Jump to content
progressivecitizen

What's the problem with Rep. Omar?

Recommended Posts

what are you confused about ? anti semitism  ?  reporting ? slander verb to noun ?

 

 I think Mel Brooks would have a field day with aggressive Jews

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There may be a different standard for her because of her open religiosity.  We often set different standards for people's speech depending on who they are.  For example, white folks are called out as racist if they reference negative facts about minorities.   A Jewish person could probably have said what she said and not been called anti-Semitic.   A practicing Catholic...they would probably get called out. 

 

Personally, I don't like that.  What a person says should be looked at independent of who they are.  But, that's not the way it works.  Our reaction to political statements, for example, depends on who said it.  Was the speaker a Democrat or a Republican?  If it was a member of the party you support, you'll find a way to rationalize it as positive.  If it was from the other party, you'll rationalize it as negative.  This whole thing a result of identity politics.  We assume that people will think a certain way because of who they are.  Muslims must think like this...  Whites must think like that...  etc.  I hate it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well the term puts her in two corners she is not able to defend well

 

makes her look like a racist and anti liberal 

 

I agree with her on the subject and not to surprised to see democrats side against her

 

And assume she is getting tossed under the right wing bus because her views fit a conservative Idea ? but I see it as liberating 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all: Hi everyone. ^_^ I'm new here. I'm a proud Social Democrat who's spent a lot of time on other forums (that ar far more right leaning) discussing politics and whatnot, so it's nice to find a place amongst some similar minds.

 

Didn't see a section devoted to introductions so I figured I'd just get that out of the way here on my first post.

 

Anyway, in regards to Rep. Omar...

 

I don't believe she said anything anti-semitic. She was calling out the corruption of money in politics, specifically AIPAC and it's influence on pro-Israel policies. Most of the people who started perpetuating this false narrative have the establishment mindset that anything anti-Israel or pro-palestinian is somehow "anti-semitic."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are words or action that carry meaning because of historical context.

 

When someone burns a cross, that's not simply arson, because we know from the historical context what that really means... or at least, we should. If someone hangs a noose at a place of employment, that's a message, not merely a decoration.

 

What Rep Omar said wasn't isolated. It was part of a long history in which Jews in any country are accused if being disloyal citizens, accused of having an overwhelming loyalty only to other Jews. That is the "dual loyalty" canard.

 

It was also used against Catholics (notably President Kennedy). The canard there was that Catholics (sometimes disparagingly called Papists) would have a greater loyalty to the Pope than to their country.

 

There are many antisemitic canards, because Jews have faced violent racism for 2000 years. You can read about some of them here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AquilaKing said:

First of all: Hi everyone. ^_^ I'm new here. I'm a proud Social Democrat who's spent a lot of time on other forums (that ar far more right leaning) discussing politics and whatnot, so it's nice to find a place amongst some similar minds.

 

Welcome to the forum AquilaKing.   You'll find that the pace is slow here in the Liberal's Only sub-forum.  As you can see by the rules for this sub-forum, no conservatives are allowed and we usually make our arguments without gratuitous abuse.   On the other hand, the pace in No Hold Barred sub-forum is much faster, all ideologies are welcomed and verbal abuse of every kind, takes place on a regular basis.

 

I too am a social democrat.  Go Bernie !

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, laripu said:

There are words or action that carry meaning because of historical context.

 

When someone burns a cross, that's not simply arson, because we know from the historical context what that really means... or at least, we should. If someone hangs a noose at a place of employment, that's a message, not merely a decoration.

 

I get what you're saying.  95% of the time, that's probably accurate.  But, sometimes a burning cross is just a fire.  Sometimes a noose is just a rope.  

 

True example:  Someone I know, had a young grandson.  They bought one of those plastic swings with the wraparound seat.  The seat comes with pre-fitted nylon ropes that end in two hooks about 2 ft above the swing.  So, to hang the swing, you need two ropes hanging from a swing set...or, in this case, a tree limb.  After years of use, this person took the swing down because the child had outgrown it.  The ropes in the tree would have to wait for another day (too high to reach).  Imagine that person's surprise when they were scolded for having two 'nooses' in their front yard!  In some neighborhoods, they might have come to real harm over that misunderstanding.

