At Truthdig, Zachary Karabell rightly points out that Jerry Muller's book Capitalism and the Jews completely fails to deal with the modern reality of empowered Jews in the U.S., dealing strictly with the historical backdrop. Then Karabell gets off this claim about American policy in the Middle East:
Jewish support of Israel evolved in the 1960s and 1970s into a core aspect of American grand strategy, with evangelical Christians in the United States just as adamant about that policy as any Jewish group and with the U.S. foreign policy establishment turning Israel into a key pillar of American strategy in the Middle East.
This is why Karabell, a friend of mine, called Walt and Mearsheimer's book "a terrible book" at the LA Book Fair a year or so back. And the claim doesn't bear scrutiny. Evangelical Christians had nothing to do with the pressure that caused Truman to urge Partition and then recognize Israel-- political decisions. Let's give Karabell the Cold War; but the war on terror? The braintrust of the Bush Administration included an evangelical Christian or two, but many many Jewish neocons. And Sheldon Adelson was one of Bush's biggest backers. Evangelical Christians don't give to the Democratic Party, which is now a bulwark of the lobby, c.f., Schumer, Frank and Berman. About half of the money in the Dem party comes from Jews. Karabell reflects a resistance to even talking about Jewish Establishment power. Is it mere coincidence that 3/4 of the Supreme Court picks by Democratic presidents in the last 18 years have been Jewish? Of course not. Nor that the two offices closest to Obama's are not manned by evangelical Christians, but by Jews.
Is Rahm Emanuel a Zionist? I believe so; he cavorted in the Golan recently in utter defiance of the two-state-solution, so as to cultivate Jews for the 2010 elections. Is David Axelrod, Emanuel's good friend? I have no idea. But until journalists honestly scrutinize the role of Zionism in Jewish life and American political life, we will get this kind of blame game.
Evangelical Christians were not part of the political landscape in the United States until Reagan sought their support during his presidential election campaign. That’s when the Christian right was catapulted into mainstream American politics.
Avi,
We can argue about whether it is a good thing or not but to claim otherwise is, frankly, absurd – evangelical Christianity has been a force in the American politics arguably from the founding of the United States but certainly from the time of the Second Great Awakening up into the present, and it has played a considerable role in the abolition, prison reform, and temperance movements.
During the middle of the 20th Century fundamentalist evangelicals took a brief hiatus from the political sphere, yes. But that period also saw the rise of the “new evangelicals” as typified by the National Association of Evangelicals, which aggressively engaged modernity and whose first president Harold Ockenga advocated an evangelical strategy of “infiltration” (of secular society.)
Ockenga’s approach bore fruit, on one notable front, through the prayer-breakfast movement that in Washington DC was spearheaded by The Family (see journalist Jeff Sharlet’s book on the subject) which established the National Prayer Breakfast in 1952.
The National Prayer Breakfast printed program has for years (and possibly decades) featured a purported George Washington quote falsified to enhance Washington’s alleged Christian piety (this falsified Washington quote has also been declaimed by US Senate chaplains, on the Senate floor.)
More recently, Christian Zionism has emerged as a considerable force in American politics. In the lead up to the US 2008 presidential election there was a reason that presidential candidate John McCain sought out the political support of evangelicals – whom McCain repeatedly denounced in the 2000 GOP primary as “agents of intolerance.” McCain needed evangelical Christian votes.
Leading up to the 2008 election, as I characterized it at the time, John McCain was after the political endorsement of Christians United For Israel founder John Hagee “like a dog in heat.” Eventually McCain got Hagee’s endorsement but then rejected it in May 2008 after I posted a Youtube video clip with audio from a late 2005 Hagee sermon in which pastor Hagee claimed that God sent Hitler, a “hunter” according to Hagee, to drive Europe’s Jews to Palestine – which, claimed Hagee, was the only home God ever intended for Jews to have. Hagee has also claimed Hitler was “partially Jewish” and that European Rothschild bankers control America through the Federal Reserve.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Michael Oren, and Danny Ayalon frequently can be found at John Hagee’s “Christians United For Israel” events.
In keeping with the topic at hand, can we agree on the fact that Evangelical Christians didn’t influence and/or control US foreign policy until recent decades?
Avi,
That would be flatly incorrect as well. Many of the basic underlying precepts that have shaped American foreign policy, such as manifest destiny, are rooted in Christian theology (Puritanism in that case) and evangelicalism and US foreign policy have been intertwined from the inception of the US up into the present.
