"Moral Rot": Rude Awakenings, Lessons, and Being Not Sure How to Cope

"We have had no end of a lesson: it will do us no end of good."

I got an e-mail from a reader today, asking about what I would say to Jewish college students who feel assailed, outnumbered, and collectively targeted by anti-Israel and anti-Israeli speech that they perceive—perhaps quite correctly—as anti-Semitic. What is the value, they might ask, of freedom for speech like that?

By coincidence, today I saw a post by Rice Prof. Moshe Vardi, "A Moral Rot at Rice University," that reports on various anti-Israel speech there, including from the Rice student government. The post closes with this:

I was well aware that antisemitism is alive and well in the US, but I had believed that it exists only in the margins, among the extreme Left and extreme Right. I have been rudely awakened. I now realize that not only is it a mainstream phenomenon, but it is also quite prevalent on my very own campus, among Rice faculty and students. This is a profoundly bitter lesson for me. I am not quite sure how to cope with it.

No-one likes rude awakenings, bitter lessons, and situations with which one is not quite sure how to cope. But they are tremendously useful. Many of us have indeed been rudely awakened to the magnitude of hostility in many American universities to Israel, Israelis, and Jews. But that's not because there has been a surge of such hostility: It's because the existing hostility has revealed itself.

Thanks to the freedom of speech, we have a better sense now than before of who our enemies are, and who our friends are. We have a better sense of how our institutions operate. We have a better sense of how the ideologies that many teach there can play out.

We are now awake when we were asleep. We have learned a lesson, bitter as it may be. Being not sure how to cope with circumstances is better than being sure of the wrong things.

One hundred and twenty years ago, an author had something to say about lessons—in that context military lessons, but I think the principle is generalizable—and indeed in a poem called The Lesson:

Let us admit it fairly, as a business people should,
We have had no end of a lesson: it will do us no end of good.

Not on a single issue, or in one direction or twain,
But conclusively, comprehensively, and several times and again,
Were all our most holy illusions knocked higher than Gilderoy's kite.
We have had a jolly good lesson, and it serves us jolly well right! …

It was our fault, and our very great fault, and not the judgment of Heaven.
We made an Army in our own image, on an island nine by seven,
Which faithfully mirrored its makers' ideals, equipment, and mental attitude—
And so we got our lesson: and we ought to accept it with gratitude….

For remember (this our children shall know: we are too near for that knowledge)
Not our mere [astounded] camps, but Council and Creed and College
All the obese, unchallenged old things that stifle and overlie us—
Have felt the effects of the lesson we got—an advantage no money could buy us!

Perhaps this may seem too pretty a face to put on some very ugly things happening today at various universities. But Rudyard Kipling (for he was the author) was also writing about things that were ugly to his readers: Britain's massive initial failures in the Second Boer War, failures that cost Britain a great deal of blood. (The war cost the Boers even more blood, especially civilian blood, but that is another story.)

The key message seems right, and apt: Value the lesson, bitter as it may be. And in this instance, value the freedom of speech that has given us an opportunity to learn the lesson.

Comments

[apedad]

"It's because the existing hostility has revealed itself."

THANK YOU!!!!

I hate when people say there's a rise in hate speech or anti (name your hatred: LGBTQ, Jews, Environmentalists, Fundamentalists, etc.).

No, there hasn't been a rise in any of that; it's just simply the internet allows everyone to have a global audience AND the global audience is now more AWARE of the hate speech.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Apedad -- the internet has been around since 1969.
Apedad -- the web has been around since 1993.

This crap has been festering in cesspools like Planet UMass for over 30 years -- the only difference -- the big difference -- is that the line between speech and violence is far easier to cross in the post BLM world.

UMass had a Hamas chapter in the graduate dorm way back in 1993.

[Bwaaah]

"the line between speech and violence is far easier to cross in the post BLM world"

Only for those who have a definition of "speech" that considers it to be "violence." In my mind, that view not only trivializes violence, but it criminalizes speech too.

[Don Nico]

EV-
I agree that a significant component of the strong sense of fear our Jewish, and especially Israeli, faculty, staff and students feel, is due to a very rude awakening about the degree of anti-Semitism that has been revealed and the degree to which administrations have tried to reflect a tone of moral equivalence in the face or widespread evidence that Jewish faculty and students feel (and are) existentially threatened.
A personal (rather than institutional) statement similar to the institutional statement from my colleagues might have helped a great deal
"We are horrified by the brutal attack carried out by Hamas and strongly condemn the terrorist acts. [We have] diverse connections with Israeli scientists and partner institutions in Israel. We mourn with our Israeli friends and colleagues for the victims and share their concerns."

[Dr. Ed 2]

Don -- is it that, or the absence of such a statement in light of all of the other statements they have made, e.g. BLM, even the Indonesian Tsunami.

Personally, I don't think the university ought to be making statements on ANYTHING.

[Don Nico]

Mr. Ed, try reading more closely.
I said "A personal (rather than institutional) statement..."
The three presidents could have made that personal statement in an answer. They did not and to their difficulties in the press and the hearing.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Of all people, I am amazed that you are saying this.

My position would be that if it didn't happen on campus, they say nothing, and if people need affirmation or personal statements, they should go see the mental health folk.

And as to ON CAMPUS, any violence should be condemned and punished qua violence. No exception, no discussion.

[Kazinski]

Well I'm not too surprised by the explosion of anti-Semitism on campus, it's been obvious for a while that the left has been embracing the Palestinian cause and its associated anti-Semitism, but has been using window dressing like claiming movements like BDS only targets Israel not Jews.

This of course has been aided and abetted by left wing Jewish organizations, that have been trying to weaponize anti-Semitism for political purposed as only a right wing problem tainting all conservatives. Ignoring he fact that 80% of anti-Semitism in US is from the progressive left, their side.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Thank you for the right-wing bigot’s perspective, which this blog exists to provide.

Carry on, clingers.

[Bwaaah]

Take a look at the Harvard Harris Poll from October (not at their summary presentation, but the data in the "Crosstabs" that shows the party breakdowns):

https://harvardharrispoll.com/

31% of Democrats believed Hamas was justified in its attack on Israel. Only 17% of Republicans felt the same. (See page 125.)

Unsurprisingly, Harvard Harris did not publish the November crosstabs because, well, you can justify it somehow.

Carry on, clinger.

[Absaroka]

I think this is the actual PDF.

Looking across the various Hamas questions, there is a strong generational divide; support for Israel/disapproval of Hamas drops steeply past age 24. I wonder how much of that is the woke/intersectionality/whatever effect, and how much is that the older you are, the more times you have woken up to 'Today a coalition of Arab countries has attacked Israel, announcing they will drive the Jews into the sea'.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

538 gives Harvard Harris a B.

538 gives Marist an A, and Marist indicates:

.

Americans are split over whether Israel's response has been too much or about right in response to Hamas' Oct. 7 attack — with a majority of Democrats now saying it's been too much, according to the latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll.

The results were driven by people of color and younger respondents, who were far more likely than others to say Israel has gone too far, and said their sympathies lie more with the Palestinians than Israelis.

There are also clear divides on whether to fund both the Israel and Ukraine wars or to fund neither, and whether the U.S. should take a leadership role in the world at all. Again, younger Americans and nonwhites — as well as majorities of independents and Republicans — say the U.S. should focus more on problems at home.

Israel still clings to support of old white people, especially the American culture war's losers. The trajectory for American support of Israel seems predictable -- and, from Israel's perspective, a catastrophe.

Carry on, clingers. Until . . . well, you know what's coming. And
you can't do anything to stop it.

[SRG2]

The good professor is on a Kipling roll, it seems!

There is much to admire in his works, both poetry and prose, particularly if one judges him by the standards of his day, not ours.

[Jerry B.]

I have never been able to figure out the why of antisemitism.

[Mr. Bumble]

The universal "other".

