News

Maybe de Blasio believes his job is to defend Israel?

NY Mayor Bill de Blasio’s pro-Israel speech to a secret AIPAC meeting on Thursday night in NY has occasioned a lot of commentary on the power of the Israel lobby. Jerry Slater posted about the speech here, reprised below. And he and Alex Kane have a dialogue.

Jerome Slater: Understandably, Andrew Sullivan, Phil Weiss and M.J. Rosenberg, and others have seized on NY Mayor Bill de Blasio’s unbelievably fawning speech before AIPAC as still further proof of the power of the Israel Lobby, or at least of its central institution. My own view is that this is an oversimplification, because it essentially dismisses two other additional or perhaps even more important possible explanations.

The first is that de Blasio—and, by extension, other uncritical public figures (Obama comes to mind)—may genuinely believe what they say. This doesn’t make them right, of course: in fact their love and unconditional support of Israel, to the extent that it is genuine, can only be explained by their ignorance of the Israeli realities.
The second explanation is a bit more complicated. Even if there were no AIPAC, even if there were no larger organized lobby, there would still be a Jewish vote that in some places could be decisive, elections in New York being the obvious but by no means the only example. And it remains very much the case that the Jewish vote is overwhelmingly “pro-Israel.” For that matter, even if there were no Israel lobby, it is reasonable to assume that there would still be large Jewish financial contributions to favored politicians, who would be quite aware of why their bread was being buttered.

This is by no means to deny the obvious: there certainly is an organized Israel Lobby, and it has a lot of political power. At the same time, its power should not be exaggerated—not only does it sometimes lose big battles (on Iran, let us hope), but even when it appears to either influence or cow politicians—in de Blasio’s case, one is tempted to say, effectively own them—there are additional factors that work in the same direction. And in some cases these additional factors would be likely to produce the same political outcomes, even if there were no AIPAC.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Israeli President Shimon Peres in 2013.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Israeli President Shimon Peres in 2013.

Alex Kane:

All good points. But allow me to inject some skepticism of them.

First, I don’t believe for a second that de Blasio actually believes in what he is saying. He has spent far too much time in the midst of committed, left-wing activists who have a global critique of American power, a critique that includes its client state, Israel. As David Wilson, an activist who worked with de Blasio, told me, “He’s a smart guy and he’s well-informed. And I can’t believe that he believes the things he says about the Middle East. It’s perfectly obvious that he’s saying the things New York City politicians say. I don’t know what he actually thinks, but he can’t think that. There is a striking disparity between what he says now about Israel and what he thought about Nicaragua.”

Yes, there is a Jewish vote, and Jews are politically engaged in New York. In total, there are about 1.1 million Jews, though not all of them vote, of course. Still, how many of those 1.1 million are pro-Israel? There is no reliable polling on this, but there’s a significant split in the Jewish community here, and that includes anti-Zionist Satmars. Perhaps a slight majority back Israel, but de Blasio is fully aware of the progressive Jewish community that exists here, where criticism of Israel is the norm. Secondly, how many other constituencies does he alienate with this type of rhetoric? He surely alienates a good chunk of the city’s Muslim and Arab population, which is not insignificant. 600,000, if not more, Muslims. 350,000 plus Arabs. (Caveat: of course these communities are not monolithic on Israel, but I think it’s fair to say many are sympathetic to Palestinians, as the massive rallies in New York in the wake of Cast Lead showed.)

But your point on donations is spot on. De Blasio’s rise has been fueled by pro-Israel donors, as I showed here.

Slater:

I admit to surmising about what De Blasio actually believes–but if he can say all that over-the-top stuff without believing in it, or at least half-believing, then he’s simply shameless and morally corrupt, which seems unlikely, given his history, or at least what I’ve read about his history.  I don’t know how the NYC Jewish vote breaks down on Israeli-related issues, I’m simply assuming that even in New York it helps more than it hurts to be seen as “pro-Israel”–even taking into account the Muslim and Arab population.  But I admit, that’s just my assumption; I don’t have the evidence–does anyone?

I also meant my comment to apply to the general question of the relative weight of the Israel Lobby as opposed to other factors in explaining national policies.  And outside of liberal NYC–I’m surmising again–the Jewish vote surely must be more “pro-Israel” than not, and so far as I know there hasn’t been a significant electoral backlash, even in areas with significant Muslim/Arab populations, against pro-Israeli politicians.

