debate, Biden accused Trump of being "Putin's poodle." But just hours before, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee revealing that in July 2016, American intelligence agencies "obtained insight" into analysis by Russian intelligence officers that claimed then Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton "had approved a plan to stir up a scandal" against Trump which involved "tying [Trump] to Putin."
Clinton's campaign paid for the infamous Steele dossier alleging corrupt ties between Trump and the Kremlin. The smear file was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. Last week it came to light that Steele's primary source for his file was investigated by the FBI as a Russian spy.
In other words, the collusion that Clinton and later the FBI, CIA, the Democrat Party, the media and a special prosecutor accused Trump of carrying out with the Kremlin was actually conducted by Clinton and her campaign with active assistance from the CIA, FBI, the media and the Democrat Party against Trump. In accusing Trump, they were describing their own actions.
The projection of Democratic plans onto the Republicans continues still today. Indeed, their campaign is organized around a new one.
For example, in the chapter on the anti-Semitism controversy Jones is conscious of the tightrope he must walk — trying not to condone the open anti-Semites in Corbyn’s movement, but at the same time trying to defend his hero from the most serious accusations. Jones can only do this by re-writing or editing out parts of the story, including his own.
So while he is willing to address and condemn some of the more minor cases of anti-Semitism in the party he at no stage contends with the most serious accusations against Corbyn. There is, for instance, simply no mention of Corbyn’s campaign for and support of Samar Alami and Jawad Botmeh, two people imprisoned for bombing the offices of a number of Jewish charities in London. To raise such a thing would mean having to excuse it, condemn it or contend with it. Jones can bring himself to do none of these things.
It is the same with the wreath-laying at the graves of the Munich Olympic terrorists. Jones writes that in 2014 “Corbyn had taken part in a ceremony commemorating the innocent victims of a 1985 Israeli air strike, during which wreaths had been laid for the Palestinians accused of taking part in the terror atrocity at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich”. This is characteristically dishonest. First Jones drops in (and mis-portrays) an Israeli action; then he suggests that anybody might find themselves laying a wreath either at or near the graves of such terrorists; and finally there is that little sleight “accused of taking part”.
What Jones does not mention in his own role in this controversy. For in 2018, when the Tunisia wreath-laying photos broke, Jones was still the most prominent mainstream media defender of everything Corbyn did. While fighting to defend his hero Jones tried to minimise the incident, proclaiming on social media “No one has [presumably he meant ‘was’] killed by a wreath.”
Perhaps Jones the would-be historian is embarrassed by this statement — but in avoiding his own embarrassment he also avoids the job any honest writer would perform. For in precisely such moments lie the problem. In pursuit of their dream of getting a socialist into Downing Street people like Jones were consistently willing to degrade themselves, defame others and otherwise lose any moral sense they still possessed.
There is a rich seam of thought to explore here, but Jones is neither a good enough writer nor an honest enough thinker to perform the task. Perhaps he thinks that both he and the revolution have many more acts left in them — so we read pabulum like the idea that the anti-Semitism crisis could have been lessened if Corbyn had been more willing to “embrace people”.
#OnThisDay 1982: one of Livingstone and the Labour Herald's more notorious moments of the 1980s. Writing about Israel under the headline 'Creature of Terror', Livingstone included a paragraph about the Holocaust that was basically a direct lift from the far right. pic.twitter.com/XjuRv48Dln
— James Vaughan (@EquusontheBuses) October 1, 2020
United Nations? No, united peoples
After 75 years of the existence of the UN, not many achievements can be attributed to the organization. From the eyes of an ordinary citizen in a remote country, one may ask, "What has this organization done for me?" Instead of global cooperation in the face of threatening challenges, we instead witness a club of government representatives throwing accusations at each other, emissaries of senior world leaders taking pot shots at the opposition and flamboyant expenses.The Tikvah Podcast: Dan Senor on the Start-Up Nation and COVID-19
I have previously met with senior representatives of the UN and UNESCO so I understand they operate according to a predetermined policy. Therefore, I know better than to expect UN politics to suddenly behave differently tomorrow morning. In our current situation they have no chance of success. They get clear ideological lines from their respective heads of state and behave according to script without deviating right or left. It is clear that they are distinctly politicians and nothing more.
Nevertheless, a call for the abolition of the UN is not an alternative. It is still an important diplomatic space to meet and talk instead of engaging in wars and struggles. For the UN to function beneficially for humanity, however, would require turning it from end to end to set a higher goal, streamline the organization, and improve and upgrade it. The face of the UN is the face of the international community which depicts the face and state of every country and person in the world. And since every person is selfish by nature, his tendency is to care for himself only. In other words, we cannot expect anything more than the same from an organization that resembles and reflects the state of the world.
The next step that humanity longs for from a global organization is to act as an arena and platform for unity instead of division. Instead of glossing over and blurring the crises facing humanity with beautiful sounding words, it is my hope that the UN will join hands with other international organizations to put the interests and good of all the world's citizens at the center of attention. The call to action for the UN should be bringing people together through a comprehensive education program for social connection as a condition for societies where everyone is closer to each other. At the end of the day, it is the unity of the peoples that make the nations truly united.
The Coronavirus pandemic has undermined years of economic growth and sent hundreds of thousands of Israelis onto the unemployment rolls. How can Israel—the legendary “start-up nation”—recover from this economic crisis?
Dan Senor, co-author with Saul Singer of the bestselling book Start-Up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle, is one of the world’s leading experts on Israel’s economy in general, and its tech sector in particular. He joins Mosaic’s editor, Jonathan Silver, for a discussion about how the Jewish state became a global technology juggernaut, the prospects for integrating the Arab and ultra-Orthodox sectors into the broader economy, and the outlook for an Israeli recovery after the devastation of COVID-19.