 

If I had my way, people would default to the 'misunderstanding' approach until proven otherwise.  "Excuse me sir...do you know the history of the burning cross?"

 

Crosses and nooses are so much part of the culture that everyone can reasonably be expected to already know that history.  But what about 'flip' charts?  I have learned that I shouldn't call those big pads of paper on a tripod (used in briefings) 'flip' charts because the word flip is a derogatory term for people from the Philippines.  Sometimes, it seems like we might run out of words that aren't offensive.

 

Yes, Omar should know better.  It may not be a fair standard, but it is well known.  If nothing else, this incident shows very poor judgement on her part.  Also, her half-done apology for the way it "made people feel" makes me think she's hostile to Jews.  It's sort of like she said "I'm sorry it upsets you that I don't like Jews".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Renegade said:

I get what you're saying.  95% of the time, that's probably accurate.  But, sometimes a burning cross is just a fire.  Sometimes a noose is just a rope.  

 

True example:  Someone I know, had a young grandson.  They bought one of those plastic swings with the wraparound seat.  The seat comes with pre-fitted nylon ropes that end in two hooks about 2 ft above the swing.  So, to hang the swing, you need two ropes hanging from a swing set...or, in this case, a tree limb.  After years of use, this person took the swing down because the child had outgrown it.  The ropes in the tree would have to wait for another day (too high to reach).  Imagine that person's surprise when they were scolded for having two 'nooses' in their front yard!  In some neighborhoods, they might have come to real harm over that misunderstanding.

 

If I had my way, people would default to the 'misunderstanding' approach until proven otherwise.  "Excuse me sir...do you know the history of the burning cross?"

 

Crosses and nooses are so much part of the culture that everyone can reasonably be expected to already know that history.  But what about 'flip' charts?  I have learned that I shouldn't call those big pads of paper on a tripod (used in briefings) 'flip' charts because the word flip is a derogatory term for people from the Philippines.  Sometimes, it seems like we might run out of words that aren't offensive.

 

Yes, Omar should know better.  It may not be a fair standard, but it is well known.  If nothing else, this incident shows very poor judgement on her part.  Also, her half-done apology for the way it "made people feel" makes me think she's hostile to Jews.  It's sort of like she said "I'm sorry it upsets you that I don't like Jews".  

 

I suppose it's possible to find counterexamples, or to make them up; but they should be realistic.

I've never heard of any Filipinos complaining about flip charts, probably because flip charts were never a symbol of oppression for them.

On the other hand, burning crosses and nooses were and still are symbols of terrorist murder.

So the comparison is not really valid.

 

Another fair point is that a slightly derogatory expression on people who have rarely experienced oppression will probably not be taken as overly offensive. If I call my neighbor a WASP because they are a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, they're not going to get too upset. No-one has tried to kill them for being that.

 

Blacks and Jews have a different history, and a different present experience too.

 

About 10 years ago I gathered numbers from the FBI's hate crime statistics tables. What I found was that for many many years, in the United States:

  • About 2/3 of the hate crimes by racial motivation were directed against Blacks.
  • About 2/3 of the hate crimes by religious motivation were directed against Jews.
  • The above varied from year to year and could go from something like 60% to something like 70% but it was mostly pretty close to 2/3.

Here are the latest tables, for 2017:   https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2017/tables/table-1.xls

Looking at that I find that:

  • 938 of 1564 hate crimes by religious motivation were directed against Jews. That's 60%, and the next highest group are Muslims, at 17.5%. It's worth noticing that Jews are between 1.7% and 2.6% of the US population, depending on who is considered Jewish. So a tiny percentage of the US population gets the lion's share of hate.
  • 2013 of 4131 hate crimes by racial motivation were directed against Blacks.  That 48.7%. So in the intervening years hate crimes against blacks, while still way too frequent, are becoming less common than they once were as a percent of the whole. Perhaps that has something to do with the slow rise of the Black middle class. I don't know, that's just a wild guess.

