Jack Ross also wants Dan Radosh to take on his neocon father over Israel

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 8 Comments

Jack Ross writes:

I must heartily second your appeal to Dan Radosh to write the article you describe!  Some time back I became Facebook
friends with Dan and wrote in the box for how we knew each other "I met
his father twice, the saddest case in the whole history of American
public intellectuals".  Dan sent a message back saying "You may be
right but I'm not posting it".

The odyssey of Ron Radosh from the CP and its orbit to brief radical flirtation to, completely without irony, Cold War liberal
fossil and as such a neocon B-lister need not be exhausted here, as it
was excellently done by my very good friend Joe Stromberg here:

A while back I flipped through The New Republic
and noticed Marty Peretz having for no apparent reason an article about
the Rosenberg case, and at least twice Peretz made the belabored point
of comparing the Rosenberg-defending fellow travelers to pro-Palestinian Jews, rather than to those beholden to the Israel lobby
Peretz is enough of a maniac that he has to deal in his own
mind with the game he's been playing for 40 years, but Radosh seems
stunningly oblivious.

For at least two years I understand Radosh has been said to be working on a book about Truman and the birth of Israel. If it has fallen by the boards it would seem that paeans to 1948, or even, at the close of the Bush presidency, to Harry Truman, are about as saleable as Hugh Hewitt's manuscript of last October "How Sarah Palin won the election and saved America".

is stunning is Radosh's complete lack of critical faculty, based on his
background and many of the ideas he's been exposed to, toward the
proposition that the "war on terror" is the Cold War,
that its critics are analogous to American Communists, and that it is
the supporters of the Palestinians, rather than the Israel Lobby, which
is beholden to a false idol comparable to Communism. 

But it
is not merely for this reason that I say Ron Radosh is the saddest case
in the whole history of American public intellectuals.  If only he had
merely traded the CP for neoconservatism!  Rather, he traded it for
partisanship of the fictitious Jewish left epitomized so gallingly in this crisis by The Forward and the leadership of the Reform Union.

    Leave a Reply