From Farrakhan to Jihad.
March 15, 2019 Daniel Greenfield
I want to thank Minister Farrakhan for offering up a number of precepts that we ought to adhere to,” Rep. James Clyburn said, at an event featuring the anti-Semitic hate group leader.
Eight years later, to the month, Clyburn, now the House Majority Whip, defended Rep. Omar’s anti-Semitism. “There are people who tell me, ‘Well, my parents are Holocaust survivors.’ ‘My parents did this.’ It’s more personal with her," he argued, dismissing the concerns of Jewish legislators.
Rep. Clyburn is one of the most powerful figures in the House. He’s also one of Farrakhan’s allies in the House who had once rejected a call from Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center to withdraw from an appearance with Farrakhan and declared that he was “not bothered in the least bit.”
After protests against Omar’s anti-Semitism, Clyburn stayed the course by working to ensure that the resolution would not focus on anti-Semitism and would not name Omar.
Before the House resolution, which failed to condemn Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks, Clyburn and the CBC’s newest bigot hugged.............To Read More....
Showing posts with label Farrakhan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Farrakhan. Show all posts
Friday, March 15, 2019
Thursday, February 21, 2019
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
The Democrats Can't Escape Their Farrakhan Problem
Posted by Daniel Greenfield 5 Comments Sunday, January 27, 2019
Like a preacher tiptoeing out of a brothel, the Democrat Party quietly dropped its sponsorship of the Women’s March. Like most of the other lefty establishment groups slowly backing away from its pro-Farrakhan leadership, the DNC offered a non-denial and no condemnation of the group’s anti-Semitism.
Instead of condemning the March’s anti-Semitism, the Southern Poverty Law Center explained that it wasn’t going to sponsor it because “other projects were a priority.” Even though HRC and GLAAD’s names had vanished from the Women’s March partner page, the spokespeople for both gay rights groups claimed that they were waiting for clarification from their respective organizations.
That’s typical.
No one wants to be associated with the Women’s March and no one wants to be disassociated from it. The lefty establishment knows perfectly well that their activist base hates Trump far more than it opposes anti-Semitism. Much of that activist base, including the ones with Jewish last names, would turn out to protest Trump even if they had to do it side by side with Farrakhan, Hamas and Hitler.
But those same groups are wary of offending a handful of wealthy Jewish donors, and so have done their best to square the circle, making a symbolic covert gesture of support for the Jewish activists campaigning against the Women’s March while offering symbolic support for anti-Trump protests.
The Women’s March leadership was threatened enough by these pullouts to parade a few Jewish or Jewface wearing members of the anti-Israel Left to rubber stamp a fake makeover even as Tamika Mallory kept on defending Farrakhan during her media tour of The View and Elle Magazine.
But the Farrakhan problem goes well beyond the Women’s March. And it isn’t going anywhere.
In 1984, Jesse Jackson used an anti-Semitic slur in a conversation with Milton Coleman, an African-American reporter for the Washington Post.
"Let's talk black talk," Jackson had told Coleman.
For Jackson, who was running for president, that meant dropping casual anti-Semitism into the conversation, combining attacks on Israel with calling Jews, “hymies”.
When Coleman wrote about it, Farrakhan, a Jackson supporter who had campaigned with him, warned, “'We're going to make an example of Milton Coleman, we’re going to punish the traitor” and “one day soon we will punish you with death”.
Considering the Nation of Islam’s history of violence, this was no idle threat. Nor would Coleman be the last African-American journalist targeted by the NOI. A decade later, Chauncey Bailey, the editor of the Oakland Post, was murdered by a Nation of Islam splinter group supported by Rep. Barbara Lee.
Media outrage, not over Jackson’s anti-Semitism, but over Farrakhan’s death threat to a reporter, forced the Democrat presidential candidate to condemn Farrakhan, though the two men continued associating. Leftist supporters of Jackson, including Jewish ones, like Bernie Sanders, stood by him despite his anti-Semitic slur. Criticism of Jackson’s anti-Semitism was attributed to his opposition to Israel.
Jackson, like every single leftist anti-Semite, wasn’t an anti-Semite, but an anti-Zionist.
The Jackson-Farrakhan scandal was the template for the same debate that is still taking place a generation later in which Democrats defend their affiliations with Farrakhan as black empowerment, distinct from his bigotry, in which anti-Semitism by leftist racial nationalists is passed off as a critique of Israel, with Jewish anti-Israel lefties providing cover, and, finally, in which Democrats engage in a complicated tango with Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
Tamika Mallory, Carmen Perez and Linda Sarsour are in the eye of the storm because they refused to do what previous lefties had done in the same situation, condemn Farrakhan.
Under pressure, Barack Obama had awkwardly disavowed the racist on the campaign trail while making sure to refer to him by the honorific, “Minister Farrakhan”. Recently, a photo of the two men together at a Congressional Black Caucus event went viral, though few media outlets were willing to report on it.
Keith Ellison also disavowed Farrakhan, despite spending as much as a decade, and beginning his career in politics, in the Nation of Islam. Despite that, he seems to have continued associating with Farrakhan.
Obama and Ellison both adopted a ‘Jacksonian’ strategy, publicly rejecting Farrakhan while embracing him on the down-low. Lesser known members of the Congressional Black Caucus have gone on meeting with Farrakhan and even praising him, only condemning him in response to political pressure.
Most never have.
Tamika Mallory tested whether it was possible for a Farrakhan fan to become a national leader without condemning him. The Women’s March controversy is the litmus test, not over whether Farrakhan will continue to be an influential figure on the left, that’s been an inescapable reality since the eighties, but if that support can be public.
And the results are mixed.
Rep. Maxine Waters, who embraced Farrakhan, will head the House Financial Services Committee, without ever condemning him. That’s true across much of the Congressional Black Caucus.
It took over a year of hard work by Jewish activists to get to the point where the DNC no longer wants to be publicly associated with the Women’s March, but still won’t condemn it. Other lefty groups continue supporting the Women’s March and to much of the #resistance, the whole debate is a non-issue.
Louis Farrakhan is 85 years old, but the problem that he poses will easily outlive him.
Tamika Mallory clarified the central issue in her View appearance when, after defending the NOI and Farrakhan, she jibed, “Other people are obsessed with my relationship with Minister Farrakhan. I am obsessed with empowerment in the black community.”
It’s a familiar defense and it goes to the heart of the intersectionality fraud, which is not actually a movement of mutually supportive identity politics groups defending each other, but a loose alliance of identity politics groups prioritizing their own narrow agendas at the expense of everyone else.
Black nationalists want to continue working with Farrakhan, despite his hatred of Jews, feminism, gays, white people, and pretty much everyone, because he stands for black empowerment.
And bigotry is more often an inspiration, rather than an impediment to tribal empowerment.
It’s not just Farrakhan.
Black nationalism is shot through with anti-Semitic and racist figures who not only engaged in garden variety bigotry, but who viewed Hitler as a role model: (Farrakhan, Stokely Carmichael, Elijah Muhammad, Amiri Baraka, Marcus Garvey, and Eugene Brown, who actually went by “Black Hitler”). During his Nation of Islam days, Malcolm X could be seen palling around with the head of the American Nazi Party and would later boast, "I sat at the table myself with the heads of the Ku Klux Klan."
This history isn’t taught for the same reason that Obama’s Farrakhan photo was buried. It reveals everything that went wrong with the civil rights movement and the fight against racism.
Intersectionality inherited the old sins of black nationalism and created new ones. After decades of insisting that they had chosen Martin, not Malcolm, the Democrats made peace with political reality.
The Women’s March is the horrible consequence of that political reality.
The Jews are the odd man out in the ‘Jacksonian’ rainbow coalition of identity politics nationalists because the Jewish leftists who participate in such movements loathe any kind of Jewish nationalism. The only Jewish exceptionalism that they will occasionally admit to, in their militant commitment to universalism, is anti-Semitism. And hard lefties will deny even the existence of lefty anti-Semitism.
Intersectionalists claim that Jews are hated as white people or as Zionists, not as Jews. That has been the leading defense of anti-Semitism in the ranks of the Women’s March.
But that’s only half the story.
Beyond the depiction of Jews as the white oppressors of minorities or the Zionist oppressors of Muslims, are the raw tribal hatreds of the individual identity politics groups within the movement.
Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour both hate Jews. But their individual hatreds are the products of different racial and religious belief systems.
Mallory tweeted in response to Jewish criticism of her Farrakhan ties, “If your leader does not have the same enemies as Jesus, they may not be THE leader! Study the Bible and u will find the similarities”.
The Women’s March leader was invoking a particular strain of classical anti-Semitism alien to the generally secular white leftist women who make up of the ranks of her movement. And to Linda Sarsour’s own religious inspiration for hating Jews. It’s also a form of ancient anti-Semitism completely distinct from Zionism or intersectionality, but that by invoking Christianity speaks to more traditional elements within the black community.
