As the neocon foreign policy fiasco plays out like a slow motion
viewing of the car wreck scene from The
Blues Brothers, the neocons are backing into their burrows
like frightened, angry wolverines. Like any other mustelid,
when cornered they'll attempt to make their opponent stink, in
the case of neocons by employing the smear. And
their favorite smear of all is to call opponents "anti-Semitic."
David Frum, of course, is
slanderer, and he has gone as far as to imply that the mere
use of "neoconsesrvative" is anti-Semitic. Well, Mr. Frum, it's
not our fault that many neoconservatives are Jewish. But
it's just as true that many neoconservatives are not Jewish,
and that far more Jews are not neoconservatives than are.
Frum's whole idea is absurd. Most Nazis were German. So, if I
were to mention that I dislike Nazism, am I being anti-German?
Just about every member of the IRA is Irish. Is coming out against
their views and tactics "anti-bog-trotter"?
In other words, Mr. Frum, stop being such an ass.
Another prominent neo-conservative hurler of the anti-Semitic
spitball is Andrew Sullivan. (Let's be clear: I find Sullivan,
whom I'd imagine is Irish, every bit as distasteful as Frum, whom
I was not even aware was Jewish until he began announcing it regularly.)
A brief look at Sullivan's exercise in navel-gazing... I mean
his blog... reveals that about every
fourth entry accuses someone or other of anti-Semitism. The first
instance I note is especially absurd: "The latest example: a story
in the left-wing Scottish paper, the Sunday
Herald, implicating Israelis in the 9/11 attacks. This
is not a fringe paper. Money quote:
So what, exactly, is anti-Semitic about that passage? After all,
it is an undisputed fact that five Israelis were
celebrating 9/11 across the Hudson from New York. Are we simply
supposed to never mention this fact? The author doesn't claim,
anywhere in the article, that Jews everywhere celebrated the attack,
or even that a single other Jew anywhere celebrated it. Does Sullivan
consider it anti-Semitic to even consider the idea that Israeli
interests might differ from American interests, or that the Israeli
government might act contrary to the wishes of the US government?
Is it also anti-Semitic to mention that Jonathan Pollard is in
prison for spying on the US and for Israel?
In another entry, Sullivan relates a story from a correspondent
about a party in LA. The correspondent met an Egyptian doctor,
a pleasant, cultured, man, and began discussing the Middle East
with him. At first things went well, but soon:
diatribe began with the stuff about how Jews truly control the
American government and society -- how policy in the mid-East
was completely driven by Jewish American interests -- this was
the same man who had agreed with me moments before how many of
the problems in the Mideast were the result of Islamic fundamentalism
and corrupt Mideast governments. "
Sullivan comments, "Nazi ideology is alive and well and in the
minds of many even in this country."
What in the above quote represents "Nazi ideology"? The speaker
never asserts that Jews are an inferior race. He never contends
that they should be confined to ghettos or expelled from the US,
let alone murdered. He never argues that the superior Egyptian
race ought to assert its military dominance over America, or Israel,
or anywhere else.
The views the Egyptian doctor expressed could be shared by someone
who was wildly pro-Semitic. Such a person might very well
say, "The Jews control America -- and thank goodness for that!
If it was in the hands of anyone less capable, we'd be in terrible
shape." One could also have neutral or even positive feelings
about Jews in general, and still feel that, representing a mostly
pro-Israel interest group, they are exerting too much influence
on US policy.
As a libertarian, I am relatively uninterested in who holds
the reins of power. My interest is in making those reins a lot
less powerful, so that I won't care so much who is holding them.
Therefore, I've paid very little attention to discussions of just
who makes up the "global elite." But it is clear that one's views
on who is running things are entirely orthogonal to one's like
or dislike for any particular group. After all, I don't think
many Englishmen who held anti-Irish views thought that the Micks
were secretly running the world!
For all of their tossing around anti-Semitism as a way to silence
their opponents, it is ironic how unabashedly anti-Moslem many
of these people are. For example, Sullivan favorably quotes Mark
Steyn saying: "There's something pathetic about a culture [Islam]
so ignorant even its pathologies have to be imported."
I challenge Sullivan or Frum to locate a single quote in the major
outlets they regularly smear that is nearly as unambiguously anti-Jewish
as that quote is unambiguously anti-Moslem. (Of course, there
are real anti-Semites out there, in whose journals one
can find real anti-Semitic quotes. If you write for LewRockwell.com,
you'll periodically receive mail from them calling you a "Jew
lover" and so forth.) But there are many, furiously negative quotes
about Moslems in the neocon outlets.
What's more, the anti-Islamic prejudices of these folks aren't
just some vague grumbling at a cocktail party. No, they recommend
Moslem cities, forcing Moslem women
into sexual submission to Americans, and forcibly converting
Moslems to Christianity.
Hey, but that's all in the name of good fun! You can recommend
policies that kill hundreds of thousands of Moslems and still
be a jolly fine fellow. But make sure you don't casually remark,
at a dinner, "There sure are quite a few Jews in Hollywood," or
it will be clear that you're a hatemonger.