Neoconservative Bill Kristol is still at it. In the latest First Things, a journal about religion, he praises the writings of Yiddish scholar Ruth Wisse–who has elsewhere called for young American Jews to serve as a kind of intellectual "army" for Israel–and then offers his belief that America and Israel have utterly congruent interests:
After the attacks of September 11, no one can escape knowledge of the dangers facing the world. And as anti-Judaism, anti-Americanism, and general hostility to the West increasingly merge, the little state of Israel and the entire Jewish people seem once again caught in the crosshairs of history… [I]n a sense, we are all caught in those crosshairs. In Jews and Power, Ruth Wisse only hints at how the experience of Zionism has relevance beyond the Jews. But if Zionism is an attempt to marry power and morality—to join religion and liberalism, tradition and modernity, patriotism and principle—then America has a great deal in common with Israel. Indeed, all the people in the world who wish to stand against both death-loving Islamic fanaticism and soulless European postmodernism—what are they, if not Zionists?
So we are all Zionists now. And moral Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is a model for western democracies. And now Europe must be taken on. Its "soulless postmodernism." I don’t know what this means. Probably it is because Europe is critical of Israel and didn’t support the Iraq war. Does Kristol want to invade?
The latest Commentary (not yet available online) includes similar sorts of statements from and about neocons. Several letter writers say that the neocons have not gone far enough in taking on the Arab malaise. We should be targeting Saudi Arabia, says Michael Schwartz of New York. "[V]irtually every entry in [a neocon writer's] catalog of evil can be traced to a single predominant source: namely, the political, financial, and religious leadership of Saudi Arabia…" Robert Rosenkranz worries that democracy in the Middle East will only enfranchise Hamas. Allen Weingarten echoes that fear, saying that "the nub of the Islamist problem is the masses that find the minority understandable, and would not seriously counter them."
Later on in the new Commentary, there is an ad for Encounter books–a publisher with whom Kristol shares connections–picturing three anti-Arab books. One is called Decline and Fall: Europe’s Slow Motion Suicide, which seems to be saying what Kristol hints at with his comment about "soulless postmodernism." Europe’s good life will end because it has let in too many "prolific" Muslims. Another is called History Upside Down: The Roots of Palestinian Fascism and the Myth of Israeli Aggression. (Need I read more?)
Five years after the neocons helped push us into a disastrous war in the Middle East, it is shocking to me that 1, these sorts of statements are routinely made in the Jewish community and 2, that so little is done to expose and embarrass them. As to point 1, in the spirit of Never-again, the neocons have now merged the history of the Jews & Israel into the history of the west. So the Arabs were made the new Nazis, and Israel’s war with the Palestinians and Arabs must be America’s new war. Kristol’s comments merely confirm that sort of Israel-centric thinking. And from one month to another Commentary basically says all Arabs are infidels.
As to 2, that is the real marvel. Why doesn’t the New York Times do a weeklong series on the thinking of the neocons? Why isn’t it a cover story in any number of magazines? Why aren’t thoughtful reporters being paid to ask about the Israel connection. How central is Israel’s fight with the Arabs to the neocon worldview? Did the discovery of a world war against Islamofascism arise in the 90s from a perception of Israel’s interests? Interview Bill Kristol about this, and Douglas Feith, and Paul Wolfowitz…. How important is their Jewishness to their worldview? What did Frum and Perle mean by saying, the choice in the Middle East is victory or holocaust?
The best reporting on what I like to call the Religious Left so far has been largely incidental. There is Scott McConnell’s fine piece on falling out with the neocons, in part because they regarded Palestinians as subhuman, and his church said otherwise. George Packer’s discussion of feverish neocon thinking in his book, The Assassin’s Gate. Michael Lind’s attack on neocon ideas in the Nation. But where is the journalism that takes these very important ideas head-on? Next month, Doubleday will publish Jacob Heilbrunn’s book They Knew They Were Right. An important and honest book by a former quasi-fellow-traveler, it places the neocons firmly in a Jewish social and intellectual milieu, historically. But I can tell you now that the foreground of the book, the modern thoughts and acts of the neocons, are not treated in much depth.