"The fag's death they gave us on a cross,” Amiri Baraka, a popular black nationalist poet, savagely wrote, indicting Jews for inventing Christianity and alienating black people from black nationalism’s Hitlerian worship of the race. “They give us to worship a dead jew and not ourselves."
The Nation of Islam meanwhile believes that the Biblical patriarch Jacob was actually a Jewish mad scientist who created white people through genetic engineering thousands of years ago.
Even within the black nationalist movement, anti-Semitism takes a variety of racial, religious and anti-religious forms. That’s even truer of the intersectional spectrum where Zionism becomes an excuse for black nationalists, lefty atheists and Islamists to agree on a justification for their individual hatreds.
When the Democrats chose black nationalism, they also picked a tribal model over an integrated one. The anti-Semitism problem of the Women’s March is one of the many manifestations of that original sin. The tribal attacks on white privilege, on toxic masculinity and heterosexuality are different expressions of the same problem.
Identity politics killed tolerance and liberalism. All that’s left is tribal intolerance with intersectional coalitions building movements not around mutual love, but common enemies they can agree to hate.
The debate about the Women’s March centers around the question of whether Jews will be one of those enemies. History and the trends in current affairs, from the media to the streets, tell us they will.
There’s no new anti-Semitism. Only a very old one.
Intersectionality isn’t a new progressive movement, it’s an alliance of old grievances and older bigotries.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine at the above link.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Instead of condemning the March’s anti-Semitism, the Southern Poverty Law Center explained that it wasn’t going to sponsor it because “other projects were a priority.” Even though HRC and GLAAD’s names had vanished from the Women’s March partner page, the spokespeople for both gay rights groups claimed that they were waiting for clarification from their respective organizations.
That’s typical.
No one wants to be associated with the Women’s March and no one wants to be disassociated from it. The lefty establishment knows perfectly well that their activist base hates Trump far more than it opposes anti-Semitism. Much of that activist base, including the ones with Jewish last names, would turn out to protest Trump even if they had to do it side by side with Farrakhan, Hamas and Hitler.
But those same groups are wary of offending a handful of wealthy Jewish donors, and so have done their best to square the circle, making a symbolic covert gesture of support for the Jewish activists campaigning against the Women’s March while offering symbolic support for anti-Trump protests.
The Women’s March leadership was threatened enough by these pullouts to parade a few Jewish or Jewface wearing members of the anti-Israel Left to rubber stamp a fake makeover even as Tamika Mallory kept on defending Farrakhan during her media tour of The View and Elle Magazine.
But the Farrakhan problem goes well beyond the Women’s March. And it isn’t going anywhere.
In 1984, Jesse Jackson used an anti-Semitic slur in a conversation with Milton Coleman, an African-American reporter for the Washington Post.
"Let's talk black talk," Jackson had told Coleman.
For Jackson, who was running for president, that meant dropping casual anti-Semitism into the conversation, combining attacks on Israel with calling Jews, “hymies”.
When Coleman wrote about it, Farrakhan, a Jackson supporter who had campaigned with him, warned, “'We're going to make an example of Milton Coleman, we’re going to punish the traitor” and “one day soon we will punish you with death”.
Considering the Nation of Islam’s history of violence, this was no idle threat. Nor would Coleman be the last African-American journalist targeted by the NOI. A decade later, Chauncey Bailey, the editor of the Oakland Post, was murdered by a Nation of Islam splinter group supported by Rep. Barbara Lee.
Media outrage, not over Jackson’s anti-Semitism, but over Farrakhan’s death threat to a reporter, forced the Democrat presidential candidate to condemn Farrakhan, though the two men continued associating. Leftist supporters of Jackson, including Jewish ones, like Bernie Sanders, stood by him despite his anti-Semitic slur. Criticism of Jackson’s anti-Semitism was attributed to his opposition to Israel.
Jackson, like every single leftist anti-Semite, wasn’t an anti-Semite, but an anti-Zionist.
The Jackson-Farrakhan scandal was the template for the same debate that is still taking place a generation later in which Democrats defend their affiliations with Farrakhan as black empowerment, distinct from his bigotry, in which anti-Semitism by leftist racial nationalists is passed off as a critique of Israel, with Jewish anti-Israel lefties providing cover, and, finally, in which Democrats engage in a complicated tango with Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
Tamika Mallory, Carmen Perez and Linda Sarsour are in the eye of the storm because they refused to do what previous lefties had done in the same situation, condemn Farrakhan.
Under pressure, Barack Obama had awkwardly disavowed the racist on the campaign trail while making sure to refer to him by the honorific, “Minister Farrakhan”. Recently, a photo of the two men together at a Congressional Black Caucus event went viral, though few media outlets were willing to report on it.
Keith Ellison also disavowed Farrakhan, despite spending as much as a decade, and beginning his career in politics, in the Nation of Islam. Despite that, he seems to have continued associating with Farrakhan.
Obama and Ellison both adopted a ‘Jacksonian’ strategy, publicly rejecting Farrakhan while embracing him on the down-low. Lesser known members of the Congressional Black Caucus have gone on meeting with Farrakhan and even praising him, only condemning him in response to political pressure.
Most never have.
Tamika Mallory tested whether it was possible for a Farrakhan fan to become a national leader without condemning him. The Women’s March controversy is the litmus test, not over whether Farrakhan will continue to be an influential figure on the left, that’s been an inescapable reality since the eighties, but if that support can be public.
And the results are mixed.
Rep. Maxine Waters, who embraced Farrakhan, will head the House Financial Services Committee, without ever condemning him. That’s true across much of the Congressional Black Caucus.
It took over a year of hard work by Jewish activists to get to the point where the DNC no longer wants to be publicly associated with the Women’s March, but still won’t condemn it. Other lefty groups continue supporting the Women’s March and to much of the #resistance, the whole debate is a non-issue.
Louis Farrakhan is 85 years old, but the problem that he poses will easily outlive him.
Tamika Mallory clarified the central issue in her View appearance when, after defending the NOI and Farrakhan, she jibed, “Other people are obsessed with my relationship with Minister Farrakhan. I am obsessed with empowerment in the black community.”
It’s a familiar defense and it goes to the heart of the intersectionality fraud, which is not actually a movement of mutually supportive identity politics groups defending each other, but a loose alliance of identity politics groups prioritizing their own narrow agendas at the expense of everyone else.
Black nationalists want to continue working with Farrakhan, despite his hatred of Jews, feminism, gays, white people, and pretty much everyone, because he stands for black empowerment.
And bigotry is more often an inspiration, rather than an impediment to tribal empowerment.
It’s not just Farrakhan.
Black nationalism is shot through with anti-Semitic and racist figures who not only engaged in garden variety bigotry, but who viewed Hitler as a role model: (Farrakhan, Stokely Carmichael, Elijah Muhammad, Amiri Baraka, Marcus Garvey, and Eugene Brown, who actually went by “Black Hitler”). During his Nation of Islam days, Malcolm X could be seen palling around with the head of the American Nazi Party and would later boast, "I sat at the table myself with the heads of the Ku Klux Klan."
This history isn’t taught for the same reason that Obama’s Farrakhan photo was buried. It reveals everything that went wrong with the civil rights movement and the fight against racism.
Intersectionality inherited the old sins of black nationalism and created new ones. After decades of insisting that they had chosen Martin, not Malcolm, the Democrats made peace with political reality.
The Women’s March is the horrible consequence of that political reality.
The Jews are the odd man out in the ‘Jacksonian’ rainbow coalition of identity politics nationalists because the Jewish leftists who participate in such movements loathe any kind of Jewish nationalism. The only Jewish exceptionalism that they will occasionally admit to, in their militant commitment to universalism, is anti-Semitism. And hard lefties will deny even the existence of lefty anti-Semitism.
Intersectionalists claim that Jews are hated as white people or as Zionists, not as Jews. That has been the leading defense of anti-Semitism in the ranks of the Women’s March.
But that’s only half the story.
Beyond the depiction of Jews as the white oppressors of minorities or the Zionist oppressors of Muslims, are the raw tribal hatreds of the individual identity politics groups within the movement.
Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour both hate Jews. But their individual hatreds are the products of different racial and religious belief systems.
Mallory tweeted in response to Jewish criticism of her Farrakhan ties, “If your leader does not have the same enemies as Jesus, they may not be THE leader! Study the Bible and u will find the similarities”.
The Women’s March leader was invoking a particular strain of classical anti-Semitism alien to the generally secular white leftist women who make up of the ranks of her movement. And to Linda Sarsour’s own religious inspiration for hating Jews. It’s also a form of ancient anti-Semitism completely distinct from Zionism or intersectionality, but that by invoking Christianity speaks to more traditional elements within the black community.
"The fag's death they gave us on a cross,” Amiri Baraka, a popular black nationalist poet, savagely wrote, indicting Jews for inventing Christianity and alienating black people from black nationalism’s Hitlerian worship of the race. “They give us to worship a dead jew and not ourselves."
