Wednesday, September 19, 2012

MJ Rosenberg Defines Anti-Semitism (Part 2)

This is the second part of MJ Rosenberg's two-fisted defense of Maureen Dowd for using anti-Semitic terminology like "puppet masters" and "slithering" in her attack on "neocons," a group that Rosenberg declares is not 100% Jewish (but do only care about Israel) ergo it's okay to use anti-Semitic terms to attack them. Right. But now the hypocrisy begins, which is always amazing to see. This is Rosenberg from this article:
"The neoconservatives now savaging Maureen Dowd are saying that an attack on Jewish individuals who do bad things is anti-Semitic. They are foaming at the mouth because she singles out Dan Senor, Romney's Middle East brain trust, for particular scorn...This is where the neocons employ classic antisemitism. They are saying that any Jew represents all Jews."
Oh, is that a bad thing now? To say that any Jew represents all Jewish people? Now if you haven't read the first part of my response please do so now, because when Rosenberg goes after Glen Beck, suddenly attacking "individual Jews" is a problem:
"The first part of the strategy is never to blame the Jews as Jews. Beck focuses on individual Jews, one after another, as the source of America's misfortunes but carefully avoids references to Jews as a group.The second is that when he does discuss "the Jews" per se, he emphasizes that he himself isn't blaming them for anything but that unnamed others do. He is just offering a friendly warning to Jews to watch their backs.The third is that he loudly professes his "love for Israel" which, to the gullible, means that he could not possibly be anti-Semitic. (Jewish neoconservatives, in particular, tend to court the friendship of anyone who claims the mantle of "pro-Israel," no matter what that person thinks about Jews.) [emphasis mine]"
Change the names around and it could easily apply to Dowd. Of course I can't help but wonder: If Beck never references Jews "as a group" than how does Rosenberg know that that who he is talking about? Gee, wouldn't that be "anti-Semitic" to conflate Jewish individuals with Jews as whole? Oh does that only apply to people that MJ Rosenberg doesn't like?

Here he is, back in the Maureen Dowd article:
"But you cannot attack individual Jews because we are all the same and thus attacking one is attacking all."
That's sarcasm, by the way. Unless you are Glen Beck in which case he is totally serious: you can't attack individual Jews or else Rosenberg will assume that you are talking about all Jews and conclude you are an anti-Semite. Seriously. That is not a joke.

At this point Rosenberg finishes by praising Dowd some more, so let's conclude with some more hypocrisy from his Glen Beck article, because I don't think I will ever find that old:
"But many Jews, and others familiar with anti-Semitic tropes and themes, see right through Beck's carefully constructed edifice of innocence. Writer Michelle Goldberg explained Beck's tactics in a blockbuster article in the Daily Beast in which she wrote that Beck's repeated references to Jews constitute "a symphony of anti-Semitic dog-whistles."
According to Goldberg, receptive ears will understand who he is describing when he talks about a liberal elite which runs a "shadow government"that, in Goldberg's words, "manipulates regimes and currencies for its own enrichment." When he says that group are simultaneously bankers and Marxists, and says they have made President Obama "their puppet," his audience will know what he means." [emphasis added by me]
Obama is a "puppet master" or some shadowy group of individuals who are mostly Jewish. Is this an anti-Semitic statement? The first thing you need to do is stop looking at the statement itself and start looking at who said it. If the person is on the left, it is definitely not and if you think so you are being anti-Semitic. Somehow. If the person is on the right, it is an anti-Semitic dog whistle and further proof that Republicans all hate Jewish people.

This article marks a return of the classic MJ Rosenberg agenda. Waving the "Jewish card" to defend his friends and attack his enemies. He doesn't really care about Jewish people, anti-Semitism, or even about Israel as close as I can tell. What he cares about is getting Obama elected, AIPAC destroyed, and liberals staying in power forever. He has chosen the Jewish angle to get him attention and a platform, but I have not found any evidence that he actually cares about the future of the Jewish people, either in America or elsewhere. That's something one can say about the Huffington Post, as well.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.