Whatever it is, if you're Jewish in this country, even if you're an atheist of Jewish parentage like me, you can expect some discrimination and potential violence. And this country is the best country in the world for Jews!!!  (In fact, better than Israel.)

 

So if Jews are sensitive to dog whistles, canards, insinuations ... it's not because they're too sensitive. It's because they have been sensitized as a survival mechanism.

 

Two last details:

1. The complete list of atrocities against Jews would take weeks to chronicle. This timeline is only the low points:     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_antisemitism

2. From the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther, the following:

"What shall we Christians do with this rejected and condemned people, the Jews?"

"First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools … This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians …"

"Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed."

"Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings, in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught, be taken from them."

"Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb …"

"Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the countryside …"

"Sixth, I advise that usury be prohibited to them, and that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them …"

"Seventh, I recommend putting a flail, an ax, a hoe, a spade, a distaff, or a spindle into the hands of young, strong Jews and Jewesses and letting them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow … But if we are afraid that they might harm us or our wives, children, servants, cattle, etc., … then let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., … then eject them forever from the country …"

 

Or do you think I'm just being a way- too-sensitive Jewflake?  (;))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bludog said:

 

Welcome to the forum AquilaKing.   You'll find that the pace is slow here in the Liberal's Only sub-forum.  As you can see by the rules for this sub-forum, no conservatives are allowed and we usually make our arguments without gratuitous abuse.   On the other hand, the pace in No Hold Barred sub-forum is much faster, all ideologies are welcomed and verbal abuse of every kind, takes place on a regular basis.

 

I too am a social democrat.  Go Bernie !

 

 

Thanks for the warm welcome. 👍

 

Bernie all the way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AquilaKing said:

 

Thanks for the warm welcome. 👍

 

Bernie all the way!

Welcome, AquilaKing.  :)  Another long-time Bernie supporter here (and member of Our Revolution).  I hope you enjoy the forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

last I checked  Hebrews had their day on top already and consider them on a down tick atm  and Christians are doing a great job of beating themselves up atm. 100 years from now it might be more Kosher then we think 

 

 but this is about our Alliance with Israel  ?

 

 aiding wars that will never end is a fruitless endeavor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2019 at 8:52 AM, rrober49 said:

 I think Mel Brooks would have a field day with aggressive Jews

 

In fact, Brooks never made a film on the subject and probably never will.  Maybe that's because he doesn't think Jews are any more aggressive than people of other faiths.

 

2 hours ago, rrober49 said:

last I checked  Hebrews had their day on top already and consider them on a down tick atm  and Christians are doing a great job of beating themselves up atm.

 

When were the Hebrews ever on top?  Even in the First Testament the period of Israeli military victories were depicted as being very finite, geographically.  Until Israel fell to the Neo-Assyrian empire in 722 BCE.  Then came the forcible relocation of the Ten Lost Tribes.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_captivity

The Hebrews of ancient Israel were never "on top" compared to the large powers of their time like The Hittites, Assyria or Egypt.  And, of course, they were later widely persecuted in Europe, finally suffering the loss two thirds of the Jewish population of the world during WWII.  The establishment of modern Israel has certainly not resulted in any acceptable level of security or enabled Hebrew domination of the area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

 

The Israel - Palestine tragedy is a separate subject.

 

 

2 hours ago, rrober49 said:

Christians are doing a great job of beating themselves up atm.

 

Measured how?  Large numbers of Christians would disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RollingRock said:

Welcome, AquilaKing.  :)  Another long-time Bernie supporter here (and member of Our Revolution).  I hope you enjoy the forum!

 

Thanks. ^_^ Nice to meet you. 

And thank you to anyone else who might welcome me here. :)

 

2 hours ago, rrober49 said:

but this is about our Alliance with Israel  ?