The Nation of Islam meanwhile believes that the Biblical patriarch Jacob was actually a Jewish mad scientist who created white people through genetic engineering thousands of years ago.
Even within the black nationalist movement, anti-Semitism takes a variety of racial, religious and anti-religious forms. That’s even truer of the intersectional spectrum where Zionism becomes an excuse for black nationalists, lefty atheists and Islamists to agree on a justification for their individual hatreds.
When the Democrats chose black nationalism, they also picked a tribal model over an integrated one. The anti-Semitism problem of the Women’s March is one of the many manifestations of that original sin. The tribal attacks on white privilege, on toxic masculinity and heterosexuality are different expressions of the same problem.
Identity politics killed tolerance and liberalism. All that’s left is tribal intolerance with intersectional coalitions building movements not around mutual love, but common enemies they can agree to hate.
The debate about the Women’s March centers around the question of whether Jews will be one of those enemies. History and the trends in current affairs, from the media to the streets, tell us they will.
There’s no new anti-Semitism. Only a very old one.
Intersectionality isn’t a new progressive movement, it’s an alliance of old grievances and older bigotries.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine at the above link.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Friday, January 4, 2019
The Racist, Anti-Semitic Black Left
How racial tribalism became the defining hallmark of the black Left.
January 4, 2019 John Perazzo
In a recent interview on the popular radio show The Breakfast Club, Temple University professor and former CNN contributor Marc Lamont Hill affectionately referred to Nation Of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan as “my brother.” Moreover, Hill pushed back against whites who suggested that he and other black pundits should, in Hill's words, “throw [Farrakhan] away wholesale” because of the latter’s long history of incendiary racial rhetoric. Noting that no one had ever urged him to similarly distance himself from what he describes as “extreme” conservatives like Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter when he was a Fox News contributor years ago, Hill now asks: “Why is only one set of people untouchable? And why does every black leader have to ritually denounce Farrakhan in order to sustain a position?”
Hill’s professed bewilderment vis-Ã -vis this alleged double standard is wholly unsurprising, in light of the very obvious fact that he, like Farrakhan, has shown himself to be quite fluent in the vernacular of racism and anti-Semitism. During a January 2017 appearance on a CNN panel, for instance, Hill took issue with black celebrities like Ray Lewis, Jim Brown, and Steve Harvey for accepting President-elect Donald Trump's invitation to meet with him at Trump Tower. After Bruce LeVell — an African American member of Trump’s diversity coalition — objected to Hill’s complaints, Hill characterized LeVell and all other nonwhites who were working on behalf of Trump’s agenda as “a bunch of mediocre Negroes.”............To Read More.....
January 4, 2019 John Perazzo
In a recent interview on the popular radio show The Breakfast Club, Temple University professor and former CNN contributor Marc Lamont Hill affectionately referred to Nation Of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan as “my brother.” Moreover, Hill pushed back against whites who suggested that he and other black pundits should, in Hill's words, “throw [Farrakhan] away wholesale” because of the latter’s long history of incendiary racial rhetoric. Noting that no one had ever urged him to similarly distance himself from what he describes as “extreme” conservatives like Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter when he was a Fox News contributor years ago, Hill now asks: “Why is only one set of people untouchable? And why does every black leader have to ritually denounce Farrakhan in order to sustain a position?”
Hill’s professed bewilderment vis-Ã -vis this alleged double standard is wholly unsurprising, in light of the very obvious fact that he, like Farrakhan, has shown himself to be quite fluent in the vernacular of racism and anti-Semitism. During a January 2017 appearance on a CNN panel, for instance, Hill took issue with black celebrities like Ray Lewis, Jim Brown, and Steve Harvey for accepting President-elect Donald Trump's invitation to meet with him at Trump Tower. After Bruce LeVell — an African American member of Trump’s diversity coalition — objected to Hill’s complaints, Hill characterized LeVell and all other nonwhites who were working on behalf of Trump’s agenda as “a bunch of mediocre Negroes.”............To Read More.....
Friday, November 16, 2018
Identity Politics and American Anti-Semitism
Posted by Daniel Greenfield 0 Comments Wednesday, November 14, 2018 @ Sultan Knish Blog
When Robert Bowers walked through the door of the Tree of Life synagogue with murder on his mind, he was propelled by identity politics. As a white supremacist, his brand of identity politics is more politically incorrect than the ones that led Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour of the Women’s March to support Louis Farrakhan, but it’s no more violent, racist or evil.
Before the massacre, the most recent high profile anti-Semitic attack had been carried out by a Muslim who was caught on video beating a Jewish man while shouting about, “Allah” and his hatred for Jews.
Another hate crime, also caught on video, was a violent assault with a baseball bat by a black man.
Such assaults are less devastating than the mass murder of eleven people, but also much more commonplace. They repeat from month to month and year to year. They make up much of the toll of anti-Semitic hate crimes so that they top the list of hate crime statistics every single year.
The Tree of Life massacre has been greeted with editorials mourning a “loss of innocence” by American Jews. Such editorials come from a bubble of privilege that is cut off from the way many Jews live.
In 1991, New York City’s first black mayor stood and watched while a violent mob whipped up, by among others, Al Sharpton, went on a violent anti-Semitic rampage in Crown Heights. The Crown Heights Pogrom, as it would become known, took three lives and terrorized a neighborhood.
Sharpton, the black supremacist linked to the anti-Semitic violence, went on to speak at the Democratic National Convention, host a show on MSNBC and become a regular visitor to the Obama White House.
The distance between Crown Heights and Squirrel Hill is more than mere geography, it’s social and cultural. Anti-Semitic violence by black supremacists and Muslim terrorists tends to happen in poorer, urban neighborhoods and is directed against a poorer and more religious class of Jews. White supremacist attacks tend to target more suburban, prosperous and less diverse Jewish areas.
Those are home to the same Jewish populations who are much more likely to write editorials about a loss of innocence. But innocence is a privilege that Jews in poorer urban neighborhoods never had.
There are Jews who live in proximity to neo-Nazis and those who live closer to admirers of Farrakhan and Hamas. (Though Farrakhan and Hamas both admire Hitler for killing millions of Jews.) The Jewish communities that endured a generation of race riots, and another generation of muggings, knockout games, rapes and murders, before often having to pack up and move out, from their American Anatevkas in major cities, have never had any innocence of anti-Semitism, only bitter experience.
It is no coincidence that the privileged are also more likely to be progressive. The hysteria over Trump is not born of experience of anti-Semitism, but inexperience. To believe that President Trump is anti-Semitic is a confession of privilege. It’s an admission that your experience of anti-Semitism is an abstraction, a series of theories and history lessons, rather than the awareness of an everyday reality.
It takes a great deal of inexperience of anti-Semitism to believe that it exists only on the side of the political spectrum furthest from you. Anti-Semitism is tribal. Those who hate Jews tend to be losers who are convinced of their own natural superiority and blame the Jews for their failure to achieve it.
You can find such people on the right side of the spectrum, but it is the left side of the spectrum that has been built for them. Hitler’s genius lay in taking the fundamental appeal of socialism, its state controls, welfare state security blankets, suspicion of meritocracy and appeal to mediocrity, and reframe them in racial and nationalistic terms. But he only emphasized the anti-Semitism in socialism, he didn’t invent it.
Identity politics does the same thing as National Socialism, combining the welfare state and anti-capitalist rhetoric with naked racial appeals, tapping into the supremacist convictions of failed groups, offering them special racial privileges, while blaming their failures on meritocracy and capitalism.
The biggest beneficiaries of the social mobility provided by both have often been the Jews.
There is very little difference between white supremacism and black nationalism. Indeed there was so little difference that Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam collaborated with the KKK and the American Nazi Party. There’s a much closer route between Obama and Hitler, than there is between Trump and Hitler. Just follow Obama’s photo with Farrakhan, the affinity of his mentor, Jeremiah Wright, for Farrakhan, Farrakhan’s admiration for Hitler, and Hitler’s admiration for Islamic anti-Semitism and his role in inspiring the Muslim Brotherhood. But that’s a route that the progressives choose not to follow.
While progressive Jews may deny that black nationalism and white supremacism are the same thing, the mutual admiration society between them makes a mockery of their denials. Anti-Semitism is a tribal problem. Multiculturalism evolved into intersectionality, spawning more tribalism, more resentment, and an alliance of the resentful in which Jews are not full participants, but growing targets.
As a society becomes more racially and ethnically tribal, it grows more anti-Semitic. The white supremacist attack on a synagogue in Squirrel Hill is one symptom of a much larger problem.
The progressive Jews worry about the rare outbursts of white tribal anti-Semitism because that is the not particularly diverse population that these proponents of diversity live among. The working-class Jews of the inner cities worry far more about the daily diverse tribal anti-Semitism that surrounds them.
That is a ubiquitous anti-Semitism that their progressive brethren neither understand nor care about because it is inconvenient to their politics and alien to their experiences.
