Kevin Drum on the Taboo for Liberals Speaking Up on Israel
Drum should be applauded for his candor; it's important to understand why writers obey taboos. But his admission underlines the fact that the pro-Israel lobby is the loose coalition of journalists, thinktankers, outspoken professors, Hill staffers and lobbyists that Walt and Mearsheimer said it is. I don't think the professors went far enough; I think the lobby functions in social ways. My reading of Drum is that he is saying that he may feel sympathy but he's afraid to express it because he'll catch a lot of flak from his friends, somebody who he doesn't wish to offend. Living in Washington, Drum surely knows and hangs out with people who will take offense. The same reason Harvard professors who sympathized with Palestinians pulled their heads down after Larry Summers accused them of antisemitism: they were alienating colleagues down the hall. Those liberals justified their silence, Well I don't really understand the mess over there... Years ago the great Mike Kinsley wrote that his real fear of sticking his neck out on Israel issues wasn't the lobbyists, he was worried what his old friend Marty Peretz would say. Just as I worry what my mother will say, what my editor will say.
It's as if America depended for information about Fidel Castro from media companies based in Miami. These are all real forces, and not to be mocked or diminished. But because these issues are so important in the "war on terror", and because the Palestinians are suffering such collective punishment, a handful of Americans have chosen to overcome these concerns, and even accept the antisemitic labelling, in order to express their true response. Scott McConnell, Norman Finkelstein, John Mearsheimer, Henry Siegman, Stephen Walt, the Presbyterian Church—have walked through the doorway marked "sympathy for the Palestinians" and, yes, suffered great abuse, but lived. Isn't this what brave journalists (and even liberal ones) are also supposed to do?
Drum says that he doesn't comment on Israeli issues because he leaves commentary on things that are "fantastically complex" to experts on the subject matter- not to armchair blowhards, with chips on their shoulder- like Weiss.
Save the Observer- lose Weiss
Americans still believe that the Israelis represent all Jews who in turn should be loyal to Israel, a state which has the moral authority to use any means to secure its objectives, including kidnapping, assassination, torture, and mass murder and war against anybody, including other Americans. Objection of the mildest sort, or even reference to examples, e.g., the attack on the American ship Liberty, or certainly Israeli espionage, is anti-Semetic, forbidden in polite company, and precipitates electoral punishment and blacklisting by the Israeli Lobby and their willing advocates in American government. Are Americans incapable of learning?
If being called an anti-Semite was the only downside to criticizing Israel more writers would be willing to do it. But you also get calls in the middle of the night from people with low gravelly voices who ask your name and then hang up. A filmmaker I knew worked with Amnesty International years ago on a project documenting torture of Palestinians in Israeli jails. He subsequently found he couldn't get work in Hollywood anymore. He went broke, lost his house, and his wife committed suicide. A writer friend of mine who criticized Israel at a private dinner party was subsequently told by another guest, prominent in the publishing industry, that if my friend persisted in talking, or writing, that way the publisher would personally see that he never published again. These are not idle threats.
one would not be altogether surprised if an anonymous and concerned citizen paid a skywriter to write in the sky over New York "Save the Observer- lose Weiss".
This is, after all, a property owning democracy.
"It's as if America depended for information about Fidel Castro from media companies based in Miami."
Actually the Cuban community in Miami is not so different from the Pro-Israel camp. Certianly, in both cases a small community distorts American foriegn policy.
M&W note that, "Ironically, Israel itself would probably be better off if the Lobby were less powerful and U.S. policy were more evenhanded." Unfortunately, that does not lead them to question their framework. If the Lobby is bad for Israel, and bad for America, and not so good for American Jews, who is it good for, who does it work for? We have here a strange lobby, apparently without a constituency, a lobby that mobilizes quite extraordinary resources to the benefit of nobody -- less an Israel Lobby, more a Nihilist Lobby.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Ash18.htm
Their framework, as you call it, is simply descriptive, and perfectly correct. Unchecked zionist expansionism and supremacism is bad for Israel, bad for everybody, and indeed, if you like, 'nihilist'.
If the Lobby is bad for Israel, and bad for America, and not so good for American Jews, who is it good for, who does it work for? M&W specifically single out conservative Jews with direct links to the Likud party. AIPAC
On O'Reilly tonight, he questioned Cong. Ackerman and Schultz that since they (he assumed) would as Jews support Israel doing whatever it takes (torture, iron fist, police state, spying, detentions, etc.) to combat terrorism, shouldn't they support it for America too? To their credit, both congresspersons said the US should adhere to its Constitutional standards as should Israel theirs, as well as both nations upholding international law, although they chose not to comment specifically on how Israel operates in regards to its security.
It was disturbing to see the Israeli police state presented as a model we should aspire to. I feel that to prevent this sort of synchronization would be the duty of all government leaders (to say "elected" leaders would not be fully accurate) sworn to uphold our Constitution. Anything short of that is treasonous, for whatever purpose.
The lobby exists to benefit "conservative Jews with direct links to the Likud party".
Do you really believe the W/M hyperbole?
If the Lobby is bad for Israel, and bad for America, and not so good for American Jews, who is it good for, who does it work for?
Mike, you're either very clever or very stupid in the way you phrased that question. Your phraseology assumes that 'works for' adn 'is good for' are more or less equivalent. However, when your employer is psychotic, the things you do 'working for' him are quite unlikely to be 'good for' him.
"The bottom line is that AIPAC, a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on Congress, with the result that U.S. policy towards Israel is not debated there, even though that policy has important consequences for the entire world. In other words, one of the three main branches of the government is firmly committed to supporting Israel. As one former Democratic senator, Ernest Hollings, noted on leaving office, 'you can't have an Israeli policy other than what AIPAC gives you around here." W&M
I agree that there is hyperbole found in the paper. The main point is that due to the financial influence of AIPAC it is too politically risky to openly question Israeli policies on the floor of Congress. No hyperbole there.
Let's get a more nuanced report from Fidel. Here about his heroism, his indefatigability, about he ensures that fascist free libraries are closed, how batistaist 20 year old gays are rounded up like the traitors they are, about how he ensures that people are fit by not giving anyone not a party leader more food than daily minimum caloric requirements. Preach that truth Weiss!
BTW when is your exclusive from Nasrtallahs bunker explaining about how hiding amongst civilians is a heroic tactics and only evil zionists wear uniforms and separate civilians from the military!
Say no to collaborators, say no to Weiss.
No the risk is that too many of us learned our lessons from WWII and the abandonment of Czechoslovakia and the Jews of Europe. Never again actually means something to those of us not devoted to Marx and the class war.
"Never again actually means something to those of us not devoted to Marx and the class war."
-- huh? You mean the Islamists are actually crypto-commies? Or maybe the Nazis and Stalin were in bed together, with the Synarchists?
Oh heck. Lindbergh claimed the same stuff about silencing by powerful Jew forces before WWII. In fact, most anti-semites claim victimization and deprivation by powerful Jewish forces. Israeli foibles are the most frequently discussed on the planet. As for Prof. Walt/Mearsheimer, they are making a mint. If only the rest of us could suffer such persecution.