 

It has more to do with a conservative pro-Israel Super PAC (AIPAC) that pushes American politicians to act in favor of a foreign power. Israel isn't a perfect saint, and just cause someone criticises the Israel government does not mean they are anti-semitic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AquilaKing said:

It has more to do with a conservative pro-Israel Super PAC (AIPAC) that pushes American politicians to act in favor of a foreign power. Israel isn't a perfect saint, and just cause someone criticises the Israel government does not mean they are anti-semitic.

 

 

 I get it  I would rather see the support go more to our direct south  or to people able to make peace

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you are in the US congress and say anything negative about AIPAC you will be accused of antisemitism. Not dissimilar from saying anything negative about the NRA. Both groups unfortunately hold a lot of political power when to my mind they should not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rrober49 said:

r  yeah brooks would never make anything like that 

 

Just so:  "Jews in Space" is nothing like "Aggressive Jews".  

 

"Jews in Space" is a playful spoof.   Making a film called "Aggressive Jews", however funny, would suggest an ugly Jewish exceptionalism that doesn't exist.  Brooks has never made anything like that and, IMO, would never have considered it.   Only an anti-Jewish bigot would make a film about "Aggressive Jews".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jews, Christians, Muslims, 

All slang terms, hateful speech, oh those Olmecs, responsible for the downfall of the central America's,

those Hindu's responsible in a different life, 

Jainism

a nontheistic religion founded in India in the 6th century BC by the Jina Vardhamana Mahavira as a reaction against the teachings of orthodox Brahmanism, and still practiced there. The Jain religion teaches salvation by perfection through successive lives, and noninjury to living creatures, and is noted for its ascetics.

 

 

Peace!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, laripu said:

I suppose it's possible to find counterexamples, or to make them up; but they should be realistic.

I've never heard of any Filipinos complaining about flip charts, probably because flip charts were never a symbol of oppression for them.

 

Certainly, it never was a symbol of oppression and it's a trivial example in comparison to the noose or the burning cross.  But, no kidding, I was briefed not to call it a flip chart during an HR class at work.  It was so unexpected that I remember this example over everything else in the class.  You can google it and see I wasn't the only one.

 

19 hours ago, laripu said:

If I call my neighbor a WASP because they are a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, they're not going to get too upset. No-one has tried to kill them for being that.

 

Not recently and not in the USA.  But, in other countries there's certainly a long and bloody history. 

 

Whether or not I get upset about anything you call me is more about how you say it and what your intention is; not the term you used.  For example, in some contexts, the 'n word' is a term that shows kinship.  In other contexts, it's a fighting word.  If (when you you call someone a WASP) you're merely cataloging facts, it probably won't be taken as an offense.  On the other hand, if you use the term in anger to indicate you believe the person is an intolerant racist bigot, then you might have some problems.  Context is everything.

 

19 hours ago, laripu said:

About 10 years ago I gathered numbers from the FBI's hate crime statistics tables. What I found was that for many many years, in the United States:

  • About 2/3 of the hate crimes by racial motivation were directed against Blacks.
  • About 2/3 of the hate crimes by religious motivation were directed against Jews.
  • The above varied from year to year and could go from something like 60% to something like 70% but it was mostly pretty close to 2/3.

 

Good point about the hate crimes against Jews.  I had no idea it was that high.  I would have thought Muslims would be most targeted.

 

I don't know that the statistics on racial hate crime reports accurately indicate the actual prevalence of the crimes.  One reason is the same reason that affects sex crime statistics...under reporting.  To start with, the police are reluctant to record any hate crimes.  Partly this is due to the difficulty in determining a person's motivation, and partly due to the negative stigma hate crimes cause for the community.  Plus, there's a cultural bias against regarding some actions as hate crimes.  A black guy gets beat up by some white guys; it might be a hate crime.  A white guy gets beat up by some black guys; it's just a mugging.   And then there's Jesse Smollett.

 

20 hours ago, laripu said:

Whatever it is, if you're Jewish in this country, even if you're an atheist of Jewish parentage like me, you can expect some discrimination and potential violence.

 

I ask this out of ignorance, not argument.  How does one even know that an atheist is of Jewish descent?   Do they seek you out because of your parents?   Other than noting who attends services in a synagogue, I wouldn't have a clue how to know if someone was a Jew.  Surely, not everyone who's name ends in -stein or -berg is a Jew?  I thought those were common Germanic suffixes, not necessarily Jewish.  In my ignorance, I would have thought atheists are more likely to be discriminated against than Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Renegade said:

I ask this out of ignorance, not argument.  How does one even know that an atheist is of Jewish descent?   Do they seek you out because of your parents?   Other than noting who attends services in a synagogue, I wouldn't have a clue how to know if someone was a Jew.  Surely, not everyone who's name ends in -stein or -berg is a Jew?  I thought those were common Germanic suffixes, not necessarily Jewish.  In my ignorance, I would have thought atheists are more likely to be discriminated against than Jews.

 

This us a good question, and you're not alone in not knowing this.

 

Being Jewish is only partly about religion. In fact, even as an atheist, I can say I'm Jewish. The other aspects are cultural and linguistic. I'll explain.

 

Cultural: Pretty much every Jewish holiday involves a meal, and a lot of Eastern European Jewish food became traditional in America. Some became mainstream: bagels, pastrami, corned beef. But they're are a whole host of other dishes eaten by Jews that aren't mainstream. Jewish holidays aren't typically only about religion. The joke about them is that every Jewish holiday amounts to "they tried to kill us, they didn't succeed, we're still here, so let's eat". That's a powerful unifier for a group. (The one that just passed, Purim, had an extra component: you can get a bit drunk too. My wife, who's of German Catholic heritage, said: "Purim? Pour 'em!" - so I had a second drink.)

 

Language: most American Jews no longer speak Yiddish (the eastern European Jewish language), but I was raised speaking it and still can. It's a 70% Germanic language with many loan words from Polish, Russian, Hebrew and Aramaic. (But the writing uses Hebrew letters.) In fact I can speak simple Yiddish to my wife and she'll understand almost everything. Same thing when she speaks German to me. There are enough people that can either speak Yiddish or want to, that it is still a unifier.

 

There's also a Jewish language that originated in Spain, called Ladino. It is sometimes referred to as Judeo-Spanish and also uses Hebrew letters. And many Jewish kids worldwide learn some Hebrew.

 

You don't lose your childhood culture when you decide you're an atheist. Lots of atheists of Christian origin grew up with Christmas trees and exchanged presents and continue to do that in adulthood. In fact, we had a little tree for years and gave gifts to my wife's kids. They're not interested in us anymore so we've dropped that. But my wife likes the music at midnight mass at Christmas, So some years she'll go, health permitting.

 

So I'm 100% Jewish and 100% atheist and there's 0% contradiction there. As to how someone would know... I'm not exactly reticent about anything ... can't you tell? 😊😉 

 

So that explains it about most American Jews, kinda, sorta. Most American Jews are of the Reform denomination, which is typically liberal, and doesn't look any different. (If someone wants to kill Jews, all they have to do is go to a synagogue or Jewish community center. They'll find American Jews who don't look any different. Easy targets. It's been fine multiple times recently, including at a Jewish community daycare center.)

 

But there are several flavors of Orthodox Jews, from those who simply wear a head covering to the ultra-Orthodox (called Haredi Jews), who dress like it's still Poland in 1775. They're kind of a Jewish version of Amish. You can easily find them in New York, London, and Israel. Still a minority, but they're easily recognizable, and therefore targets of hate crimes.

 

Here's a typical Haredi look:

 

 

1920px-Haredi_(Orthodox)_Jewish_Couples_

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

America's relationship with Israel is definitely odd, and the total absence of any criticism of anything Israel does is striking.  Honestly, in our world, where Jews have been persecuted forever and have a legitimate gripe...is it possible to criticize Israel, or not?

 

It is not possible that because Jews are really and truly discriminated against and/or attacked, that the policies of Israel are beyond reproach.

 

Is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely support Omar and think that she has for one helps wake Americans up to the abuses Palestinians face at the hands of Israeli Jews.

 

And I do not think her comment about AIPAC was anti-Semitic. It was more about politicians' loyalties and the reason for them having to do with the "Benjamins".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...