[loki13]

Trying to "figure out" hate against marginalized communities is always a losing proposition. Because you can't logic your way to understanding it. Why is there hate against the trans community? Against Latinos? Against blacks? Against anyone, really?

Of course, anti-Semitism is particularly pernicious, both because of its very long history, and because of its more recent manifestation (the Shoah).

[David Nieporent]

There's the old Jewish joke:

A Nazi is giving a speech in 1930s Germany ranting about how the Jews have caused all the problems in the country. A member of the audience yells out, "Yeah, the Jews and the bicycle riders."

The Nazi stops, puzzled, "Why the bicycle riders?"

The other guy replies, "Why the Jews?"

[shawn_dude]

Answer: because a scapegoat is needed to focus societal anger in a way that can be taken political advantage of. Anger against those perceived as different or outsiders is always bubbling under the surface so pick the most convenient one and run with it.

See: Russian/Florida and their anti-LGBT campaigns.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Respectfully, there is a distinction between the two -- the Jews aren't trying to convert Christian children to Judaism.

The Jews -- at least the ones I know -- simply want to be left alone. They aren't waving their Judaism in my face the way the LBGT folk do.

[shawn_dude]

Homophobia is never respectful, Ed. I wish you'd stop waiving your homophobia in my face.

[Macy's Window]

Yes, it is shocking that the government seeks to stop grade school children from seeing pornography. ... Just shocking.

[Randal]

Yeah, because Ready Player One is pornographic. Y'all must be pretty fucking prudish in Florida if Ready Player One is XXX.

[Bwaaah]

Have you considered "Gender Queer," with the picture of the "hot" simulated strap-on blowjob?

https://theiowastandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/6.jpg

The "prudish" people want to hold that one back until after third grade. You must be one of those "with it" people.

[Randal]

Oh please. What does Gender Queer have to do with Ready Player One? Nobody's arguing that elementary school libraries should have a pornography section. If all that had happened was some school was like oh man, what's Gender Queer doing here, this seems inappropriate, let's fix this mistake... no one would have cared. I'm sure that kind of thing happens all the time.

But no. You guys took this one example and ran with it as a justification to create an entire censorship regime which has now censored hundreds if not thousands of books, almost none of which have any remote connection to pornography whatsoever. It's just normal books that this or that parent objected to on viewpoint grounds. Like Ready Player One.

[David Nieporent]

I mean, maybe you (your fellow travelers, not you personally) could've undercut the legs from this censorship regime if you had said, "Yeah, you're right; this book doesn't belong in school libraries; we'll get rid of it," rather than, "How dare you? Queer kids will die if this book isn't available in schools! You can take it out of the library when you pry it from our cold dead hands!"

[Randal]

Give me a break. "You were briefly insufficiently accomodating about an single outlier case so I had no choice but to set up a comprehensive censorship regime that predictably went out of control" is the plot summary of every cautionary tale and/or satire on fascism in existence.

[David Nieporent]

In the court of public opinion (and in real courts, too!) the side that takes the more unreasonable position generally loses. If group A says "Gender Queer doesn't belong in schools; look at this part of the book," and group B says, "It's outrageous and hateful to remove it; it must stay in," then the public is going to say, "If Group B is that extreme about something this obvious, then Group B simply can't be trusted. I'm on Group A's side."

[Randal]

That’s the cautionary tale about fascism I’m talking about. Group A is the fascists. Fascism always arises in harmony with public opinion. Congratulations, you figured out that you can give rise to fascism by demonizing some small thing about your political enemies.

That doesn’t excuse the fascism.

[Kazinski]

Must be an old joke because anyone who lives in a modern urban environment doesn't need the reasons for a pogrom against bicycle riders explained.

[ReaderY]

Well, to the white supremacists and colonialist types on the far right, Jews are black and brown people, or at least their agents and toadies, who have been allowed to infiltrate white society, masquerade as white, and form a sort of 5th column to undermine it.

And to the minority liberationists on the far left, Jews are simply white supremacists, or at least their agents and toadies, who do their dirty work oppressing the black and brown people. They pretend to be minorities and have been allowed allowed to infiltrate, but form a sort of 5th column to undermine them.

The odd thing here is that people who are otherwise mortal enemies are in complete agreement.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No, the issue the White Supremicists have with the Jews is the same issue that the Catholics have with the Masons -- I'm not justifying it (in either case) but there's an aspect of paranoia that an insular group is organizing to plot against you.

[Macy's Window]

Except that the Masons -- and other groups -- actually did discriminate actively against Catholics.

That has mostly been gone for some decades, but there are still echoes of it.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That's a different issue and it relates to the Catholic confessional and ability to ethically keep the secrets of Masonry secret and it's best illustrated by the concerns that electing JFK President would "put the Pope in the White House."

Fair enough.

But my point was that any insular group is inherently suspect -- any insular group. Another example is "Skull and Bones" at Yale.

[Kazinski]

Don't forget the KKK. Most state legislation from the late 19th and early 20th century restricting religious schools was driven by KKK anti-catholic bias.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan_in_Maine

Of course the Catholics weren't blameless as they led efforts to keep bible reading out of public schools because they didn't approve of the King James bible (James 1, ironically his grandson James 2, lost the crown because he was a Catholic and tried to reverse the reformation).

[Life of Brian]

Thomas Sowell et al's middleman minority theory rings true to me.

[bernard11]

I think it makes a lot of sense, though it's not the whole picture.

He mentions that these communities are often seen as clannish. Goes with the territory. One reason they succeed is because they have a lot of "social capital." They know each other, work for each other, intermarry, etc.

That creates a network of trust and cooperation that makes it much easier to get things done. It also creates a situation where one's reputation is very important, so misconduct is risky.

[Absaroka]

"One reason they succeed is because they have a lot of “social capital.” They know each other, work for each other, intermarry, etc."

I dunno if the second sentence supports the first ... trailer trash know each other, work for each other, intermarry (obligatory cousin joke), etc, and that doesn't lead to a lot of success.

I agree that behavior is reinforced within groups - if you surround yourself with good role models, that nudges you in a good direction, and vice versa. So I think the group needs some good values first, before the group effects start amplifying them.

We had some not-catholic neighbors who paid more than they could really afford to send their kids to parochial school, because when their kids showed up at the public school with homework done, paid attention in class, etc, the other students hassled them for 'acting white' (FWIW, they were black). That's amplifying in a bad way.

[shawn_dude]

Something about your implied definition of success here seems off to me. The middleman theory describes Jews as starting as peddlers and some ending up quite wealthy--like Levi Strauss. But, economic success isn't the only measure for success. The less educated poor (aka: "trailer trash") bind together into a tight community as you note and they support each other to reduce the individual risks that come with poverty. There is an element of success there, too.

[Sarcastr0]

Richard Rhodes in the Making of the Atomic Bomb (to sound like a bit of a broken record citing it again) posits that antisemitism started as a top down thing.
Since well before the rise of antisemitism in the 20th century, the fact that Jewish enclaves had solidarity and authority chains independent of the local sovereign that made them stand out as a threat to that authority, by example even if not directly.

When attempts at exercising economic control were, at best, counterproductive, meant social control was the plan. And over the centuries it became normalized.

Probably it's not one thing, but this sounds like a decent thread to me.

[Kazinski]

The natural order of primates is clannish, so that is hardly a surprise.

It explains the often irrational behavior that accompanies devotion to sports teams, neighborhoods, gangs, political parties, alphabet groups, unions, nationalities, religions, terrorists cells, etc, etc.

[gormadoc]

I think it's pretty simple. If you believe success is essentially zero sum and one group of disparate people with one thing in common is disproportionately represented among the successful, then are those people uniquely capable, have they rigged the game, or are they colluding in some way? If you're the kind of person who would hate an entire group then you're more likely to believe the last two.

[apedad]

It doesn't affect me but perhaps the "Chosen People" thing might stick in the craw of other non-Jewish religious folk.

Of course it's all complete and utter bull-floppy-tits-bat-shit-craziness.

But whatevs....

[Bob from Ohio]

“Chosen People” is not actually a benefit, its a burden. A heavy responsibility to HaShem to be a "light unto the nations".

[shawn_dude]

To some extent or another, all religions seem to have some aspect of the faithful being the "chosen people." Jehovas Witnesses take that literally even among their own members. I don't think this makes the Jewish faith any different.

[Don Nico]

Shallow, shawn.
Try to understand the point that Bob alludes to,

[SRG2]

Esther 3:8 (NIV): “There is a certain people dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom who keep themselves separate. Their customs are different from those of all other people"

That does it IMO.

FWIW note the dual claim that we're dispersed among the peoples and yet we keep ourselves separate. In one of the standard 20thC personality tests, an early question would be, "do you think Jews try to blend in too much with others?" and a late question would be "do you think Jews try to keep themselves apart too much?" and anti-Semitism would be revealed by responding "yes" to both questions.

Even at the time Esther was written, therefore, the author of this fictional tale was aware of anti-Semitic perceptions.

[mydisplayname]

Hmmm. Esther actually does contain an awesome passage regarding bad strategy and the creation of terrorists by acts intended to thwart terrorism: “Have a pole set up, reaching to a height of fifty cubits, and ask the king in the morning to have Mordecai impaled on it. Then go with the king to the banquet and enjoy yourself. [...] A pole reaching to a height of fifty cubits stands by Haman’s house. He had it set up for Mordecai, who spoke up to help the king. The king said, 'Impale [Haman] on it!'” Oh, that pesky [...] part!

[SRG2]

You may know this, but not everyone does. When the book of Esther is read in synagogue for Purim, at the point when it lists the 10 sons of Haman who are also hanged, it is customary to recite the list in one breath, to suggest that they all died within the span of a single breath. In the way of these things, having learned the list at the age of 10, I can still recite it at the age of 66...

[Frank Drackman]

We (supposedly) killed Hey-Zeuss, who even the Moose-lums supposedly value, which I never understood, because that was the whole point of Hey-Zeuss's coming to Earth, if you believe in made up superstitious beings.

Frank

[Frank Drackman]

We're also smarter, richer, better looking, and have better personalities.

[Macy's Window]

That's the sort of communication that will help build bridges and overcome old resentments. /s

[Dr. Ed 2]

Frank, you do not understand Christian theology.

First and foremost, Jesus was an observant Jew, the Last Supper was a Passover Seder.

Second, Matthew 21:12-13 (King James Version)

12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

Jesus was upset because they were not following JEWISH law. It was perfectly OK to conduct business in the *outer* temple, but it was not OK to rip people off. And he was upset at the corrupt Jewish leaders who weren't enforcing Jewish law.

Third, it was CORRUPT Jewish LEADERS who condemned him to die -- not "The Jews" but corrupt INDIVIDUALS. Yes, I've heard the "Christ Killer" stuff but that is only amongst the loons -- no sane Christian church seriously holds "The Jews" responsible for something that was predestined anyway.

[Frank Drackman]

Umm, only that small sect that Martin Luther founded.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No. Not only did Martin Luther not found my sect (Puritanism) nor any of the ones that split off (Baptist, Methodist, etc.).

Second, as to Martin Luther himself, he was quite antisemetic because he believed that the issues that that the Jews had were graven images and that they would join his movement -- and felt hurt when they didn't.

[Roger S]

Antisemitism is defined so broadly that we should expect to see it everywhere. It is hard to say anything about Jews or Israel without getting the accusation.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

I have never been able to figure out the why of antisemitism.

Any ostensible insights concerning why so many Republicans are racists (other than the selfish voter suppression, I suppose)?

Why conservatives tend to be superstition-addled gay-haters?

Why right-wingers hate immigrants and Muslims?

Why conservatives -- this blog in particular -- exhibit transphobia?

Why Republicans -- especially the incels and old-timey clingers -- are such misogynists?

[Dr. Ed 2]

It’s not antisemitism, it’s broader than just that, it’s more an attack on the basic values of Judiasm. Or perhaps better stated an attack on Western Civilization itself, which Israel represents even though Judiasm is far older and originated in the Middle East. And without starting a firefight, I ask who were the Zionists — weren’t they largely the intellectual elite of Europe?

Where did the people who founded Israel come *from*? And hence what cultural values did they bring with them?

Some years back, I heard the Israeli ambassador being interviewed and he made the point of Israel being a culture of life as opposed to a culture of death.

I also say this is deeper than mere antisemitism (as bad as that is) because I, as a Christian, have run into the same mentality. It’s not quite the Borg Collective and it isn’t exactly fascism or stateism either, but it is a rejection of (small “l”) liberal values. It includes the War on Christmas (and now Hanakkah), degradation of married women who stay home with their children (and of marriage itself) and celebration of hedonism and what a mere decade ago would have been considered deviant sexual behavior (if not mental illness).

I don’t have the time to elaborate further — the rot is far deeper than mere antisemitism — although for more than a decade now, I have been asking “exactly what part of ‘Kill the Jews’ do American Jews not understand?”

[ReaderY]

The problem with that explanation is that people on the far right, who claim to be defending Western civilization, count Jews as among its enemies.

[Reg Parnell]

Sure they do, but so what? Whatever the far right is doing doesn't dictate what the left is thinking. Both things can and are true. Yes, the far right considers Jews among their enemies and claim to be defending Western Civilization. That is because they are morons. Meanwhile, the left is out to destroy all of Western Civilization and considers destroying the Jews essential to that. They are also morons. One has nothing to do with the other. The far right and the far left have both always hated Jews and both always been two side of the same malignant coin.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This white, male, right-wing blog seems to complain solely about antisemitism, real or illusory, it believes can be pinned on liberals.

Right-wing antisemites have long benefitted from the matador treatment -- waved through -- from the Volokh Conspirators and their conservative fanboys.

It's enough to make one suspect the railing and flailing derive more from partisanship -- a perceived chance for the bigots play some offense for once -- than principle.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The problem is that said people on the far right don't have a clue what Western Civilization actually *is*, in the first place.

I'm not justifying it, but I know a few of these people and I look at what they don't have for an education -- on the most basic level they often resort to physical violence because of their limited vocabulary.

It's like the airplane cultures -- islands where the US military brought cargo planes in during WWII (sharing the bounty with the natives) and where they still do worship ceremonies on the abandoned runways hoping that the planes will come again. The far right latch onto things like hairstyles (distinctly male and female) because they represent a time when other values (that they can't even articulate) were present.

The point I often make about Bull Connor is what did he have for an education. Not just only a high school education but my guess is that the girls did most of his homework for him so that he could play football -- such was common back then in the smaller schools of the era, my uncle got through high school because the girls wanted him to be eligible to play basketball.

Now the left *are* educated, and the problem with them is different.

[Reg Parnell]

The claim that fascism was the ideology of the unwashed uneducated masses is one of the biggest lies leftist intellectuals tell. The truth is fascism’s first and most ardent believers were university students. The infamous Einsatzgruppen were largely composed of former college students. Martin Heidegger, arguably one of the top five or ten intellectuals of the 20th Century was an unrepentant and committed Nazi. Ezra Pound was as well. The list goes on and on.

Spare me this “the far right are just uneducated" nonsense. Like all malignant evil ideologies, fascism is one of the realms of that most despicable of all human creatures, “the intellectual”.

[Absaroka]

"The truth is fascism’s first and most ardent believers were university students."

If you are talking about German fascism[1], that is at variance with just about every history I have read, and I've read a bunch of them.

[1]You can argue that the Italians were the first fascists; I know bupkis about the early days of Italian fascism.

[Reg Parnell]

Read Stephen Norwood's The Third Reich and the Ivory Tower. It is a history of how American universities loved Hitler and the Nazis but also has a very good history of how fascism swept through German Universities. University students may not have been literally the first fascists in Germany, they were among the early converts and remained its most committed followers throughout the Third Reich.

Read "No Ordinary Men" for a history of who the most committed killers of Jews actually were. It wasn't the uneducated masses.

[Dr. Ed 2]

You kinda gotta admit that the Nazis cleaned out the faculty and the libraries first -- memory is that it wasn't just the Jewish faculty they removed (and whose books they burned) but anyone critical of them.

I'm just guessing here, but whom do you think they replaced them with???

And as to American universities, they were plagued with eugenics at the time. But that's another story.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.this “the far right are just uneducated” nonsense

Nobody tell this hayseed the relationship of a college degree -- or an advanced degree -- to Republican registration, or mention that chart of states ranked by educational attainment (which shows half-educated populations in red states). The facts might shatter his fragile worldview.

[Sarcastr0]

Stolen persecution valor.

Antisemitism isn't an indirect way to do a War on Christmas, chief.

[Reg Parnell]

You remain the dumbest human being on the internet. The left hates Jews just like they hate Christians. The difference is no one cared or noticed when they were doing this stuff to Christians. Eugene only noticed when they started doing it to Jews.

Only someone of your limited intelligence and complete lack of intellectual honesty could fail to understand such a simple point. It gives me chills to think that there are people out there as stupid and dishonest as you are.

[Sarcastr0]

The roots of antisemitism are quite different from the left's antipathy to Christianity. Ed's just talking out of his ass.

You, on the other hand, snuck some anti-Prof. Volokh antisemitism in, as though he's primarily sensitive to the rights of Jews.

The rest of your discussion is boring name calling that serves to make you sound insecure, and not much more.

[Reg Parnell]

The roots of antisemitism are quite different from the left’s antipathy to Christianity.

No, they are just two expressions of the same evil, collective guilt. Why does the left hate Israel? For the same reason it hates the US, it is deemed a "colonizer", which is leftist speak "for designated oppressor". It is all the same thing.

You, on the other hand, snuck some anti-Prof. Volokh antisemitism in, as though he’s primarily sensitive to the rights of Jews.

He is like every other human on earth, more sensitive to things that affect him personally. That is totally understandable. That, however, does not mean he shouldn't see more broadly and understand where this hatred is coming from and stand up for other victims of it.

You well and truly are disgusting.

[Nige]

'No, they are just two expressions of the same evil, collective guilt.'

What the fuck are you on about? Collective guilt about what? Nobody ever wrote the Protocols Of The Elders Of Christianity. They made up a vast tissue of lies about Jews to foment hate against them. Nobody has made up lies about Chrisitanity.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

more sensitive to things that affect him personally

Precisely how sensitive do you perceive him to be with respect to vile racial slurs, or his trans fetish, you bigoted rube?

[shawn_dude]

Roughly 64% of Americans identify as Christian according to Pew. If the entire "Left" hates Christianity, that means less than 36% of the country is part of the "Left" but is still able to elect slim majorities in both chambers of Congress and the presidency. Your math is off.

[Frank Drackman]

thats because Afro-Amuricans are still mostly Hey-Zeuss followers but still vote for their former Slavemasters, "Stockholm Syndrome" I think it's called (didn't know they had Blacks in Sweden, much less Slaves)

Frank

[Macy's Window]

Because someone identifies as Christian does not mean that they vote for traditional Christian values or even know what those values are.

The present state of the western world should make this obvious.

[Sarcastr0]

traditional Christian values is a term that depends heavily on which Christian you ask.

[Macy's Window]

Really?

Oh, I forgot that Leftists don't think that words have meanings.

So, if I call myself a Christian and explain that I am Christian because I think that Buddha was reincarnated as Muhammed to bring the holy word from the alien, Xenu, then that counts as one version of traditional Christianity?

Or does it just mean I've no idea what a Christian is?

You think the former and I think the latter. We will have to disagree.

[Randal]

Some Christians think that grabbing women by the pussy isn't a traditional Christian value. Some seem to think it is.

[Sarcastr0]

That's doctrine, not values.

[Kazinski]

Well you missing the part where its a bare majority, if that, of committed activists of both parties that select the candidates of both parties often leading the 48% in the middle holding their nose and voting for what they see as he lesser of two evils.

[Dr. Ed 2]

CAMERA has pointed out the genocide of the Coptic Christians.

But you completely understood what I meant as the problem being deeper than mere antisemitism, as bad as that is.

[Reg Parnell]

You have to remember, he is fine with genocide. He is a leftist. He just on here trolling using objections to antisemitism as a way to deny the existence of these other genocides. To put it bluntly, he is disgusting.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

I don't think any commenter here rivals him for duplicity. The Rev is vile, but doesn't disguise it.

[Sarcastr0]

Kind of incredible you post alongside Bob, *who says lying is a good thing to do if it helps your side* and then call me a liar.

I knew plenty of others along here confused contradicting them with lying. Didn't realize you were of that intellectually cowardly lot.

Welp.

[Reg Parnell]

Says the man who mutes anyone he can't rebut, which is pretty much everyone with a brain.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Kind of incredible you post alongside Bob, *who says lying is a good thing to do if it helps your side* and then call me a liar."

I haunt many dreams.

[Sarcastr0]

Aaand muting.

[loki13]

Yeah, I put in a few pokes. But between the ignorance, the arrogance, and the overall tenor of the posts ... that's one for the ignore list.

[Reg Parnell]

Of course you mute it. God forbid you learn something. There is great happiness to be found in stupidity.

[Reg Parnell]

It is not arrogance if it is true. I am much smarter, better read, and more knowledgeable than you. My biggest sin is that I waste my time trying to engage with inferior minds like yours.

[Frank Drackman]

It's not true, you're stupider, less well read, and less knowledgeable, it's like how the guys with 14 inch cocks don't go around telling everyone they have 14 inch cocks, chicks can sense it. Your biggest sin (besides the buggery I'm sensing) is pride.

Frank

[Frank Drackman]

Aaaannnn nobody gives a fuck

[Reg Parnell]

Eugene spent all of this time thinking he wasn’t a white male. Welcome to the club Eugene. Antisemitism is nothing but an expression of collective guilt.

This country has been operating under two enormous lies for over sixty years now. The first is that we could have a society where every racial group except whites could have racial pride and engage in racial politics. The second is that we could assign collective guilt to whites but doing that would never cause people to assign collective guilt to anyone else.

The first lie is largely holding but showing real signs of strain as more and more whites have had enough of being told to forever feel guilty about being white. The second lie has been shown to be a lie over the last month if it hadn’t already. Antisemitism is a form of collective guilt. It says that someone is guilty for being Jewish alone not because of anything they have done. This society has been applying collective guilt to whites for decades. If you are white, you are answerable for the sin of every white person in history. Now that is happening to Jews. What does a Jewish guy who owns a restaurant in Philadelphia have to do with whatever Israel does? The same that a white guy in Indiana has to do with slavery. Nothing. We have been saying for decades that the white guy in Indiana is answerable for slavery even though it was abolished over a hundred years before he was born. Why can’t we say that a Jew in Philadelphia or MIT is responsible for what goes on in Israel? You almost have to feel sorry for the goons at Harvard who lost their job offers for calling for the genocide of Israel and every Jew in it. They have been rewarded their entire lives for calling for the genocide of the white race and the destruction of every majority white country in the world for the sin of being "colonizers". How were they supposed to know you can't do the same to Jews?

The problem with the response to all of this even from people on the right is that it doesn’t recognize the underlying problem. They are just saying “you can’t hate Jews”. While that is a fine sentiment in itself, the people hating Jews can rightfully respond “but you told me it was okay to hate white people, why can’t I hate Jews” and those condemning them have no answer other than “Jews are different”. I don’t think that answer is going to get very far.

If you want to stop antisemitism, you need to stop people engaging in all forms of collective guilt. That means talking about how it is and has been applied to whites for years. You can’t stop antisemitism and still say that is okay. You stop both or you stop neither. Sadly, I don’t think anyone on the right or left has the guts to do that. So, instead it will be “stop hating Jews” with the unstated implication being “go back to hating whites like you did before”. And that isn’t going to solve anything.

[loki13]

This is a new one!

The only way to stop anti-Semitism, is to make sure white guys feel okay about themselves.

Because anti-Semitism is totally a new thing. And it's probably the fault of all those uppity minorities, making white guys feel bad. Or something.

That was a tour de force. Bravo!

[Reg Parnell]

Antisemitism is an example of collective guilt. Collective guilt and antisemitism have been around forever. Why on earth would you think that my post says "antisemitism is new"? What about it could possibly cause you to think that? Are you stupid? Illiterate? Or do you just think someone reading your response is?

Come back when you are smart enough to understand the point. Otherwise, stop wasting everyone's time embarrassing yourself. We already have Sarcastro above to show us what it means to be profoundly stupid. We don't need more examples.

[loki13]

Aw, you're a charmer, aren't you! Always amazing when people immediately result to insults. Kinda shows you we're they're coming from.

But hey, if you feel the need to show your ass, I can't stop you! I am sure at some point your village will realize that they're short an idiot. 🙂

[Reg Parnell]

If you don't want to be insulted, stop staying stupid things. Make an intelligent response to the point. If you can't do that, and it appears you can't, you deserve whatever you get.

The point is to have a discussion, not to worry about the feelings of people making dumb points.

[Life of Brian]

The irony runs deep with this one, as always:

Always amazing when people immediately result to insults. Kinda shows you we’re they’re coming from.
* * *
I am sure at some point your village will realize that they’re short an idiot.

I guess "immediately" must conveniently be limited to prior to your second post, and "insults" must conveniently exclude the faint-praise yammering of your first post. Bravo indeed!

[Randal]

Why on earth would you think that my post says “antisemitism is new”? What about it could possibly cause you to think that?

Antisemitism is nothing but an expression of collective guilt. This country has been operating under two enormous lies for over sixty years now.

Uh.... maybe it was when you tried to explain antisemitism by looking at a full six decades of history?

And just to follow the apparent trend... you fart-assed finger-licker!

[Nige]

‘Antisemitism is an example of collective guilt’

For what? For blood libel and supposed child sacrifices and for supposed financial and political control of institutions and society? You don’t get the fundamental point that anti-semitism is based on pure malicious fictions, and that most, if not all, conspiracy theories of their modern ag have their roots in anti-semitism: made up bullshit. A white guy in Indiana may have nothing to do with slavery but SLAVERY WAS REAL. Using slavery, a real thing, to make wiote guys feel guilty? Says more about the white guys who whine that it does than anything else.

[Reg Parnell]

Being declared guilty of imaginary crimes is no different than being declared guilty of other people's crimes. In both cases you are innocent and being declared guilty because of your race or religion. You argument is "but white people deserve to be hated and Jews don't".

[Nige]

Oh, sure, Jews being declared guilty of imaginary crimes and brutalised, murdered and discriminated against for them is the same as being somewhat conscious of the fact that white people owned slaves in the US and black people were subject to Jim Crow. Wait’ll you find out about who was responsible for the Holocaust.

[Bwaaah]

"The only way to stop anti-Semitism, is to make sure white guys feel okay about themselves."

That's not what he said. Try an argument instead of a smear.

[Randal]

“The only way to stop anti-Semitism, is to make sure white guys feel okay about themselves.”

That’s not what he said. Try an argument instead of a smear.

If you want to stop antisemitism, you need to stop people engaging in all forms of collective guilt. That means talking about how it is and has been applied to whites for years.

I mean…

[apedad]

“Antisemitism is nothing but an expression of collective guilt.”

Ok, I’ll bite…honest question.

If I feel some level of remorse for how our country has treated certain peoples, e.g., slaves, Native Americans, women, gays, etc., and I think we should take some steps to somewhat level the playing field, then that makes me an antisemite?

[Reg Parnell]

Why should I feel remorse for something I didn’t do? Should Jews feel some level of remorse for how Israel is treating the Palistinians even though they have personally had nothing to do with it? Should Russians feel some remorse for how the old USSR treated the Chechens and the Ukrainians? If I should feel guilty about something I had nothing to do with, there is no reason Jews shouldn’t feel guilty about anything a Jew has done at any time in history.

Do you just not understand that logic applies equally or do you really think that it is okay to apply it selectively based on your feelings? I will bite here. Is that what they teach in schools now?
Did you learn to think like this or did it just come naturally? I am very curious about how someone becomes this deeply confused irrational.

[apedad]

"Why should I feel remorse for something I didn’t do?"

Because you and I have the capacity/capability to, "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, (and) promote the general Welfare . . . . "

Some people like to think/wish that we're a country of individuals and that's what the US was and is about - but they're wrong.

[Reg Parnell]

Some people like to think/wish that we’re a country of individuals and that’s what the US was and is about – but they’re wrong.

So, I am guilty and must be punished for the sins of people I never knew because I share the same skin color? That is all you are saying here. We are a nation of individuals. Saying I have some duty to the community as part of that is not the same as saying I should be punished for the color of my skin. That is a terribly piece of sophistry on your part to confuse patriotism with racialist collective guilt.

[apedad]

That's quite a mantle of victimhood you're wearing.

Good luck being an "individual."

[Reg Parnell]

How is "that is just being a victim" a sensible response to the point? Jews had their numbers admitted to elite schools limited for years. Were they just being "victims" when they complained about that? If whites and Asians are "victims" for doing the same today, I guess Jews were too?

Pointing out an actual wrong is I suppose being a "victim" because you are a victim. What exactly is your point here? You don't seem to have one. Come back when you do.

[Macy's Window]

apedad: "Because you and I have the capacity/capability to, “form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, (and) promote the general Welfare . . . . ”

This claim makes no sense at all.

I think that you didn't bother to articulate the logic because you realize how very thin your argument would be if openly stated.

So far as I can tell, you intend to argue that because the USA was founded and has a constitution, the current citizens are responsible for slavery -- and anything ever happened in the country -- even if it was hundreds of years ago and the country paid a terrible price to extinguish an evil that existed for thousands of years almost everywhere.

[Don Nico]

"Because you and I..."
That is rather arrogant to talk about how other people should feel remorse or be guilt tripped.
It is an individual decision. There is no eternally enduring collective guilt.

[Nige]

'Why should I feel remorse for something I didn’t do?'

You don't have to feel anything, you soul-dead creep, but those are things that actually happened. The things that are the basis for anti-semitism are not.

[Reg Parnell]

I think we should take some steps to somewhat level the playing field, then that makes me an antisemite?

You think that some guy working at a Home Depot in Dayton should be penalized because he was born with the wrong skin color and is thus responsible for the sins of people who were dead long before he was born. Stop lying. “Level the playing field” means punish one group and reward another. That doesn't make you an anti-Semite. It makes you a believer in collective guilt and deprives you or the moral standing to condemn anti-Semites. You are both guilty of the same fallacy. You just have a different opinion on who you want it applied to.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Yes, MLK had it right. The only way to stop racism is to stop being racist.

[David Nieporent]

John Roberts, MLK, they're often confused.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

It was MLK who speechified about a color blind society. No doubt he heard others talk about it, such as Frederick Douglass. I am sure Roberts knew of both.

[shawn_dude]

I doubt MLK meant that we should build racism into the system so that it is self-perpetuating and then, and only then, claim color blindness when asked to disassemble the scheme and provide some form of reparations to reverse the damage caused by anti-black racists. John Roberts, OTOH, sees no problem with that.

[Frank Drackman]

You speak with Martin alot do you?

[Bruce Hayden]

That, of course, isn’t what happened. Your self perpetuating racism is by the same group that has perpetuated it in this country for well over 250 years now. It’s the same theory, that Blacks need the help of generous Whites, that gave Blacks 3/5 representation, separate restrooms, restaurants, and colleges, even justified slavery and lynchings, and now gives them preferences in college admissions, and reduced prosecution for crimes. That was not what MLK was asking for.

As long as Blacks are given preferences for their skin color, whether in non prosecutions, or college admissions, they will be judged by the color of their skin. You can’t separate them apart.

[Sarcastr0]

'Your policies made me racist' doesn't play, Bruce.

AA may or may not be a good policy. Saying it's the reason racism persists is nonsense.

[Bwaaah]

He didn't say AA is *the* reason racism persists. Here merely intimated that it is *a* reason. And you intimate that he might be right.

[Sarcastr0]

As long as Blacks are given preferences for their skin color, whether in non prosecutions, or college admissions, they will be judged by the color of their skin.

That right there is a statement of but-for cause.

[Don Nico]

apedad,
If you feel remorse, then YOU should do something to help people in your community that you think your ancestors may have harmed.

[Bruce Hayden]

Luckily, my ancestors advocated emancipation of slaves, voted for Lincoln, and fought for the Union to end slavery. No thoughts of guilt here.

[Nige]

Who cares whether you feel guilty or not? Equating the history if racism and discrimination in society with individual guilt, inasmuch as complaining that one implies the other therefore whining about it, is narcissitic at best.

[Reg Parnell]

You want individuals today punished for things they didn't do. It is not about feelings you lying half wit.

[Nige]

You 'feel' like you're being 'punished' because people remember slavery and Jim Crow boo hoo.

[Dr. Ed 2]

A very good point -- not exactly the same as mine, but no less valid.

Leviticus 16:10 comes to mind -- the scapegoat. That's what 'White Guilt" really is -- and it ignores things like a 76% Black illegitimacy rate and the rest.

Although I still think that there is some underlying hatred of Western civilization involved -- how else would you get the LBGT++++ crew supporting folks who would kill them on sight if they could -- and they don't have an answer when I point that out to them....

[Reg Parnell]

They hate the west and want it destroyed. The difference between today and the past is that in the past the left believed that they could create a Utopia. Today it is the post modern left. They don't have a Utopia or an end state. They literally just want to watch the world burn. It is all about "the struggle" between the oppressor and the oppressed. There is no end state just endless "struggle" and destruction.

[Dr. Ed 2]

An interesting aside:
https://americanmind.org/salvo/get-whitey/?utm_campaign=American%20Mind%20Email%20Warm%20Up&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=285646602&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8s8SiKT5M8zKPNuvlehoEpddFrdIFJgvEC6EuWzmKWVFLySuBpkvkwt3vSZB65Rj6XJCdWCKZhLNhLbKQ-6IQ9OPRF7A&utm_content=285646602&utm_source=hs_email

[Nige]

Great Replacement is always at the bottom of these things, isn't it?

[shawn_dude]

We know a lost cause when we see one. We have a saying: scratch a homophobe and find a racist. Why waste our time?

[Frank Drackman]

You scratch this "Homo-fobe" and you'll be picking up your teeth.

[Reg Parnell]

So when you scratch a devout Muslim, you find a racist? They want you dead you know?

[Randal]

more and more whites have had enough of being told to forever feel guilty about being white.

As far as I can tell, this is a complete strawman that’s been foisted on white conservatives by the grievance peddlers who drive your politics. Your handlers are telling you to get angry about being told to feel guilty... but no one's actually telling you to feel guilty.

I know a lot of leftists from a lot of races. Not a single one either feels guilty or expects white people to feel guilty about the sins of the past. It’s just not a thing. What would even be the point?

I get how it’s fun to be the victim, but… are you really a victim? What, precisely, in your actual life, putting Fox News aside, are you a victim of?

[Reg Parnell]

As far as I can tell, this is a complete strawman that’s been foisted on white conservatives by the grievance peddlers who drive your politics. Your handlers are telling you to get angry about being told to feel guilty… but no one’s actually telling you to feel guilty.

Just an entire industry called DEI and entire academic departments at pretty much every major university doing it. But you have never heard of any of that.

I know a lot of leftists from a lot of races. Not a single one either feels guilty or expects white people to feel guilty about the sins of the past. It’s just not a thing. What would even be the point?

They just expect them to pay reoperations for slavery and be legally discriminated against in the form of affirmative action.

You are so dishonest there is no point in engaging you. You know what the argument is, you just lie and pretend it is something else.

[Randal]

Reparations and affirmative action aren't about guilt! I knew it. It's not about guilt at all, you just want to keep the wealth within your race.

You're right, I did know exactly what the argument was, and I got you to admit it.

[Bwaaah]

"You just want to keep the wealth within your race."

Wow. I suppose a corollary would be that you want move "the wealth" away from "his" race. Oh sorry, I mean you want to move "the wealth" toward the ______, ______, and ______ races. (Fill in the blanks as you prefer.)

[Randal]

Uh, duh, that's explicitly what reparations do. But watch how easy this is: I don't think reparations are a good idea.

See what I did there? I stated a policy preference without accompanying it with a whole victimhood narrative about how the evil reparations people are trying to hurt my feelings.

Now how about:

Farm subsidies are nothing but an expression of collective guilt.

This country has been operating under an enormous lie for over two centuries now. The lie is that we could have a society where every social class except elites could have solidarity and engage in economic politics by assigning collective guilt to elites.

The lie is largely holding but showing real signs of strain as more and more elites have had enough of being told to forever feel guilty about being elite. Farm subsidies are a form of collective guilt. It says that someone is guilty for being elite. This society has been applying collective guilt to elites for decades. If you are elite, you are answerable for the sin of every elite person in history.

Kind of makes me sound like a little bitch, no? Compare to: I disagree with farm subsidies.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

Eugene spent all of this time thinking he wasn’t a white male.

You must be the new asshole here. Prof. Volokh devotes most of his time to thinking he's a poor, persecuted white male conservative. Not all of his time, though. Some is devoted to (1) searching for opportunities to use vile racial slurs with plausible deniability and (2) this trans fetish that has developed during the past year or so.

Carry on, clingers. But only so far as your betters permit, as is customary in modern America.

[apedad]

[Reg Parnell]

Why should I feel remorse for something I didn't do? Should Jews feel some level of remorse for how Israel is treating the Palistinians even though they have personally had nothing to do with it? Should Russians feel some remorse for how the old USSR treated the Chechens and the Ukrainians? If I should feel guilty about something I had nothing to do with, there is no reason Jews shouldn't feel guilty about anything a Jew has done at any time in history.

Do you just not understand that logic applies equally or do you really think that it is okay to apply it selectively based on your feelings? I will bite here. Is that what they teach in schools now?

[Dr. Ed 2]

It's also who started it.

The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor -- and hence they bear responsibility for Hiroshima. Hamas went on a killing and raping spree, and hence THEY bear responsibility for the consequences.

But, sadly, you would not like what they teach in schools today. Even though I had *two* ancestors fight (for the North) in the Civil War, I am personally responsible for slavery.

[Reg Parnell]

Yes. You bear that responsibility, albeit somewhat indirectly, because you are living in the country or society that did those things. The problem arises when you are somehow responsible for things that happened before you were born or far away from where you are or ever were.

[Nige]

In what way do these things imply you or anyone should feel personal remorse or guilt? These things all happened, and have had wide-ranging effects on people and on societies. The reality of that has nothing to do with your ego.

If anyone claims all Jews are implicated by Israeli militarism, they are anti-semitic. If anyone claims criticism of Israeli militarism applies to all Jews, they are anti-semitic.

[Reg Parnell]

If anyone claims all Jews are implicated by Israeli militarism, they are anti-semitic. If anyone claims criticism of Israeli militarism applies to all Jews, they are anti-semitic.

Says the guy who supports mobs attacking Jewish businesses in the US to protest Israel.

In what way do these things imply you or anyone should feel personal remorse or guilt?

It is not about making people feel guilty. It is about punishing people by discriminating against them and hating them for it. We are not talking about ego here.

You are a dishonest piece of shit.

[Nige]

'Says the guy who'

Liar.

'It is not about making people feel guilty'

To hear you go on about making a white person feel guilty is the worst atrocity since the Holocaust.

'You are a dishonest piece of shit.'

Sorry I read what you said and responded to it.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Parnell, you talk about nothing but ego, while trying to elevate ego to a civic principle. Obsessive focus on, "guilt," is misplaced. Guilt is a personal attribute, not a collective one. Governance is a collective notion, but you don't want it to be. You want the premise for governance—for society in general, in fact—to be atomized individualism. That is so far from any notion of society defined by collective interaction, or governance as a group activity, that it borders on sociopathy.

[mydisplayname]

Professor Robert A. Pape offers an interesting conclusion in a recent essay (in Foreign Affairs magazine). "But perhaps the most important step that Washington could take now would be to jump-start a major public debate of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, one that allowed alternative strategies to be considered in depth and that brought forth rich public information for Americans, Israelis, and people around the world to evaluate the consequences for themselves. The White House could release U.S. government assessments of the effect that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza is having on Hamas and Palestinian civilians. Congress could hold hearings centered on a simple question: Is the campaign producing more terrorists than it’s killing?"

The entire essay (at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/israel/israels-failed-bombing-campaign-gaza) is worth reading. What a handful of misguided souls perceive as anti-Semitic sentiment might in reality be the opposite: informed debate is necessary.

[Reg Parnell]

Yelling "from the River to the Sea" and throwing bricks through the window of a Jewish owned restaurant in Philadelphia or having a gang of thugs terrorize a high school teacher in New York City for the crime of attending a pro Israel demonstration, or having a mob of goons prevent Jewish students from attending class at MIT is not "informed debate". Stop claiming these people want informed debate. Hell, stop claiming they care about the people in Gaza. They don't care about that, they just hate Jews.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

throwing bricks through the window of a Jewish owned restaurant in Philadelphia

That (throwing bricks) would be intensely wrong. (Protesting outside that restaurant was wrong.)

Is there evidence it occurred, or is this just another conservative Volokh Conspiracy fan making shit up because he seethes at the reality-based modern world?

The record of this disingenuous blog points toward “making shit up.”

[The Margrave of Azilia]

The Philly incident, which was condemned by the White House, doesn't seem to involve broken glass, "merely" protesters gathering outside the restaurant and accusing the owner of genocide.

There were smashed windows in a Jewish restaurant NYC, but that city is a known hotbed of antisemitism. /sarc

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Gathering outside a Jewish restaurant to protest Israel's disgusting, immoral, violent right-wing belligerence is wrong.

Defending Israel's lethal, disgusting conduct is wrong, too. Objecting to Israel's casual killing of Palestinian civilians, refugee camp bombing, settlement activity, settler violence, superstition-based discrimination, etc. is admirable.

Carry on, clingers. But soon enough it will be without American support, in the case of some foreign clingers.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Interesting that it is all about analyzing Israel's actions, nothing about analyzing Hamas or Palestine or Muslim terrorism.

[Bored Lawyer]

Brown people are children who are never responsible for anything they do. That's one of the core beliefs of the left.

[Sarcastr0]

Core belief? You used to not do this kind of reductive demonization of the other side.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

That's a very typical comment from you, full of sound and fury, signifying ... nothing. You are destructive always, constructive never.

[Macy's Window]

In fairness, the Left also will also absolve white people for misdeeds, so long as it it the right sort of white people and the misdeeds are directed at "society."

[Sarcastr0]

Hey Macy's! Good time of year for ya, all gussied up for the Holidays!

This 'Left' seems a shifting demon; it can include Democrats or maybe it's rose twitter or maybe it's Bernie Bros.

But no matter how you slice it, 'brown people are children who are never responsible for anything they do' is not a thing. It's just strawman bile.

Plenty of folks are into that around here. BL I thought was a bit more sober in his conservativism. Maybe he's just celebrating early.

[Macy's Window]

Sarcastro: " ‘brown people are children who are never responsible for anything they do’ is not a thing. It’s just strawman bile."

You are correct that it is an overstatement. For example, if brown people go off the reservation and become conservative, then the Left directs the worst sort of abusive, racist vile at them, just as it directs the most vulgar slurs at gays who fail to parrot the party line.

Cheers.

[Randal]

Reading you and BL... it seems like you simply don't live in an actual world with actual people. Do you spend all your time in Internet bubbles? Go meet some real Americans! You'll find it's not all just dumb stereotypes wandering around pandering to your sense of victimhood.

[Bwaaah]

Try going to a college campus and shouting, "America will not be free until it is free of black people." Am I unrealistic to think that won't be tolerated? *That* shout-out, I believe, can't be properly "contextualized" (in the words of Harvard's president), unlike calls for Jewish genocide, which can (in her words and in the expressions of so many others).

You seem to be in denial of the U.S. political left's categories of Favored Peoples Status. Your blindness is cruel.

[Sarcastr0]

As Randal noted, these libs in your head sure seem bad and one dimensional.

You and BL a good time burnishing your righteousness by hating them. It's easier than living in the real world where people are not cartoons!

[Bwaaah]

If they weren't cartoons, then George Floyd's life wouldn't be held as a model of American injustice. (Sorry, friends...that was a tragic, drug-induced end to a problem-riddled life.) The people of the left (and the right) aren't cartoons, but their popular political narratives are downright cartoonish. (Both are disastrously simplistic and half-truthy, just like cartoons.)

[Randal]

You seem to have badly misunderstood the George Floyd protests. Once more, seems like because you think everyone on the left is a silly-but-evil caricature.

[Sarcastr0]

It is a common but ridiculous take that Floyd just died by coincidence at the same time he had Chauvin kneeling on him, and that the trial and conviction are all fake news.

It is a *great* example of not living in the real world, Bwaaah. You can be conservative without disengaging from reality.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How these worthless clingers wish to spend their time until replacement is their call. It's a pain in the ass to put up with them and their stale thinking until they die off, irrelevant and defeated, but putting up with them is a winner's problem.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The soft bigotry of low expectations.

[Nige]

‘Brown people’ are an undifferentiated mass, killing them all is fine, because they all think the same and bear collective responsibility for the actions of others is a core belief of the current bloodlust.

[Bored Lawyer]

The day after October 7, demonstrators in Sydney chanted "Gas the Jews."

That's your "informed debate."

[Nige]

Those people have more in common with the people who think all Jews belong with or to Israel than not.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How did they travel from Charlottesville (Unite The Right) to Sydney? Airplane? Boat? Jewish space laser? Jesus-facilitated miracle?

Carry on, clingers.

[Don Nico]

" Congress could hold hearings centered on a simple question: Is the campaign producing more terrorists than it’s killing?”
Let's see what member of team D has the balls to demand such hearing in public.

[Nige]

What are you giving out about team D. for? they're funding the slaughter quite happily.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

I'd be happy to get accurate information about what's really going on in Gaza right now.

By accurate I don't mean what's in the media. They may be right about Israel, but you wouldn't know it because they'd say it whether it was true or not.

If Israel is as bad as the media say, there should presumably be a reliable source willing to say it. Until then I'll admit I don't know, which makes me better informed than people who take the media reports as reliable.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

I offer an areligious non-lawyer's guess on why Jews are so often targeted. Note I am not an atheist (they believe there is no God) nor an agnostic (they wonder if there is a God) -- I simply don't care if there is or isn't or what type or how many.

My understanding is that the Jews were the first monotheistic religion, notwithstanding the Pharaoh whose successors erased him. The Romans, again my understanding, were quite tolerant of multiple religions, as long as their adherents also believed in the Roman / Greek gods. The Jews refused to do so, and the Romans could not accept this; they were intolerant of the intolerant.

Like all outcasts, the Jews were relegated to occupations that were too filthy for honorable people -- like bankers. (The same thing happened in Japan, and probably many other cultures. Merchants were the lowest caste, and handling money made them even lower.)

Then as society developed industries which required capital to build factories, ships, warehouses, and other large projects, not to mention more technological and larger armies, suddenly money mattered, and those dirty Jews had it. All the more reason to hate them even more, and why not, they had snitched on Jesus! Dirty scum. Dirty rich scum.

Anyways, that's my theory.

[Reg Parnell]

Pretty much the only truthful thing Lenin ever said was that fascism was just communism for stupid people.

People have different reasons for hating Jews. Some have hated them because they were Christians and saw them as Christ killers and this alien Christ denying culture that had infiltrated their society. The Nazis hated them because they saw them the same way communists viewed capitalists, this evil cabal oppressing everyone and controlling everything. Communists eventually turned on Jews because they were seen as a fifth column that were loyal to the tribe over the state.

Today's left hates Jews because Israel has been deemed a "colonizer" and oppressor. There is no one answer to the question.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

My point is that Jews have always been a target because they refused to bend over for others. They stand out, literally, for not taking a knee and bowing their head. Not being religious, the reasons for all this religious hatred are somewhat murky to me, but it doesn't blind me to the existence of religious hatred.

[Reg Parnell]

Even the ones who do integrate and become secular end up being murdered anyway. So, it is more than just standing out. No Jewish population on earth was more secular and assimilated into society than German Jews were in the 1930s.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Religion-wise, they did not assimilate. Religion was incredibly important in that era.

[loki13]

"Pretty much the only truthful thing Lenin ever said was that fascism was just communism for stupid people."

Shockingly, only a stupid person would believe that Lenin said that.

The question is ... do we think that person who stated that is the stupid person and believes it? Or do we assume he knows that quote is made up, and he assumes everyone else is stupid?

Eh, why not both?

[Reg Parnell]

Is that an apocryphal quote? If so, show a link saying that it is. It is certainly widely attributed to him. If it is apocryphal, it just means he never said anything true, not that the quote is wrong because it isn't.

The question is, why are you incapable of making an honest argument or understanding the points being made? Are you stupid or just dishonest or both?

[Magister]

An internet search doesn't show such a quotation; the only quotation from Lenin about fascism I could find was "fascism is capitalism in decay" which may also be a false quotation, but at least has in its favor that it would make sense for Lenin to say that.

[David Nieporent]

.

Shockingly, only a stupid person would believe that Lenin said that.

But a German politician¹ did once describe antisemitism as the socialism of fools, which is kind of similar, so, it's closer than Dr. Ed ever got to accuracy.
​
​
​
¹It's sometimes attributed instead to Marx, or Orwell, but I don't think there's any evidence for that.

[loki13]

Well, you'd have to be really really stupid to believe Marx said it. After all, he died in 1883, and fascism was first used in 1919.

Then again, you'd have to be pretty guillible to think that Lenin used it too. He died at the beginning of 1924, so while it might have been possible for him to use it, he didn't.

Then again, the guy I muted is both stupid and gullible, so it's hardly a surprise.

[Reg Parnell]

It doesn't matter who said it. The point is the quote is an astute observation. Attribute it to whomever you like.

[Life of Brian]

.

Shockingly, only a stupid person would believe that Lenin said that.

The question is … do we think that person who stated that is the stupid person and believes it? Or do we assume he knows that quote is made up, and he assumes everyone else is stupid?

Fittingly, Lenin did indeed say: "It is, of course, much easier to shout, abuse, and howl than to attempt to relate, to explain."

[Randal]

Today’s left hates Jews because Israel has been deemed a “colonizer” and oppressor.

It doesn't help that Israel is currently engaged in colonization (e.g. settlements) and oppression (e.g. long-term occupation).

It's not a justification to hate Jews, but it's certainly a bit of an albatross around their necks.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It’s enough to cause a decent American object to subsidizing that superstition-addled, immoral, violent, right-wing belligerence.

Which will eventually give Israel an opportunity to learn how it would fare without American skirts to hide behind. Time to pray for a miracle, maybe.

[Dr. Ed 2]

My understanding is that Jews were not permitted to own land -- many countries restrict who can own real estate even today.

But as the Jews could not own land and because they realized that they may have to leave in a hurry, they tended to accumulate wealth that was easily portable -- gold and precious stones.

I am not sure if this is true, but it does make sense.

[Bruce Hayden]

I think more important was that they could charge interest, while Mideival Christians (and fundamentalist Muslims) could/can not. You really need to be able to charge interest, in order to cover the cost of nonpayment and the lost opportunity cost of the loaned money. So, the Jews would get rich, doing something that most others couldn’t do, under the precepts of their religions. And, the envy of that wealth was, ultimately the root of antisemitism through the ages.

And, yes, the Christians and Muslims that they were living in the midst of, and profiting from, would, eventually, get greedy and try to take that wealth away from them by force. Not really that different than what France did (with the approval of a complicit Papacy to the Knights Templar, or Henry VIII did to the Roman Catholic Church.

[SimonP]

Vardi, like David, points to putative "double standards" as "antisemitism." That, in itself, shows that his opinion is unserious.

It is not "antisemitic" to focus on the atrocities currently being caused by Israel in Gaza and (at smaller scale) in the West Bank, without paying (what opponents deem sufficiently credible) lip service to the atrocities that Israelis and Jews themselves have suffered. It is not "antisemitic" to describe Israel's current plans for Gaza and the West Bank as "Zionist," notwithstanding the fact that some have taken to using that term as a slur. It is not "antisemitic" to observe how Israel has quickly burned whatever sympathy it may deserve for the massacre on October 7 by attacking Gaza without a plausible strategy or exit plan other than the complete annihilation of Palestinians in Gaza.

I was myself shocked and appalled by the attacks on October 7. Many of my colleagues have family and friends there, and they were suffering. I completely agree that Israel has every right to use military force to end the threat of Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank. But Israel has, with American support, turned this license into a blank check, using our tax money to systematically destroy Gaza, without deigning to explain to anyone, much less the American people, why this wanton destruction is driven by military necessity. Meanwhile the bloodthirsty zealots call for Israel to kill each and every last member of Hamas, build support for bombing every school and hospital in Gaza, are now building support for flooding tunnels where hostages and civilians may be sheltering.

I'll admit that I have lost sight of my sympathy for Israel, as this bloodthirsty rhetoric has dominated so much of the media I have consumed. I am seeing propaganda produced by the IDF after various attacks and raids, clearly modeled after copaganda after drug busts here in the states. I am reading public statements that are long on conjecture and scant on details. I can sense that I'm being lied to. Meanwhile I can also see the numbers of journalists being killed, the numbers of women and children being killed, videos and images of the destruction.

So. When Billy Ackman and the rest of his crew take it upon themselves to attack universities as pretty much the only place in American society where people can criticize Israel safely, when I see AIPAC lining up political challengers for Democratic politicians who have been insufficiently supportive of Israel, when I see dark money trying to manipulate other political candidates and doxx campus critics of Israel, my sense is that enough is enough. Israel has long overstayed their welcome. Let them have their war. But let us be done with them.

[Reg Parnell]

So. When Billy Ackman and the rest of his crew take it upon themselves to attack universities as pretty much the only place in American society where people can criticize Israel safely,

That is complete bullshit. People criticize Israel all of the time. If all that were happening on these campuses were people criticizing Israel, no one would care. That is not all that is happening and you know it. Demanding the death of all Jews in Israel and terrorizing Jewish students from attending class is not criticizing Israel. It is anti-Semitic violence.

[SimonP]

People criticize Israel all of the time.

Yeah, and they get fired and primaried for it all the time!

Demanding the death of all Jews in Israel...

I am not going to debate reality with you. I will just note that you're strawmanning here. People are not, in fact, demanding the death of all Jews in Israel. That is something you are attributing to people because they say "from the river to the sea" or they describe Hamas as "freedom fighters." But if you were to ask them directly, "Are you calling for the death of all Jews in Israel," they would say - no, of course not. