Earlier today we defended ourselves from a smear written by Armin Rosen published at the Atlantic site, saying that this website is anti-Semitic. Well Robert Wright, who is also at the Atlantic, has denounced that piece as McCarthyite in its aim at Alex Kane, and offered a spirited (and slightly qualified) defense of our site. Excerpt re Kane:
I want to reiterate that calling Rosen’s regrettable piece McCarthyite–as I’m doing–doesn’t depend on whether you do or don’t think any of those Mondoweiss pieces is beyond the pale. Because the person Rosen attacked–the person whose voice Rosen is trying to silence–didn’t write any of those pieces.
It’s kind of amazing, when you think about it. You write a piece arguing that a given person shouldn’t be allowed to write for respectable publications, and at no point do you make critical reference to anything this person has ever said or written!
I guess by Rosen’s logic I am now personally responsible for his article–because, after all, it appeared on the Atlantic’s site, and I work for the Atlantic. Well, I’m happy to say I disagree. But maybe my connection to the Atlantic at least entitles me to offer an apology to Alex Kane. He certainly deserves one.
Andrew Sullivan– who has also been accused of anti-Semitism– links Wright with approval here. It’s nice to see non-Jews offering opinions about what is anti-Semitic and what isn’t. A propitious development. Vigilance about bigotry is, or should be, a universal attribute.
“It’s kind of amazing, when you think about it. You write a piece arguing that a given person shouldn’t be allowed to write for respectable publications, and at no point do you make critical reference to anything this person has ever said or written!”
Chicken is coming home to roost. This is the same method that has been used over the years to silence critics of American policies on Israel-Palestine and Israel -Arab and Israel-Iran and deny them a voice in the media.
It goes without saying that Alex Kane and Mondoweiss are worth defending against these baseless smears which aim to silence you.
But it’s frustrating that only non-Palestinians and non-Arabs are granted this protection from mainstream media elites. In January, Sullivan said he would stand up against anti-Semitism smears but he was silent about PennBDS (we brought it to his attention). Robert Wright’s project bloggingheads.tv has a clear problem with Palestinians. No Palestinian women have ever appeared on this site. A handful of other Palestinians have appeared. Gershom Gorenberg alone has appeared more often than all Palestinians combined.
So it’s great that these guys stand up for you, but it also perpetuates a significant problem. Palestinians are completely excluded and are never worthy of a word of support from these guys.
It is time to lay new ground rules with regard to terminology:
“anti-Semite”should be shunned by progressives as it is a one-size-fits all term used to serve the propaganda aims of one faction (Zionists) by providing a useful rhetorical tool to portray perpetual victimhood (and, technically it is a non-sequitur as Semites is a term that describes peoples from northern Africa to Near Asia)
Acceptable Terms:
anti-Israel refers to someone against the policies and actions of the state of Israel
anti-Zionist refers to someone against the philosophy and enterprise of Zionism – specifically the historic ethnic-cleansing of over 700,000 Palestinians, the ongoing Occupation and serially inhumane treatment of those occupied
anti-Jewish refers to someone who has an unbridled antipathy or outright hatred toward all Jews … this is the only offensive posture as it is manifested not as a response based upon the actions of particular Jews but a general broad-brushing of all Jews and, hence, is discriminatory
“It’s kind of amazing, when you think about it. You write a piece arguing that a given person shouldn’t be allowed to write for respectable publications, and at no point do you make critical reference to anything this person has ever said or written!”
Did the McCarthyites ever sink quite this low?
It’s a genuine question. I’m curious.
As I suggested in an earlier comment on the other piece regarding Armin Rosen’s libelous attacks, it’s way past time to bring out the legal guns. Vicious, lowlifes like Rosen or Alan Dershowitz or Abraham Foxman have casually hurled the charge of anti-Semitism for decades and they have never suffered any downside. There has been subdued admission from New York Times editors or academics or a handful of well-positioned others that this is part of the Israel Lobby’s campaign of intimidation. But, while Dershowitz or Ariel Sharon have successfully deployed legal forces, pro-Palestinian individuals and groups have either not done so, been unable to muster the funding to do so, or have done so ineffectually and ineffectively. That has to change. These days, it’s clear to all but the completely delusional that Alan Dershowitz is unhinged, perhaps really mentally ill, to judge from the ravings he indulges in. But others, like Rosen, have to learn that career-destroying, baseless allegations cannot be made with impunity.