Here’s some fairly orthodox general historical background:
link to americanforeignrelations.com
Here’s a 2007 Council on Foreign Relations symposium on evangelicals and foreign policy that notes the historical import of evangelical politics in the latter half of the 20th Century (especially its strong anti-communist thrust) and takes the picture up into the near-present: link to fora.tv
The history of evangelical missionary work outside of the US as an important component of anti-communist American foreign policy has been woefully under-researched (I’m told there’s some work on the way) but in the early 1950′s, with the ramping up of the Cold War, one could find the Baron Frary Von Blomberg, an American evangelical Christian (a Branhamite) traveling extensively through Europe to evangelize the royal families of Greece and Sweden and helping to establish a prayer breakfast association in the British Parliament.
Branhamism and many other strains of evangelical Christianity view communism and socialism as satanic, so there are very real policy implications of the worldview – which tends to hold a utopian view of free-market economics, and it militates against attempts towards global governance and international agreements, which many fundamentalists and evangelicals see as harbingers of the expected coming rule of the Antichrist.
In his appearance at John Hagee’s Christians United For Israel rally in Jerusalem, on the night prior to Joe Biden’s trip to Israel in the Obama Administration bid to jump start the peace process, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his speech at the event, ventured that Israel might not exist but for the support and efforts of British Christian Zionists. Although I radically disagree with Netanyahu’s calculation that the alliance is good for Israel (and Jews generally), nonetheless his claim has strong historical grounding.
John Hagee has written that during the mid 1980′s he traveled to Germany at the invitation of the US military and was given a private tour of the Berlin Wall. That’s just one data point in a growing field of research, especially as advanced by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, demonstrating the very substantial influence of conservative evangelicals who seek to establish the US as a “Christian nation” within the United States military.
One striking example of such influence, arguably, is at Offutt Air Force Base, near Omaha Nebraska, the former headquarters of SAC, The Strategic Air Command which for a period at the height of the Cold War controlled America’s nuclear arsenal. Inside a small Christian chapel at Offutt are stained-glass windows depicting SAC and its B52′s bombers engaged in a nuclear holy war.
More recently, George W. Bush is reported to tried to sell Jacques Chirac, in 2003, on the invasion of Iraq by referring to “Gog and Magog.” [ see: link to guardian.co.uk
] In that same year (2003) Donald Rumsfeld’s Pentagon prepared intelligence briefings for president Bush that featured Bible verses on their covers. [ link to gq.com
]
Christian Zionism is, I think, a very strong force inside the Republican Party–it’s part of the Christian right and to the extent that the Christian right has influence, so does Christian Zionism.
But as Phil says, it doesn’t seem likely that they have anywhere near the same impact on the Democrats. Maybe in states where Democrats have to be conservative to win elections they play a role, but I don’t know.
Seems some important Democratic establishment elites are in with them:
——————
Jewish leaders welcome CUFI
Many Jewish leaders welcome the support for Israel offered by Hagee and other Christian Zionists. The Israeli ambassador to the U.S. spoke at the July 18th CUFI banquet.
The next day, the Jewish Federation of Greater Washington, the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, **the National Jewish Democratic Council,** the Republic Jewish Coalition, the American Jewish Committee and the Israel Project sponsored a rally with Hagee near the White House, according to the JTA. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich, ** Rep. Ben Cardin (D-Md.),** **Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fla.)**, **Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.),** and **Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)** spoke at the rally.
————–
link to jewsonfirst.org
P.S. Rep Robert Wexler now works for a Zionist lobbyist outfit.
link to centerpeace.org
Peace – ha — with a photo of Netanyahu centerpiece – how ironic.
Bruce,
Thank you for that overview. I’m glad you were around as I’ve learned something new.
Avi,
Thanks in turn for your gracious response.
Best,
BruceW
Avi,
But why? But why? That’s when the Christian right was catapulted into mainstream American politics.
Menachem Begin and Yitzak Shamir devised a plan in the late 70s. They recognized the huge Evangelical vote in the US, but also knew that the Evangelicals were still on the Jews killed Jesus rag, and had no use for Jews as a result. They also knew that Evangelicals hated fags, hated homosexuals, as a policy.
So Menachem called Jerry Falwell and said We both hate homos. We need to build bridges to get rid of this scourge in American life.
That’s what started this. Jerry Falwell became the only way that Reagan could communicate with Israel and get a response. Begin would only communicate through Falwell, which gave Falwell ENORMOUS power and he liked those chitlins. It completely politicized the Christian Right.
I’m shortening this considerably, and adding some smart-ass of my own, but this is the genesis of it in the USA. Frank Shaeffer can add to this as well.
Full disclosure: Zach Karabell is related to Norman Podhoretz. I think he’s his son or something.
Good find. Anyone have a link?
I think it is reasonable to argue that the Israel Lobby was born in 1967 when President Johnson called back both planes to find out what had happened to the (sinking) USS Liberty out of fear what had previously been an imagined powerful lobby. I believe Johnson’s decision as Commander in Chief to not rescue American naval forces must be considered an act of treason.
