Why did what Bill Maher said get so little notice?

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah as has been said, I'm pretty certain Maher meant: "Because it's got to be something about the Jews themselves" which these critics of Israel must not like. Not that there must be something about the Jews themselves that makes them somehow deserve it. He is saying that Israel is subject to a supposed double standard by the left, because if they are historically oppressed, why isn't the left supporting Israel? He is insinuating that it must just be because Israel is a Jewish state--that critics of Israel just hate Jews and that's all there is to it. (Which is bogus).


It's been years but I still can't tell how exactly the right thinks Jews fit into leftist "wokeism". As any number of neo-Nazis will tell you, Jewish scholars have been hugely influential in modern studies on systemic racism. Jews in America have always had common cause with other marginalized groups in this country. Jews have been victims of structural racism like any other non-white group. That being said, as with any group, they are not immune to being racist themselves. Jews can be racist against blacks can be racist against asians can be racist against natives etc.etc.etc. That last bit is always glossed over in criticisms of identity politics i see from the right--like you are either a victim 100% of the time or an oppressor 100% of the time--when (most of us) recognize that the reality is more nuanced than that. Some on the far right will go so far as to tell you that "anti-white" identity politics is a sign that academia is straight-up controlled by the Jews, yet they also insist (mainly when the Israeli/Palestinian conflict flares up) that academia is controlled by anti-semites who hate Israel because they supposedly hate Jews. So which is it? It seems to do with whether they are, in a given moment, trying to turn conservatives or liberals against academia and leftists as a whole.

Farrakhan is a sack of sh-t. But he is the exception. He is more representative of black (supremacist) nationalism than he is a representative of BLM or the left as a whole. That's right--me, identity politics anti-capitalist anarchist, can acknowledge that (as I stated above) black people can very much be racist against non-blacks. I always feel like it is telling that the right always brings out Farrakhan as an example--lord knows they have precious few examples of openly anti-Jew leftists to work with. Gotta really milk those few actively anti-semitic leftists to distract from the fact that actual, self-described Nazis are some of the GOP's most reliable constituents.
As for the banning of star of David pride flags, that is more to do with that symbol's association with Israel than Judaism as a whole. In my experience, queers have been extremely welcoming of Jews. Queer Jews have it especially rough in a society dominated by straight Gentiles. Hostility to Israel is not because of Judaism, but because it is a colonial state built on the expulsion of native peoples and the relegation of other religious groups to second-class citizenship.

I see the anti-semitism of the USSR as more of a continuation of the anti-semitism of Russian society before and after the revolution, rather than a sign that the left as a whole has a built-in tendency towards hating Jews. Unfortunately, anti-semitism has crafted the narrative over the centuries that Jews are greedy elites who hoard wealth to oppress the majority-Christian working class. Many non-Jews have bought into that narrative and integrated it into their political world views. If you're an anti-semite and you become a socialist, then you are going to integrate anti-semitism into your brand of socialism.
That being said, anti-semitic leftists are anti-semitic *despite* being on the left--not anti-semitic *because* they are on the left. Socialism at its core is internationalist and cosmopolitan. Jews have made enormous contributions to socialist thought. Jews have been viewed with suspicion of being leftists for as long as the nationalist-capitalist establishment has recognized the threat they pose to the status quo. Right-wing nationalism has always viewed Jews as a threat to the nation-state--because to the nationalist Jews are always outsiders with questionable loyalty to Gentile states. It has only been in recent years that conservatives have started parroting "JUDEO-Christian American values"--signalling their virtue by adding Jews to the exclusive club of religions that can "get" American values.

Thank you for actually answering the questions.

Once more I get and have always gotten that Maher meant that Israel is getting the attention because they identify as a Jewish state. I am just shocked that people who disagree with him and people who just like to criticize are not taking the “something about the Jews” out of context because taking one part of a statement out of context to attack people is just how things are done. I have concluded that what seems like an obvious exception to me is me being the exception. That pretty much everybody who saw the show or read the quotes innately understands things I do not.

What I described as “woke antisemitism” is often differs from what is usually described as anti-semitism. What has been described as “oppression olympics” is an outgrowth of intersectionality. Intersectionality is a recent word for what is common sense. If you are a member of multiple minorities you are more likely to face discrimination, face it more often, and face the more severe kinds than if you are a member of one minority. “Oppression Olympics” describes ranking groups on a privileged/oppressed scale. The “woke antisemitism” idea says that because most American Jews are the Ashkenazi kind and thus lite colored skin and they have done very well here Jews get put at the top of the oppressor part of the scale. Where this type of stereotyping does conflate with traditional anti-Jewish tropes is the association with a lot of money and the nefarious use of that money. Israel as white colonialists oppressing Palestinian people of color fits into this narrative.

I agree that people fit their bigotry into their political views. Certain political narratives make this easier than others.

Farrakhan’s views are much more associated with wing ideologies than left wing ideologies but plenty of people associated with left wing views have adopted him.

One of the good things to come out of social justice activism is the idea that outsiders should not define things for a group. When I was growing up “Queer” was a toxic slur on par with “n****r”. The Queer community changed that. The Dyke march and too many other groups have decided for Jews what the Star of David a Jewish symbol before zionists adopted it have decided for Jews what it should mean.

The objection was not to the Star of David per se, but to the Star of David on a background of horizontal stripes reminiscent of the Israeli flag. A Star of David on a different kind of background would probably have been fine.

The reason why we've been talking about the disproportionate attention to Israel is that it is often pointed to as the primary alleged evidence of “woke antisemitism”, even though (as discusssed here and in subsequent posts) there are lots and lots of other reasons for the disproportionate attention to Israel besides bigotry against Jews. The latter might be a factor too, but, probably, far from the biggest factor, at least for most American leftists. (Things might be different in other Western countries, where bigotry against Jews might be a bigger factor.)


Googling this right now, I found this Haaretz article, which is paywalled, but the following subtitle is visible: "Dyke March organizers say rainbow flag featuring Star of David is too similar to Israeli flag, but symbols that don't 'directly replicate nationalist images and symbols' are permitted." In other words, this looks like a Star of David without stripes would have been permitted, and likewise a menorah would have been fine.


This is understandable, given that many Black people see Palestinians as fellow victims of Western settler-colonialism, albeit victimized in very different ways.

There is also quite a bit of anti-Jewish bigotry in the Black community, but it comes mainly from the Black Nationalist / Nation of Islam / "Black Hebrew" sector, rather than from the left.


Googled that. Indeed, looks very bad for that particular BLM chapter. No one seems to be claiming that the guy was actually innocent (e.g. mistaken identity). Instead they are just making excuses for him. Not good.


IMO leftist groups do need to take stronger stands against the random attacks on Jews, and against the anti-Jewish grand conspiracy ideologies that may be inspiring them.

But that isn't a reason not to object to Israel's policies, or to the very idea of ethno-states in general.

I cant figure out what you're saying about ...what I said. Lol!

So apparently you were confused about what I said. And what I said couldnt have been very complicated.

Whoopi said Nazism was evil, but it was not racism. The second point being of course nonsense. Nazism is all about the Germans being "the master race". And indeed the Nazis were heavily influenced by early 20th Century American Eugenicists in their racial theories. American racists and Nazis were in the same back and forth conversation.

You were agreeing with Whoopi. Ergo you were dead wrong. The fact that you consider Jews to be White is irelevent. In the mind of the perpetrators of the crime (the Holocaust) the Jews were a separate "race" from pure Aryans. So it was racism. Not very complicated.