I know, these are highly uncomfortable and pessimistic times; and my people feel skittish. But the result is that the media have not taken on these shocking and important ideas squarely. To do so would be to embarrass and marginalize the neocons. (As it is, only Walt and Mearsheimer are to be marginalized. When the Obama campaign placed an ad in the Amazon site for W&M’s book, the New York Sun got Obama to remove the ad.) I think the reason is, again, that the neocons are part of the Jewish family: the dark side of it, but an empowered member in good standing, representing an aggressive response to fears shared by the larger community re Israel. "Atavistic" fears, says Richard Silverstein, yes; but prevalent fears. So the larger community refuses to repudiate these ideas; good Jewish liberals refuse to expose these ideas for what they are and where they came from. So my community remains unredeemed in the shadow of the Iraq bloodbath.
Related posts:
- Now he tells us: Bill Kristol says Obama-McCain election was about Israel
- Bill Kristol Is Right About Moveon.org’s ‘Alex’ Ad
- Did ‘The Times’ Leave Judy Miller Out in the Cold Because She Was Jewish? And Other Parochial Asides from an Angry Bill Kristol
- At Least Bill Kristol Is Being Upfront About His Zionist Agenda
- Neocon Thinktank, and Bill Kristol, Share Close Connection to Settlements in Occupied Territories
{ 19 comments }
//Why doesn't the New York Times do a weeklong series on the thinking of the neocons?//
What, and expose themselves as part of the problem?
Phil Says "my people" a lot. Could he be more specific? Des he mean suburbanites? The unemployed? Hypocrites? Cowards? Men married to mannish women? People who love Christmas? Surely he doesn't mean Jews. If he does, might he enlighten us as to what he believes makes him Jewish?
"If he does, might he enlighten us as to what he believes makes him Jewish?"
Fear.
Yeah, well I'd submit there should be more to it than that. I'd rather he leave us alone and just be a cowardly little Christian . . .
I would submit there is nothing more than fear inside someone who wants to be left alone so as to turn fear and loneliness into tribal bonding and the brewing of enemies.
Phil says: "I know, these are highly uncomfortable and pessimistic times; and my people feel skittish."
But you are married to a gentile, Phil. Aren't your people now the gentiles too?
Hey Anon:
My tribe is America.Go back to whatever shit hole country you came from. This is America, cocksucker!
Ourpeople says "America" a lot. Could he be more specific? Des he mean suburbanites? The unemployed? Hypocrites? Cowards? Men married to mannish women? People who love Christmas? Surely he doesn't mean american. If he does, might he enlighten us as to what he believes makes him american?
might he enlighten us as to what he believes makes him american?"
Fear. Of cocksuckers.
There you are! Fear is what defines you.
Next, please.
cocksucker is what defines me.
Next please.
"cocksucker is what defines me."
Wow. Aren't you at all curious how I knew that?
Phil should change his name to Weissbrod- Phil Whitebread
"Why doesn't the New York Times do a weeklong series on the thinking of the neocons?" Really no need for that, since the old grey "Slimes" has announced that it's picking up Bill Kristol as a columnist, after Time magazine fired him.
Kristol (as the NYT's announcement noted) has been a harsh critic of the paper in the past, denouncing it as unfit to serve as a newspaper of record. But evidently the Slimes is willing to swallow its pride to serve the neocon cause. A good reason for its "liberal" readership to unsubscribe, no?
I agree with Jim. The hiring of Kristol says everything we need to know about the Times. They're about as liberal as the NY Sun. We're returning to the days of Bill Safire and Abe "Out of My Mind" Rosenthal. Not that we ever really left them.
Looking back through history, I see only the Roman Empire extended Roman citizenship regardless of racial/tribal/ethnic origins of the peoples they conquered. Such peoples, or at least their elite and those of them who served in the Roman army for 30 years, were entitled to be Citizens of Rome, an abstract conception giving full rights and entitlement within the Roman realm. That's the closest thing I see to being or becoming an American citizen. But these days, unlike in Roman days, the prevailing world ideal is democratic states, which means USA has all the burdens of Rome, but not the full control of Might-Makes-Right since USA must deal abroad by pussy-footing around democratic states or at least those who give lip service to same. Rome just sent its legions for control. No Iraqi expects to become an American citizen, unless they immigrate here. The notion of dual citizenship in this context is interesting, no?