While Jewish communities around the world, from Crown Heights to Jerusalem, mourn for the massacre in Squirrel Hill, it often feels as if such outpourings of empathy are not reciprocated. When Jews were being stoned in Crown Heights by anti-Semitic mobs, the progressive Jews told them to stop embarrassing New York City’s first black mayor. When Rabbis were axed to death in a Jerusalem synagogue, the “innocent” progressives blamed Netanyahu and Israel’s imaginary ‘rightward’ drift.
They did not care that their tax dollars were being used to pay the terrorists murdering Jews. Nor do they care that the MSNBC news network that they were watching was paying a pogromist.
This “innocence” of theirs has a high price and for now, Jews in Brooklyn and Jerusalem are paying it. While progressive Jews live in the fading golden summer of the suburbs, working class Jews have lived through generations of looted stores, ransacked apartments, and random violent assaults. The dream of the former, their political policies and ideals, have been the waking nightmares of the latter.
But the age of innocence is coming to an end.
America is changing. The same forces that made Obama have also made Farrakhan relevant once again. Muslim migration will transform America the way that it did Europe. The cities will feel it first. But they won’t be the last. The combination of political radicalism and tribalism that is driving out the Jews of France, Sweden and now the United Kingdoms will not pass by the suburban shtetls of America.
White supremacism is one vector for anti-Semitism. Identity politics has created a dozen more.
The shootings at Squirrel Hill were not the worst of it. Unfortunately, tragically, and horrifyingly, the worst is yet to come. And when it comes, the old innocence will vanish as if it had never been.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine at the above link.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
When Robert Bowers walked through the door of the Tree of Life synagogue with murder on his mind, he was propelled by identity politics. As a white supremacist, his brand of identity politics is more politically incorrect than the ones that led Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour of the Women’s March to support Louis Farrakhan, but it’s no more violent, racist or evil.
Before the massacre, the most recent high profile anti-Semitic attack had been carried out by a Muslim who was caught on video beating a Jewish man while shouting about, “Allah” and his hatred for Jews.
Another hate crime, also caught on video, was a violent assault with a baseball bat by a black man.
Such assaults are less devastating than the mass murder of eleven people, but also much more commonplace. They repeat from month to month and year to year. They make up much of the toll of anti-Semitic hate crimes so that they top the list of hate crime statistics every single year.
The Tree of Life massacre has been greeted with editorials mourning a “loss of innocence” by American Jews. Such editorials come from a bubble of privilege that is cut off from the way many Jews live.
In 1991, New York City’s first black mayor stood and watched while a violent mob whipped up, by among others, Al Sharpton, went on a violent anti-Semitic rampage in Crown Heights. The Crown Heights Pogrom, as it would become known, took three lives and terrorized a neighborhood.
Sharpton, the black supremacist linked to the anti-Semitic violence, went on to speak at the Democratic National Convention, host a show on MSNBC and become a regular visitor to the Obama White House.
The distance between Crown Heights and Squirrel Hill is more than mere geography, it’s social and cultural. Anti-Semitic violence by black supremacists and Muslim terrorists tends to happen in poorer, urban neighborhoods and is directed against a poorer and more religious class of Jews. White supremacist attacks tend to target more suburban, prosperous and less diverse Jewish areas.
Those are home to the same Jewish populations who are much more likely to write editorials about a loss of innocence. But innocence is a privilege that Jews in poorer urban neighborhoods never had.
There are Jews who live in proximity to neo-Nazis and those who live closer to admirers of Farrakhan and Hamas. (Though Farrakhan and Hamas both admire Hitler for killing millions of Jews.) The Jewish communities that endured a generation of race riots, and another generation of muggings, knockout games, rapes and murders, before often having to pack up and move out, from their American Anatevkas in major cities, have never had any innocence of anti-Semitism, only bitter experience.
It is no coincidence that the privileged are also more likely to be progressive. The hysteria over Trump is not born of experience of anti-Semitism, but inexperience. To believe that President Trump is anti-Semitic is a confession of privilege. It’s an admission that your experience of anti-Semitism is an abstraction, a series of theories and history lessons, rather than the awareness of an everyday reality.
It takes a great deal of inexperience of anti-Semitism to believe that it exists only on the side of the political spectrum furthest from you. Anti-Semitism is tribal. Those who hate Jews tend to be losers who are convinced of their own natural superiority and blame the Jews for their failure to achieve it.
You can find such people on the right side of the spectrum, but it is the left side of the spectrum that has been built for them. Hitler’s genius lay in taking the fundamental appeal of socialism, its state controls, welfare state security blankets, suspicion of meritocracy and appeal to mediocrity, and reframe them in racial and nationalistic terms. But he only emphasized the anti-Semitism in socialism, he didn’t invent it.
Identity politics does the same thing as National Socialism, combining the welfare state and anti-capitalist rhetoric with naked racial appeals, tapping into the supremacist convictions of failed groups, offering them special racial privileges, while blaming their failures on meritocracy and capitalism.
The biggest beneficiaries of the social mobility provided by both have often been the Jews.
There is very little difference between white supremacism and black nationalism. Indeed there was so little difference that Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam collaborated with the KKK and the American Nazi Party. There’s a much closer route between Obama and Hitler, than there is between Trump and Hitler. Just follow Obama’s photo with Farrakhan, the affinity of his mentor, Jeremiah Wright, for Farrakhan, Farrakhan’s admiration for Hitler, and Hitler’s admiration for Islamic anti-Semitism and his role in inspiring the Muslim Brotherhood. But that’s a route that the progressives choose not to follow.
While progressive Jews may deny that black nationalism and white supremacism are the same thing, the mutual admiration society between them makes a mockery of their denials. Anti-Semitism is a tribal problem. Multiculturalism evolved into intersectionality, spawning more tribalism, more resentment, and an alliance of the resentful in which Jews are not full participants, but growing targets.
As a society becomes more racially and ethnically tribal, it grows more anti-Semitic. The white supremacist attack on a synagogue in Squirrel Hill is one symptom of a much larger problem.
The progressive Jews worry about the rare outbursts of white tribal anti-Semitism because that is the not particularly diverse population that these proponents of diversity live among. The working-class Jews of the inner cities worry far more about the daily diverse tribal anti-Semitism that surrounds them.
That is a ubiquitous anti-Semitism that their progressive brethren neither understand nor care about because it is inconvenient to their politics and alien to their experiences.
While Jewish communities around the world, from Crown Heights to Jerusalem, mourn for the massacre in Squirrel Hill, it often feels as if such outpourings of empathy are not reciprocated. When Jews were being stoned in Crown Heights by anti-Semitic mobs, the progressive Jews told them to stop embarrassing New York City’s first black mayor. When Rabbis were axed to death in a Jerusalem synagogue, the “innocent” progressives blamed Netanyahu and Israel’s imaginary ‘rightward’ drift.
They did not care that their tax dollars were being used to pay the terrorists murdering Jews. Nor do they care that the MSNBC news network that they were watching was paying a pogromist.
This “innocence” of theirs has a high price and for now, Jews in Brooklyn and Jerusalem are paying it. While progressive Jews live in the fading golden summer of the suburbs, working class Jews have lived through generations of looted stores, ransacked apartments, and random violent assaults. The dream of the former, their political policies and ideals, have been the waking nightmares of the latter.
But the age of innocence is coming to an end.
America is changing. The same forces that made Obama have also made Farrakhan relevant once again. Muslim migration will transform America the way that it did Europe. The cities will feel it first. But they won’t be the last. The combination of political radicalism and tribalism that is driving out the Jews of France, Sweden and now the United Kingdoms will not pass by the suburban shtetls of America.
White supremacism is one vector for anti-Semitism. Identity politics has created a dozen more.
The shootings at Squirrel Hill were not the worst of it. Unfortunately, tragically, and horrifyingly, the worst is yet to come. And when it comes, the old innocence will vanish as if it had never been.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine at the above link.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Thursday, November 8, 2018
Farrakhan in Tehran
Liberals would prefer that he go away quietly. He won’t.
The Editors @TWS_opinions
There are disreputable characters that haunt the ranks of both Republicans and Democrats. The right has its David Dukes and Milo Yiannopouloses; the left has its Oliver Stones and Ward Churchills. Louis Farrakhan is certainly an embarrassment to Democrats. The Nation of Islam leader is an infamous and vocal anti-Semite with a long history of viciously racist rhetoric. Only last month he was heard on a video insisting that he’s not an anti-Semite, he’s an “anti-termite.” The comment drew criticisms from a few on the left—Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), Chelsea Clinton—but otherwise our left-leaning friends seem to prefer that Farrakhan just go away quietly. That’s understandable, perhaps, but regrettable nonetheless. .................. It’s tempting to say none of this matters, and that Farrakhan’s racist ideology has no purchase in American life. But Farrakhan boasts longstanding ties to and tangled relationships with several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, among them Maxine Waters of California, Al Green of Texas, and William Jefferson of Louisiana. Rep. Keith Ellison, the Minnesota congressman and deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, has tried unsuccessfully to obscure his longstanding ties to the Nation of Islam leader. Farrakhan boasts enthusiastic supporters in the Women’s March movement. And, of course, Barack Obama himself was once caught on camera grinning with Farrakhan. ............To Read More....