I wonder if LBJ was being blackmailed because somebody knew how the JFK assassination had really gone down.
Alternatively, there might have been a plot by both the LBJ administration and the Israelis to blame the attack on the Liberty on the Egyptians, so that that would serve as an excuse for the U.S. to enter the ’67 Middle East war on the Israeli side, as Peter Hounam suggests in http://www.amazon.com/Operation-Cyanide-Bombing-Liberty-Nearly/dp/1904132197/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276457521&sr=1-1.
Faulty link there on the Hounam book. Let me try it again: Operation Cyanide: How the Bombing of the USS Liberty Nearly Caused World War Three.
Oh, for a preview option!
Such a thesis is not unlike the idea that Roosevelt knew in advance about Pearl Harbor because people cannot accept that what warnings there were, were ignored by an incompetent military command. I would accept that Johnson was a coward before I would accept that he would willingly betray the Americans on the USS Liberty for a private agenda in league with the Israelis and possibly with the Israel Lobby as well. His fear of the power of the Lobby precluded that he could have a good working relationship with it.
Les,
Then you have not read Robert B. Stinnett’s book “Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor,” and the extraordinary FOIA military docs, memos, wires, and telegraphs, in it.
Military incompetence yes. Professional historians appreciate that those in charge had a flood of documents to peruse at the time. Collecting the wheat from the chaff is not difficult when it is being done with hindsight but this had to do it in the real world just before Pearl Harbor. Even in today’s world the CIA and FBI are correctly criticized for amassing so much data that they can’t handle it. Discarding warnings out of hubris or ignorance is not the same thing as committing treason. It certainly deserves “dereliction of duty” consideration.
I think it is reasonable to argue that the Israel Lobby was born in 1967
no les, it definitely goes back further than that. here is some history including documentation referencing “DOJ orders the AZC to Register as a Foreign Agent”, in ’63.
The Lobby existed before 1967 but it was President Johnson who gave it the power it has today. When we give in to our fears, as alas Johnson did, this is what happens.
It was Robert Kennedy as Attorney General who issued that order to the AZC, with the approval of his brother President John F. Kennedy. After JFK’s assassination, the whole matter was quietly dropped (as were JFK’s attempts to stop Israel’s development of nuclear weapons by inspecting Dimona).
The reactor at Dimona went critical in December 1963. Interesting date.
“…Is David Axelrod, Emanuel’s good friend? I have no idea…”
Not sure either… but their history seems to go back a long way… with both of them apparently working along side AIPAC for its election success:
“…In 1984, Emanuel and David Axelrod (Obama’s senior campaign strategist in 2008) worked alongside AIPAC on a campaign to unseat Illinois Senator Charles Percy who was then chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. That electoral success followed a victorious AIPAC-directed campaign in 1982 when Springfield attorney Richard Durbin was recruited to oppose Paul Findley, an 11-term Congressman. Findley learned too late the political costs visited on U.S. policy-makers who challenge the Israeli-fication of U.S. foreign policy…”
link to huffingtonpost.com
And now the two people competing for Harry Reid’s position as Majority Leader of the Senate if Reid is not reelected are Chuckie Schumer and — Dick Durbin.
Yerp…
–4th in line for ownership of Durbin
“…Top Industries
Senator Dick Durbin 2005 – 2010
[1] Lawyers/Law Firms $2,113,906 $1,967,685 $146,221
[2] Securities & Investment $654,662 $562,162 $92,500
[3] Real Estate $430,646 $392,646 $38,000
[4] Pro-Israel $375,137 $329,887 $45,250
link to opensecrets.org
He shares a house in Washington with New York’s Charles Schumer
yickk
Christian Zionism in different guises has been around for centuries with a degree of power and influence that it is at many points intangible and hard to pin down. As far as I know Phil’s remark that Truman was not pressured by Christians, but perhaps in a way he didn’t need to be and the pressure already existed within his own brain, since he was so entranced (it is often said) by the idea of being the New Cyrus – ie he was influenced by a form of Christian Zionism. Maybe the same could be said of David Lloyd George, so soaked in the Welsh Bible during childhood, as an adult so cynical in so many ways yet perhaps seeking some sort of divinely approved role to counter the shame he felt for his insatiable womanising.
As a Welshman, Lloyd George felt sympathy for other small peoples, like the Greeks whom he encouraged to occupy western Anatolia, with disastrous results in the end for Greece. He seems to have included the Jews as another such small people, although not the Palestinians for some reason. Also, for whatever reason, he resisted the Irish independence movement pretty firmly, to the extent of sending the Black and Tans into the country, although it was his government that eventually reached the peace deal that resulted in the establishment of the Irish Free State.