To: All Employees
From: Art Sulzberger, Publisher
Date: January 2, 2008
Re: New Staff Member–Bill Kristol
Welcome back. I hope everyone had a wonderfully secular winter solstice.
Many of you no doubt have heard the news that, in the grand tradition of diversity that is a hallmark of this great newspaper, conservative Bill Kristol will soon join us as an opinion columnist. I’m personally quite pleased to finally add the elusive neo-conservative species to the New York Times employee mosaic. Further, I am confident that Mr. Kristol will look absolutely fabulous sitting in between the transgendered Mongolian-American proofreader, Genghis John, and Darnae, the formaldehyde-entombed, late-term abortion mascot.
However, judging from some of the emails I received over the break, as well as Frank Rich’s unfortunate decision to set himself on fire, it’s clear this move has had an unsettling effect on many. So, in an effort to alleviate any anxiety, and to maintain the type of working environment necessary to publish America’s newspaper, we will be introducing a Neo-Con Sensitivity Training Program (NCSTP). This program will help us all understand the true nature of Mr. Kristol’s condition and give us some pointers on what we can expect when interacting with a real conservative.
However, since many of you won’t be able to take the seminar for a few weeks, I’ll use this opportunity to lay out a few key points that may help you get comfortable with Mr. Kristol (I’m sure many of you are aware of what happened at CNN when they got their first neo-con, so I’d like to avoid a repeat here).
Like you and I, Bill Kristol puts his pants on one leg at a time–he’s just thinking about dead Iraqi babies, single malt Scotch and his Haliburton dividends checks while he’s doing it. My point is that we should try to view him as just another staff member, and try to find common ground and mutual respect. Also, as a general rule, try to avoid startling him and limit direct eye contact to less than two seconds.
Mr. Kristol is a neo-con, as in neo-conservative. Your NCSTP training will offer a more in-depth explanation of the difference between a standard-grade conservative and neo-con, but for now, imagine the difference between a really bad case of the flu and full-blown AIDS. Also, it will be important to not confuse neo-con with neo-com, or neo-communist, the employee group that meets every Tuesday and Thursday at 4:30 in the Stalin room.
Due to the unenlightened nature common of those with his ideological underpinnings, Mr. Kristol may often actually say what he means (this style of speaking was common years ago, before countless victims had the courage to come forward and seek redress for blatantly direct talk). Until we are able to better train Mr. Kristol, staffers should be prepared for this unorthodox style of communication. For example, where we might say, “I’m pleased we’ve both shared our feelings and I look forward to trying to come up with a better solution,” Mr. Kristol might say, “The fact that I won’t get back the ten minutes I just spent listening to you makes me want to drive a pencil into your eye.”
I’ve confirmed with some colleagues that Mr. Kristol urinates standing up. While this will take some getting used to, make every effort not to stare.
It’s quite possible that Mr. Kristol will have an American flag in his office. Do not be alarmed if it is not on fire; he apparently prefers it this way. (Note: This will in no way impact the standard NYT practice of hanging white flags in your office.)
Look for further communication from your Human Resources representative, and please join me in welcoming Mr. Kristol to the New York Times family!
Interesting post. After reading that pitiful attempt at humor, I'd love to "Punch" Sulzberger all right.
BTW, $10,000 invested in NYT stock in 12/99 is now worth $3,400. Well done Punch!
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ian_williams/2008/01/kristol_clear.html
Ian Williams points out that actually turning a profit is hardly important in the 21st century American Zionist propaganda industry.
"But the contract really does defy logic. Kristol, deservedly known as 'Quayle's Brain,' is a light weight, recidividist wrongist, whose magazine, the Weekly Standard, makes massive losses for Rupert Murdoch, its owner. These conservatives go on about market disciplines, but it is noteworthy how many of their thinktanks and publications – the Standard, the New York Sun, the National Review – depend on the kindness of strangers to reason, eccentric billionaires with political agendas. Their minute circulation suggests little or no backing in the marketplace, but their editors and pundits are elevated by all that patronage to slots on Fox and the rest of the conservative echo chamber. How else could someone like Kristol still get a platform for his Panglossian view of the Iraq invasion?"
Comments on this entry are closed.