The Editors @TWS_opinions
There are disreputable characters that haunt the ranks of both Republicans and Democrats. The right has its David Dukes and Milo Yiannopouloses; the left has its Oliver Stones and Ward Churchills. Louis Farrakhan is certainly an embarrassment to Democrats. The Nation of Islam leader is an infamous and vocal anti-Semite with a long history of viciously racist rhetoric. Only last month he was heard on a video insisting that he’s not an anti-Semite, he’s an “anti-termite.” The comment drew criticisms from a few on the left—Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), Chelsea Clinton—but otherwise our left-leaning friends seem to prefer that Farrakhan just go away quietly. That’s understandable, perhaps, but regrettable nonetheless. .................. It’s tempting to say none of this matters, and that Farrakhan’s racist ideology has no purchase in American life. But Farrakhan boasts longstanding ties to and tangled relationships with several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, among them Maxine Waters of California, Al Green of Texas, and William Jefferson of Louisiana. Rep. Keith Ellison, the Minnesota congressman and deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, has tried unsuccessfully to obscure his longstanding ties to the Nation of Islam leader. Farrakhan boasts enthusiastic supporters in the Women’s March movement. And, of course, Barack Obama himself was once caught on camera grinning with Farrakhan. ............To Read More....
Louis Farrakhan, Live from Tehran
Democrats’ favorite hatemonger leads “Death to America and Israel!” chants in the Islamic Republic.
November 6, 2018 Lloyd Billingsley
Monday November 5, one day before the election, marked the resumption of sanctions on the Islamic regime by the Trump administration. Nation of Islam boss Louis Farrakhan flew to Iran to speak out on behalf of the ruling mullahs.
As Fox News reported, Farrakhan told Mohsen Rezaei, Secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council: “Today, I warn the American government that sanctioning Iran is a big mistake.” The eager Farrakhan failed to flag any mistakes by the Iranian Islamic regime, the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism. And Farrakhan took care to time his visit with an important event.
Thirty-nine years ago, in 1979, the Islamic regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini invaded the U.S. embassy in Tehran, took more than 50 American diplomats and civilians hostage, and held them for 444 days. Farrakhan marked the anniversary by telling law students at the University of Tehran, that “America has never been a democracy” and then led the students in a chants of “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!”
No one in America had ever seen a performance quite like that. On the other hand, in his live Tehran show the Nation of Islam boss was not advancing any new themes...........To Read More....
November 6, 2018 Lloyd Billingsley
Monday November 5, one day before the election, marked the resumption of sanctions on the Islamic regime by the Trump administration. Nation of Islam boss Louis Farrakhan flew to Iran to speak out on behalf of the ruling mullahs.
As Fox News reported, Farrakhan told Mohsen Rezaei, Secretary of Iran’s Expediency Council: “Today, I warn the American government that sanctioning Iran is a big mistake.” The eager Farrakhan failed to flag any mistakes by the Iranian Islamic regime, the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism. And Farrakhan took care to time his visit with an important event.
Thirty-nine years ago, in 1979, the Islamic regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini invaded the U.S. embassy in Tehran, took more than 50 American diplomats and civilians hostage, and held them for 444 days. Farrakhan marked the anniversary by telling law students at the University of Tehran, that “America has never been a democracy” and then led the students in a chants of “Death to America!” and “Death to Israel!”
No one in America had ever seen a performance quite like that. On the other hand, in his live Tehran show the Nation of Islam boss was not advancing any new themes...........To Read More....
Monday, October 22, 2018
So, Louis Farrakhan Can Call Jewish People Termites...And Not Get Suspended By Twitter
Matt Vespa Oct 18, 2018
Well, conservatives have more fodder against Twitter. The social media giant will not suspend, ban, or do much discipline-wise against Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who compared Jewish people to insects (via Newsbusters):
Well, conservatives have more fodder against Twitter. The social media giant will not suspend, ban, or do much discipline-wise against Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who compared Jewish people to insects (via Newsbusters):
In a video tweeted by Farrakhan, the minister compared Jewish people to “termites.” Gripping the pulpit, he called also called them “stupid.” This video was later tweeted by the official Nation of Islam account which Farrakhan leads. Ordinarily, this kind of behavior would get someone suspended or banned from Twitter, because of its hate speech policies. But not so with Farrakhan...........To Read More.....
Monday, September 24, 2018
The Diverse Hatreds of the Democrats
Posted by Daniel Greenfield 0 Comments Sunday, September 23, 2018 @ Sultan Knish Blog
On Saturday, the Human Rights Campaign, the country's top gay rights lobby, held its 22nd annual dinner. Top speakers included Joe Biden, who bemoaned the lack of acceptance for gay people, Anne Hathaway, who shrieked, “Let’s tear this world apart and build a better one”, and Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, who declared, “The age of bullies and bigots is not fully behind us”.
Holder would know. He was last seen posing with Louis Farrakhan at Aretha Franklin's funeral. The leader of the Nation of Islam is both a bigot and a bully. He also loathes gay people.
The HRC dinner was taking place at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center concurrently with the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Phoenix Awards.
Holder's boss, Barack Obama, had been caught posing with Farrakhan at a Congressional Black Caucus event. And multiple CBC members have refused to condemn Farrakhan. They include Rep. Danny Davis, who had called Farrakhan an “outstanding human being”. They also include Rep. Maxine Waters.
On Friday, the day before, Rep. Maxine Waters had received the National Leadership Award from the National Newspaper Publishers Association.
The NNPA is an association of black papers that includes Final Call, the paper of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Ford, GM, AT&T, Pfizer, AARP, Comcast, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation act as partners and sponsors of an association that includes a notorious racist and anti-Semitic hate group.
Ford had spent a long time trying to live down its past association with another anti-Semitic paper, The Dearborn Independent, only to end up associated with yet another violently anti-Semitic publication.
The HRC has its own extensive relationship with Ford. It has nothing to say about Ford’s NNPA role.
At the 2018 Black Press conference sponsored by the NNPA, which had previously honored Senator Kamala Harris, the First Place Feature Writing Award went to a Final Call article, “The Feminization of Black Men” which quoted Farrakhan’s claims that drugs were being used to turn black men gay.
"He can make you think you’re a homosexual, he’s feminizing the Black man," the racist leader declared. "You are the guinea lambs of White experimentation."
"We now have feminization and homosexual behaviors being normalized in the Black community," another of the article's experts warned.
The NNPA awarded piece then went on to quote Nation of Islam minister Wesley Muhammad, whose version of the ‘Pot Plot’ warned that that the government and the Jews were using pot to make black men gay.
“It’s the US government and the Synagogue of Satan’s scheme to use manipulated marijuana along with other drugs to de-masculinize and feminize the black male of America," Wesley warned at a mosque. “While it cannot be said that the Pot Plot that we are exposing is a strictly Jewish conspiracy, the Synagogue of Satan is the key player."
Last month, Mary Beth Maxwell was forced to resign as the head of the education arm of the Human Rights Campaign for using the ‘N-word’ twice. But nobody at the Congressional Black Caucus or the NNPA is resigning. Not for the racism, the anti-Semitism or the homophobia.
The NNPA’s tolerance for both shouldn’t be surprising. It’s headed by Ben Chavis, a former NAACP boss and former member of the Nation of Islam, who had tried to steer the NAACP closer to Farrakhan.
At the HRC dinner, Anne Hathaway denounced white and straight privilege, attacking the “myth” that “gayness orbits around straightness, transgender orbits around cisgender, and that all races orbit around whiteness.” The tidy intersectional formula though doesn’t remotely reflect reality.
Identity politics is a coalition of separate identity resentments united only by loathing the construct of an oppressive majority, of whiteness, straightness and whatever othering formula the left is offering this week. Once you get past those common bonds of bigotry, of hating the same people, unity falls apart.
The attendees at the National Newspaper Publishers Association and the Congressional Black Caucus dinner move in the same Democrat orbits, but have very different views of each other. Eric Holder goes from rubbing shoulders with Louis Farrakhan to pontificating for wealthy gay donors at the HRC dinner.
Wells Fargo and Pfizer sponsor both the NNPA and the HRC, funding both celebrations of gayness and of the promotion of conspiracy theories about drug companies, governments and Jews conspiring to make black men gay. It’s not just individuals, but politicians and major corporations on the ‘down-low’, appealing separately to wealthy gay men and the black political allies of an anti-gay hate group.
Nobody speaks about the essential contradictions of a movement that includes both militant denunciations of homophobia at the HRC dinner and the NNPA’s support for Farrakhan’s militant denunciations of homosexuality. The friction between gay nationalism and black nationalism is just another of the many schizophrenic frictions of the Democrats in the dark age of identity politics.
Identity politics nationalism is based on a thousand clashing convictions of the superiority of the group and the inferiority of outsiders. Every identity politics group has its own Farrakhan, the ‘extremist’ who is popular within that group because he preaches its total superiority and the inferiority of the ‘Other’.
No matter how much the left wants to unify pride and identity politics nationalism around hating an artificial idea of straight white men, a multicultural society is one with a multitude of hatreds. The more diverse America becomes, the more diverse the varied hatreds of the rainbow coalition will get.
The left killed liberalism, tolerance and coexistence. What’s waiting in the wings is Farrakhan
Apologists on the left insist that black people love Farrakhan, not because of his bigotry, but because of his message of empowerment. But Farrakhan’s message of ‘empowerment’ is based entirely on his bigotry. The Nation of Islam’s message of black empowerment derives from its theological conviction that black people are a master race while white people (and especially Jews) are genetically evil.
Farrakhan’s message of “empowerment” is the same as Hitler’s. It lays out a vision of a naturally superior people being oppressed by their racial inferiors through trickery and cunning. The NNPA awarded an article whose rhetoric echoes Nazi Germany’s Goebbels almost word for word.
The black empowerment of the Nation of Islam that the left praised is based on racism, dehumanization and power. When Obama, Holder, leaders of the Women’s March, and members of the Congressional Black Caucus embrace Farrakhan, they’re showing their own hate. And the farce of identity politics.
When Eric Holder flirts with black nationalists and gay rights activists, whom does he go home with at night? Democrats running for the White House inevitably head to New York City to meet with Al Sharpton who once ranted about, “Greek homos”, and then condemn homophobia. Maxine Waters plays aunt to the #resistance of white lefties, but hugs Louis Farrakhan and collects an award from a press association that includes Farrakhan’s Final Call, with its claims of a plot to make black men gay.
The Democrats are all on the ‘down-low’, flirting with bigots and then condemning bigotry.
Corporations throw money at both the NNPA and the HRC, and any other diverse dinner they can find. The media could expose the contradictions, but it chooses to ignore principles for political expediency.
The obsessive accusations of bigotry aimed at Republicans are a typical example of projection. The left needs to believe that Republicans are bigots so that its members can pretend that they aren’t. As the devil’s bargain with identity politics takes hold, the accusations of bigotry grow shriller, not because Republicans have become more bigoted, but because the Dems are dealing with more internal bigotry.
The schizoid nature of identity politics is turning the Democrats into bigots who scream about bigotry.
And the more they scream, the more bigoted they are.
Meanwhile the NNPA, an organization that includes a racist paper put out by a racist hate group, is sponsored by Ford, GM, Bill Gates, AT&T, MillerCoors, the AARP, Coca Cola, Macy's, Toyota, VW, Pfizer, Wells Fargo and many other major corporations and organizations. Racism is big business once again.
Major corporations have gotten behind racism and anti-Semitism because the Democrats have.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Holder would know. He was last seen posing with Louis Farrakhan at Aretha Franklin's funeral. The leader of the Nation of Islam is both a bigot and a bully. He also loathes gay people.
The HRC dinner was taking place at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center concurrently with the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Phoenix Awards.
Holder's boss, Barack Obama, had been caught posing with Farrakhan at a Congressional Black Caucus event. And multiple CBC members have refused to condemn Farrakhan. They include Rep. Danny Davis, who had called Farrakhan an “outstanding human being”. They also include Rep. Maxine Waters.
On Friday, the day before, Rep. Maxine Waters had received the National Leadership Award from the National Newspaper Publishers Association.
The NNPA is an association of black papers that includes Final Call, the paper of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Ford, GM, AT&T, Pfizer, AARP, Comcast, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation act as partners and sponsors of an association that includes a notorious racist and anti-Semitic hate group.
Ford had spent a long time trying to live down its past association with another anti-Semitic paper, The Dearborn Independent, only to end up associated with yet another violently anti-Semitic publication.
The HRC has its own extensive relationship with Ford. It has nothing to say about Ford’s NNPA role.
At the 2018 Black Press conference sponsored by the NNPA, which had previously honored Senator Kamala Harris, the First Place Feature Writing Award went to a Final Call article, “The Feminization of Black Men” which quoted Farrakhan’s claims that drugs were being used to turn black men gay.
"He can make you think you’re a homosexual, he’s feminizing the Black man," the racist leader declared. "You are the guinea lambs of White experimentation."
"We now have feminization and homosexual behaviors being normalized in the Black community," another of the article's experts warned.
The NNPA awarded piece then went on to quote Nation of Islam minister Wesley Muhammad, whose version of the ‘Pot Plot’ warned that that the government and the Jews were using pot to make black men gay.
“It’s the US government and the Synagogue of Satan’s scheme to use manipulated marijuana along with other drugs to de-masculinize and feminize the black male of America," Wesley warned at a mosque. “While it cannot be said that the Pot Plot that we are exposing is a strictly Jewish conspiracy, the Synagogue of Satan is the key player."
Last month, Mary Beth Maxwell was forced to resign as the head of the education arm of the Human Rights Campaign for using the ‘N-word’ twice. But nobody at the Congressional Black Caucus or the NNPA is resigning. Not for the racism, the anti-Semitism or the homophobia.
The NNPA’s tolerance for both shouldn’t be surprising. It’s headed by Ben Chavis, a former NAACP boss and former member of the Nation of Islam, who had tried to steer the NAACP closer to Farrakhan.
At the HRC dinner, Anne Hathaway denounced white and straight privilege, attacking the “myth” that “gayness orbits around straightness, transgender orbits around cisgender, and that all races orbit around whiteness.” The tidy intersectional formula though doesn’t remotely reflect reality.
Identity politics is a coalition of separate identity resentments united only by loathing the construct of an oppressive majority, of whiteness, straightness and whatever othering formula the left is offering this week. Once you get past those common bonds of bigotry, of hating the same people, unity falls apart.
The attendees at the National Newspaper Publishers Association and the Congressional Black Caucus dinner move in the same Democrat orbits, but have very different views of each other. Eric Holder goes from rubbing shoulders with Louis Farrakhan to pontificating for wealthy gay donors at the HRC dinner.
Wells Fargo and Pfizer sponsor both the NNPA and the HRC, funding both celebrations of gayness and of the promotion of conspiracy theories about drug companies, governments and Jews conspiring to make black men gay. It’s not just individuals, but politicians and major corporations on the ‘down-low’, appealing separately to wealthy gay men and the black political allies of an anti-gay hate group.
Nobody speaks about the essential contradictions of a movement that includes both militant denunciations of homophobia at the HRC dinner and the NNPA’s support for Farrakhan’s militant denunciations of homosexuality. The friction between gay nationalism and black nationalism is just another of the many schizophrenic frictions of the Democrats in the dark age of identity politics.
Identity politics nationalism is based on a thousand clashing convictions of the superiority of the group and the inferiority of outsiders. Every identity politics group has its own Farrakhan, the ‘extremist’ who is popular within that group because he preaches its total superiority and the inferiority of the ‘Other’.
No matter how much the left wants to unify pride and identity politics nationalism around hating an artificial idea of straight white men, a multicultural society is one with a multitude of hatreds. The more diverse America becomes, the more diverse the varied hatreds of the rainbow coalition will get.
The left killed liberalism, tolerance and coexistence. What’s waiting in the wings is Farrakhan
Apologists on the left insist that black people love Farrakhan, not because of his bigotry, but because of his message of empowerment. But Farrakhan’s message of ‘empowerment’ is based entirely on his bigotry. The Nation of Islam’s message of black empowerment derives from its theological conviction that black people are a master race while white people (and especially Jews) are genetically evil.
Farrakhan’s message of “empowerment” is the same as Hitler’s. It lays out a vision of a naturally superior people being oppressed by their racial inferiors through trickery and cunning. The NNPA awarded an article whose rhetoric echoes Nazi Germany’s Goebbels almost word for word.
The black empowerment of the Nation of Islam that the left praised is based on racism, dehumanization and power. When Obama, Holder, leaders of the Women’s March, and members of the Congressional Black Caucus embrace Farrakhan, they’re showing their own hate. And the farce of identity politics.
When Eric Holder flirts with black nationalists and gay rights activists, whom does he go home with at night? Democrats running for the White House inevitably head to New York City to meet with Al Sharpton who once ranted about, “Greek homos”, and then condemn homophobia. Maxine Waters plays aunt to the #resistance of white lefties, but hugs Louis Farrakhan and collects an award from a press association that includes Farrakhan’s Final Call, with its claims of a plot to make black men gay.
The Democrats are all on the ‘down-low’, flirting with bigots and then condemning bigotry.
Corporations throw money at both the NNPA and the HRC, and any other diverse dinner they can find. The media could expose the contradictions, but it chooses to ignore principles for political expediency.
The obsessive accusations of bigotry aimed at Republicans are a typical example of projection. The left needs to believe that Republicans are bigots so that its members can pretend that they aren’t. As the devil’s bargain with identity politics takes hold, the accusations of bigotry grow shriller, not because Republicans have become more bigoted, but because the Dems are dealing with more internal bigotry.
The schizoid nature of identity politics is turning the Democrats into bigots who scream about bigotry.
And the more they scream, the more bigoted they are.
Meanwhile the NNPA, an organization that includes a racist paper put out by a racist hate group, is sponsored by Ford, GM, Bill Gates, AT&T, MillerCoors, the AARP, Coca Cola, Macy's, Toyota, VW, Pfizer, Wells Fargo and many other major corporations and organizations. Racism is big business once again.
Major corporations have gotten behind racism and anti-Semitism because the Democrats have.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Intersectionality, Tribalism and Farrakhan
A movement of bigotries can only divide us.
March 20, 2018Daniel Greenfield
A funny thing happened on the way to the intersectional future. The proverbial knapsack was unpacked in the Women’s March and inside wasn’t just racial tribalism, but racial and religious supremacism. Why do Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour of the Women’s March like Farrakhan and his hate group?
The Nation of Islam preaches that black people are the master race. It doesn’t just hate white people, Jews and a whole bunch of other folks. It hates them out of a conviction in its own superiority. According to its teachings, “the Blackman is the original man” and lighter skinned people were “devils” created by an evil mad scientist to rule over black people until they are destroyed by UFOs. It even teaches that monkeys are descended from white people.
Progressive media essays defending Obama, Rep. Keith Ellison, Rep. Danny Davis, Mallory and other black leaders for their Farrakhan links have urged concerned liberals to look at the positive aspects of the Nation of Islam, its love for black people, not the negative, its hatred for white people. But it is the “positive” that is the problem..........The clown car of identity politics runs smoothest when it has a common enemy: white people. ............These “rainbow coalitions” of racist radicals don’t fight bigotry; they mobilize bigots for racial wars..........To Read More....
March 20, 2018Daniel Greenfield
A funny thing happened on the way to the intersectional future. The proverbial knapsack was unpacked in the Women’s March and inside wasn’t just racial tribalism, but racial and religious supremacism. Why do Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour of the Women’s March like Farrakhan and his hate group?
The Nation of Islam preaches that black people are the master race. It doesn’t just hate white people, Jews and a whole bunch of other folks. It hates them out of a conviction in its own superiority. According to its teachings, “the Blackman is the original man” and lighter skinned people were “devils” created by an evil mad scientist to rule over black people until they are destroyed by UFOs. It even teaches that monkeys are descended from white people.
Progressive media essays defending Obama, Rep. Keith Ellison, Rep. Danny Davis, Mallory and other black leaders for their Farrakhan links have urged concerned liberals to look at the positive aspects of the Nation of Islam, its love for black people, not the negative, its hatred for white people. But it is the “positive” that is the problem..........The clown car of identity politics runs smoothest when it has a common enemy: white people. ............These “rainbow coalitions” of racist radicals don’t fight bigotry; they mobilize bigots for racial wars..........To Read More....
Thursday, March 15, 2018
An Obama Photo Worth a Thousand Lies
Posted by Daniel Greenfield 2 Comments Wednesday, March 14, 2018
When a a major Obama news photo story broke, the media was there to capture it. A 2-year-old girl was photographed looking at a really terrible painting of Michelle Obama.
"'A moment of awe': Photo of little girl captivated by Michelle Obama portrait goes viral," Washington Post cheered. "Little girl awestruck by Michelle Obama's portrait believes she's a queen," urgently reported CNN. The sum total of this story is that a little girl looked at a portrait of Michelle.
Eat your heart out, North Korea. Our fake news propaganda is even tackier than yours.
Recently, a photo was released of Barack Obama meeting with Louis Farrakhan. The photo had been suppressed all these years to protect Obama’s career. Farrakhan was the racist leader of a hate group who had praised Hitler and described Jews as “satanic”. And yet he had met with the future president at a Congressional Black Caucus event. A CBC member, Rep. Danny Davis, had even praised Farrakhan.
You might think there’s a story in all that. And you would be wrong.
There isn’t a single Washington Post story on the photo. Not one. The same paper that believed its readers needed to be informed that a little girl had been photographed looking at a bad painting of Michelle Obama hasn’t found the time to report on the cover up of a meeting between top Democrats, including a future president, and the leader of a racist hate group that had once allied with the KKK.
It’s not that the Washington Post can’t report on Farrakhan. Or use Farrakhan to attack a president.
In ’15, the Post ran, “The bigotry of Trump and Farrakhan” and in ’16, “Why the Nation of Islam is praising Donald Trump”. Its stories about Obama and Farrakhan insist that the two men hate each other. A ’15 piece even attempted to link Farrakhan to Clarence Thomas, instead of Obama.
The Washington Post can report on Farrakhan when attacking Republicans. It just won’t report on Obama’s links to Farrakhan. Neither will CNN. The only mentions of the photo on its site come from CNN personalities like Jake Tapper and Michael Smerconish. CNN found the time to report on a photo of a dog’s ear that it claimed looked like President Trump. But not on a photo of Obama and Farrakhan.
I reached out to Washington Post editor Marty Baron and media columnist Margaret Sullivan asking them to explain their paper’s embargo on the Farrakhan photo. There has been no response.
Instead of coverage, the Washington Post has engaged in a cover up.
Ever since Obama left office, the media has reported on all sorts of photos of him. None of these photos are actually significant. The stories are puff pieces of the kind you expect to find in North Korea.
The New York Times, the Washington Post, Time and other media outlets found it vital over the years to report on a photo of a boy patting Obama on the head. They continued revisiting the photo even after Obama was out of office. And then ran stories of the boy looking back on that “historic” head patting.
If only they had done a fraction of the research on a photo of Obama meeting with a hate group leader at an official Democrat function as they did on a photo of him mugging for the camera with a little boy.
"Photo speaks volumes about Obama and race," is how the Washington Post wrote it up. Does the photo of Obama with a black nationalist racist leader who praised Hitler say anything about race?
Nah.
The Washington Post dedicated yet another piece to yet another photo of Obama and a little boy. “A touched cheek and hope for the future,” it declared. CNN, for its part, ran, "Obama reacts to child's White House tantrum." The media finds staged photos of its beloved leader as newsworthy as any state propaganda agency in a dictatorship. But actual newsworthy photos get buried out back at midnight.
The propaganda photos were mostly taken by Pete Souza, Obama's Official White House Photographer. Souza had been brought on board to do his best Leni Riefenstahl shtick since 2005 when the Chicago Tribune assigned him to "document" Obama's first year in the Senate. That turned into a book, “The Rise of Barack Obama”, released just in time for the full launch of the Obama presidential campaign.
New senators don't normally have a former White House photog following them around. But Obama was being groomed for the White House even before he walked into the Senate. Souza was selected for the Chief Photo Propagandist gig by the Tribune’s Jeff Zeleny in ’04. Zeleny later became infamous, after switching to the New York Times, for asking Obama how “enchanted” he was by his first 100 days.
Obama wasn’t enchanted, but the media was. It was the Chicago Tribune whose dirty trick of unsealing the divorce records of Obama’s Republican opponent got him to the Senate. And having used dirty tricks to get him there, it funded his hagiography without reporting it as a campaign contribution.
Behind the cute propaganda photos was a darker truth.
The White House Correspondents Association protested the ban on independent photographers. “Journalists are routinely being denied the right to photograph or videotape the President while he is performing his official duties,” they complained.
While President Trump allows the media to photograph him as much as its shutterbugs want, Obama’s official image was a carefully manufactured collaboration made to appear casual and natural.Instead of risking unflattering shots, Obama Inc. just tossed out propaganda pics from Pete. But photojournalists also participated in staging photos of Obama.
During his live speeches, still photographers would be kept out to avoid any unflattering pictures of the beloved leader moving his simpering lips. Then when he had finished speaking, the photogs were allowed in to take posed shots of Obama pretending to speak even while he was saying nothing.
That is a good summary of how the media covered Obama and how it’s still covering for him.
The media found the time to turn 5 different photos of Obama posing with kids into stories. It pretended that some of these photos, taken with African-American children, said something about race.
No, they didn’t.
The photo that does say something about race is the one of Obama smiling next to a notorious racist. And how many other photos like it remain buried? How many are locked away in a vault somewhere, like the Los Angeles Times’ infamous Obama Khalidi tape, awaiting the day when they no longer matter?
The Obama Farrakhan photo can’t be locked up again. But mention of it can be locked away by the media which will instead urgently report on a photo of a little girl looking at a portrait of Michelle Obama. Or a photo of a little boy patting Obama on the head. Or Obama with a baby.
Just like the countless propaganda photos and posters of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong-un with the kiddies. Here’s an adorable photo of the North Korean dictator at an orphanage. You won’t believe how cute this photo of Stalin holding a little girl is. Especially once you find out he murdered her parents. This snap of Hitler with the daughter of his chief propagandist, who was murdered when Hitler’s doctor forced cyanide tablets into her mouth, was meant to make people think he wasn’t a monster.
And this shot of Saddam Hussein ruffling the hair of a 5-year-old British hostage will melt your heart.
There’s a reason that dictators are often depicted with children. Yes, it makes them seem cuddlier. But it’s also the essence of tyranny for the servants of the people to play the parents of the people instead.
The people are their children who need to be told what to do and disciplined when we misbehave.
Soviet propaganda named Stalin, “Father of Nations”. (When he invaded other nations, he was just exercising his parental prerogatives.) Hitler was the “Father of the German People”. And Obama?
“The President of the United States is, you know, our boss. But also, you know, the president and the first lady are kind of like the mom and the dad of the country. And when your dad says something, you listen, “ said Chris Rock, at a gun control rally back in the Obama era.
And you don’t need to ask why daddy is kissing Louis Farrakhan. It’s none of your business.
That’s what the media is really telling us. And it’s telling that we have the same media as Russia, China and North Korea that runs propaganda photos of its beloved leader while smearing his opponents.
The media’s Obama kiddy photos and its sullen silence about the Farrakhan photos do tell us something. They tell us that we narrowly survived a cult of personality. And that we aren’t out of the woods yet.
The dictator is out of the White House. But his lackeys still control the news.
Change will come when the Berlin Wall of silence about the Farrakhan photo falls and when the Fuhrerbunker in which the Khalidi tape is buried pops open. We’ll know when the spying, the lies, the dirty tricks of the tyranny under which we’re still living come crashing down around its heads.
And then we’ll know that we are finally free.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
"'A moment of awe': Photo of little girl captivated by Michelle Obama portrait goes viral," Washington Post cheered. "Little girl awestruck by Michelle Obama's portrait believes she's a queen," urgently reported CNN. The sum total of this story is that a little girl looked at a portrait of Michelle.
Eat your heart out, North Korea. Our fake news propaganda is even tackier than yours.
Recently, a photo was released of Barack Obama meeting with Louis Farrakhan. The photo had been suppressed all these years to protect Obama’s career. Farrakhan was the racist leader of a hate group who had praised Hitler and described Jews as “satanic”. And yet he had met with the future president at a Congressional Black Caucus event. A CBC member, Rep. Danny Davis, had even praised Farrakhan.
You might think there’s a story in all that. And you would be wrong.
There isn’t a single Washington Post story on the photo. Not one. The same paper that believed its readers needed to be informed that a little girl had been photographed looking at a bad painting of Michelle Obama hasn’t found the time to report on the cover up of a meeting between top Democrats, including a future president, and the leader of a racist hate group that had once allied with the KKK.
It’s not that the Washington Post can’t report on Farrakhan. Or use Farrakhan to attack a president.
In ’15, the Post ran, “The bigotry of Trump and Farrakhan” and in ’16, “Why the Nation of Islam is praising Donald Trump”. Its stories about Obama and Farrakhan insist that the two men hate each other. A ’15 piece even attempted to link Farrakhan to Clarence Thomas, instead of Obama.
The Washington Post can report on Farrakhan when attacking Republicans. It just won’t report on Obama’s links to Farrakhan. Neither will CNN. The only mentions of the photo on its site come from CNN personalities like Jake Tapper and Michael Smerconish. CNN found the time to report on a photo of a dog’s ear that it claimed looked like President Trump. But not on a photo of Obama and Farrakhan.
I reached out to Washington Post editor Marty Baron and media columnist Margaret Sullivan asking them to explain their paper’s embargo on the Farrakhan photo. There has been no response.
Instead of coverage, the Washington Post has engaged in a cover up.
Ever since Obama left office, the media has reported on all sorts of photos of him. None of these photos are actually significant. The stories are puff pieces of the kind you expect to find in North Korea.
The New York Times, the Washington Post, Time and other media outlets found it vital over the years to report on a photo of a boy patting Obama on the head. They continued revisiting the photo even after Obama was out of office. And then ran stories of the boy looking back on that “historic” head patting.
If only they had done a fraction of the research on a photo of Obama meeting with a hate group leader at an official Democrat function as they did on a photo of him mugging for the camera with a little boy.
"Photo speaks volumes about Obama and race," is how the Washington Post wrote it up. Does the photo of Obama with a black nationalist racist leader who praised Hitler say anything about race?
Nah.
The Washington Post dedicated yet another piece to yet another photo of Obama and a little boy. “A touched cheek and hope for the future,” it declared. CNN, for its part, ran, "Obama reacts to child's White House tantrum." The media finds staged photos of its beloved leader as newsworthy as any state propaganda agency in a dictatorship. But actual newsworthy photos get buried out back at midnight.
The propaganda photos were mostly taken by Pete Souza, Obama's Official White House Photographer. Souza had been brought on board to do his best Leni Riefenstahl shtick since 2005 when the Chicago Tribune assigned him to "document" Obama's first year in the Senate. That turned into a book, “The Rise of Barack Obama”, released just in time for the full launch of the Obama presidential campaign.
New senators don't normally have a former White House photog following them around. But Obama was being groomed for the White House even before he walked into the Senate. Souza was selected for the Chief Photo Propagandist gig by the Tribune’s Jeff Zeleny in ’04. Zeleny later became infamous, after switching to the New York Times, for asking Obama how “enchanted” he was by his first 100 days.
Obama wasn’t enchanted, but the media was. It was the Chicago Tribune whose dirty trick of unsealing the divorce records of Obama’s Republican opponent got him to the Senate. And having used dirty tricks to get him there, it funded his hagiography without reporting it as a campaign contribution.
Behind the cute propaganda photos was a darker truth.
The White House Correspondents Association protested the ban on independent photographers. “Journalists are routinely being denied the right to photograph or videotape the President while he is performing his official duties,” they complained.
While President Trump allows the media to photograph him as much as its shutterbugs want, Obama’s official image was a carefully manufactured collaboration made to appear casual and natural.Instead of risking unflattering shots, Obama Inc. just tossed out propaganda pics from Pete. But photojournalists also participated in staging photos of Obama.
During his live speeches, still photographers would be kept out to avoid any unflattering pictures of the beloved leader moving his simpering lips. Then when he had finished speaking, the photogs were allowed in to take posed shots of Obama pretending to speak even while he was saying nothing.
That is a good summary of how the media covered Obama and how it’s still covering for him.
The media found the time to turn 5 different photos of Obama posing with kids into stories. It pretended that some of these photos, taken with African-American children, said something about race.
No, they didn’t.
The photo that does say something about race is the one of Obama smiling next to a notorious racist. And how many other photos like it remain buried? How many are locked away in a vault somewhere, like the Los Angeles Times’ infamous Obama Khalidi tape, awaiting the day when they no longer matter?
The Obama Farrakhan photo can’t be locked up again. But mention of it can be locked away by the media which will instead urgently report on a photo of a little girl looking at a portrait of Michelle Obama. Or a photo of a little boy patting Obama on the head. Or Obama with a baby.
Just like the countless propaganda photos and posters of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong-un with the kiddies. Here’s an adorable photo of the North Korean dictator at an orphanage. You won’t believe how cute this photo of Stalin holding a little girl is. Especially once you find out he murdered her parents. This snap of Hitler with the daughter of his chief propagandist, who was murdered when Hitler’s doctor forced cyanide tablets into her mouth, was meant to make people think he wasn’t a monster.
And this shot of Saddam Hussein ruffling the hair of a 5-year-old British hostage will melt your heart.
There’s a reason that dictators are often depicted with children. Yes, it makes them seem cuddlier. But it’s also the essence of tyranny for the servants of the people to play the parents of the people instead.
The people are their children who need to be told what to do and disciplined when we misbehave.
Soviet propaganda named Stalin, “Father of Nations”. (When he invaded other nations, he was just exercising his parental prerogatives.) Hitler was the “Father of the German People”. And Obama?
“The President of the United States is, you know, our boss. But also, you know, the president and the first lady are kind of like the mom and the dad of the country. And when your dad says something, you listen, “ said Chris Rock, at a gun control rally back in the Obama era.
And you don’t need to ask why daddy is kissing Louis Farrakhan. It’s none of your business.
That’s what the media is really telling us. And it’s telling that we have the same media as Russia, China and North Korea that runs propaganda photos of its beloved leader while smearing his opponents.
The media’s Obama kiddy photos and its sullen silence about the Farrakhan photos do tell us something. They tell us that we narrowly survived a cult of personality. And that we aren’t out of the woods yet.
The dictator is out of the White House. But his lackeys still control the news.
Change will come when the Berlin Wall of silence about the Farrakhan photo falls and when the Fuhrerbunker in which the Khalidi tape is buried pops open. We’ll know when the spying, the lies, the dirty tricks of the tyranny under which we’re still living come crashing down around its heads.
And then we’ll know that we are finally free.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.
Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.
Thank you for reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)