Kane:

You’re right that it helps more than it hurts to be pro-Israel in the city.  I don’t think it comes down to a vote calculation, though, for why that is.  One big reason is the media and the role of the dailies in New York.  Sure, the Internet has broken up some of their power, but the New York Post and New York Daily News–both run by Zionists–still play a significant role in drumming up controversy when they want to. And if de Blasio made any sort of criticism that borders on harsh, the anti-Semitism smear would come up. And then, of course, there’s donors.

It’s an open question, even nationally, about Jews voting on the basis of whether a pol is more pro-Israel or not.  I don’t think it ranks up there with many run-of-the-mill Jews’ priorities.  But, the media and donors also play a role nationally and in other cities.

Slater:

Whether or not Jewish voters routinely punish politicians they perceive as anti-Israel, the more important point is that politicians clearly believe that they do.  Anyway, there have been some famous cases in which popular politicians have said or done something perceived as anti-Israel, and then lost in the next election.  These cases are well-known to politicians in constituencies with a substantial Jewish population, and has a big impact on what positions they take–even if there is no proof that the Israeli issue is what caused them to lose.  In other words, they see nothing to be gained by bucking what they perceive–correctly or not–to be “the Jewish vote.”   And it will continue that way, unless and until the time comes that some kind of countervailing power develops.  Hasn’t happened yet, and no sign that it will in the foreseeable future.

16 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So deBlasio says it but doesn’t mean it. What good is that?

Never mind voters. BIG-ZION punishes pols who don’t fawn over Israel. The fact that the pols regularly do so — without negative comment in MSM — conditions the public (including the Jewish public) to think there is nothing wrong with all the fawning, and also nothing wrong with the American system of control of politics by BIG-MONEY.

Good grief. Be nice if some big-enough pol stood up on his hind legs and stated forthrightly (whre NYT would have to report it) that the BIG-MONEY system harms America and that BIG-ZION steers USA away from being helpful in I/P peacework.

RE: “NY Mayor Bill de Blasio’s unbelievably fawning speech before AIPAC” ~ Slater

MY COMMENT: I wonder if Uri Avnery would refer to New York’s Mayor as “de Blasio the Terrible”. Personally, I see a lot of similarities to “Gunter the Terrible”*.

* SEE: “Gunter the Terrible”, By Uri Avnery, The Palestine Chronicle, 4/13/12

[EXCERPT] Stop me if I have told you this joke before:
Somewhere in the US, a demonstration takes place. The police arrive and beat the protesters mercilessly.
“Don’t hit me,” someone shouts, “I am an anti-communist!”
“I couldn’t give a damn what kind of a communist you are!” a policeman answers as he raises his baton.
The first time I told this joke was when a German group visited the Knesset and met with German-born members, including me.
They went out of their way to praise Israel, lauding everything we had been doing, condemning every bit of criticism, however harmless it might be. It became downright embarrassing
, since some of us in the Knesset were very critical of our government’s policy in the occupied territories.
For me, this extreme kind of pro-Semitism is just disguised anti-Semitism. Both have a basic belief in common: that Jews – and therefore Israel – are something apart, not to be measured by the standards applied to everybody else. . .

ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.palestinechronicle.com/gunter-the-terrible/#.UpTfHMSsh8E

Will De Blasio introduce a Habeit Hayehudi style racial hierarchy in Gotham?

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/eyes-wide-open/.premium-1.566156

What will you do if a law for single sex marriages is proposed [in the Knesset]?

“No, under no circumstances. A Jew and a goy can also not marry.”

Is that the same thing?

“We don’t recognize either of them. In any case, a Jew always has a much higher [level] soul than a goy, even if he is a homosexual … Matters of religion and state are the largest obstacle in the path of the government … Conflicts between women are much more difficult than conflicts between men…” (On the parliamentary conflict between MK Adi Kol (Yesh Atid) and MK Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) over the bill granting same-sex parents equal tax exemptions to heterosexual parents.)

Agree with Alex that de Blasio doesnt actually believe for a second what he is saying about Israel and isnt that ignorant.

Agree with Slater that US politicans perceive that Jewish voters vote pro Israel which is important in heavily Jewish districts as well as national elections because of states like Florida.

For the arguement over whether Jews do or dont or how many attach great weight to Israel in voting we cant know. The only way we could know that is if one party ceased support for Israel. If the Dems dropped Isr and the liberal Jews jumped ship to the Israel supporting GOP then we could judge that importance, or non importance if they didnt jump the lib ship.

Until we get big money out of our political system, the corporations, the huge lobbies and the very wealthy, will continue to call the shots in our politics, in both local and national elections. Progressives need to work hard on this issue, because right now we have rule by the wealthy. The rest of us don’t count so much.