And he had opposed the South African War. A very interesting and paradoxical character.
I think that LLG’s antagonist, Kaiser Bill, had some proto-Zionist opinions mixed with a degree of anti-Semitism.
I’m just watching the DVD’s of the 1974 BBC series Fall of Eagles, about the fall of European dynasties during and after the First World War. Barry Foster did an absolutely fantastic job of acting Kaiser Willy. Nothing about the Jews, as far as I’ve noticed (although I still have one episode to go.)
In my opinion, the zionist lobby has been a powerful force in american politics (and society) at least since during WW2. They definitely had large enough hooks into the war criminal truman so that he aided the formation of israel. Back then, though, I don’t think the zionist lobby was the dominant power behind america, I’m not sure how powerful they were in relation to the other fascist forces that shaped american politics and society. Apparently there was not enough support among the american oligarchies for unilateral u.s. support for israel back in the 40′s and 50′s when the bulk of direct support for israel came from Europe with the usa providing indirect support. One could say the Europeans supported israel because the usa forced them too, which is probably true, but the usa used this method because at home the zionist lobby lacked the power to force the issue openly, so relied upon proxies to support israel, to whom the usa wouldn’t be directly seen responsible. IE: the zionist lobby was not the most powerful and still faced serious opposition to their positions.
Gradually, though, the zionist lobby gained power in the usa and the roles of Europe and the usa switched with the usa providing the bulk of direct support to israel and Europe now in the role of providing more indirect support. The switch was gradual, I think, with by the 70′s, it being obvious the usa was now israel’s largest supporter. When the israeli actually gained the upper hand in the usa appears to be later, probably not until late in the raygun regime or during the following bush regime. By the clinton regime, the israeli lobby was definitely in control.
The israeli lobby got a huge boost in power during the raygun regime due to its control over the Christian zionists. With them backing zionist policies, they were able to gain a similar dominant position over “conservative” politics (the neo-cons) similar to their dominant position in american “liberal” politics (the neo-libs).
This take-over began years before, though. It was mostly complete by the late 70′s after men. begin openly got behind them. In the mid’70s I noticed this Christian revival first when I started seeing cars with “I found it” bumper stickers. Up till then Christianity looked like it was a dying religion in the usa. Before that time, the media had been getting more critical of Christian doctrine and repression. After that time, they became less critical. It used to piss me off how they would coddle these superstitious fanatics and hardly counter the gibberish and just present them, and their fanatical politic, as legit subjects of discussion, not as objects of ridicule, as most people saw them. At the time I didn’t realise it, but this was the work of zionist control of the media. They framed the dialog so that the Christian right would be seen as something much more powerful than it was, and also as having a legit pov, as opposed to the rantings of superstitious nuts, that they obviously were. In other words, the zionist controlled media deliberately held back criticism of the Christian right and more and more promoted their spiel, both on the sly and openly. This clever marketing campaign is how zionists empowered their Christian zionist puppets.
But zionists not only empowered the Christian right, they took it over. The Christian right has always played a large role in american politics. Face it, america is a country that has always consisted of an excess of Christian nuttery. But until relatively recently, that Christian activism was not very zionist. A lot of american anti-Semitism was housed in the Christian right. In the 50′s, Jews were evil commies, bent on world atheism, to the Christian right. By the 70′s, Jews were the “good guys”. So between the 50′s and the 70′s, in the Christian right, Jews went from being “bad guys” to “good guys” (incidentally, commies are still the “bad guys” in the Christian right – so their primary role is still that of capitalist crowd control tools). One can see how the movement was used to promote anti-communism, by america’s capitalist oligarchy throughout the 20th century, but zionism played no early role as far as I know. During the 60′s and 70′s, the Christian right leadership switched from promoting Jewish people as being “bad guys” to “good guys”, and this was due to the zionist lobby and zionist money. In other words, the Christian right leadership was recruited by zionists to promote israeli interests. Established leaders were recruited, and many new leaders were created. Those not going along were disempowered, one way or another, and saw their “flocks” dispersed. The followers were instructed to be proper zionist supporters and to support israel, right or wrong, and many are quite fanatical about this. But what I find telling is the majority of the these followers that I’ve come across still seem to harbour anti-Semitic leanings, the result of their past generations of programming to hate the “killers of our savior” that hasn’t died out yet with the influx of the new zionist programming. Old ingrained habits die slowly.
I don’t see how anyone could seriously give Christian Zionists credit for being the power behind the Issrael lobby or Mid East policy. The Christian right loses on abortion, school prayer, Ten Commandment arguments, and just about every other issue the group pushes, and unlike AIPAC/Jewish Zionists, the influence of Christian Zionists waxes and wanes with the election cycle.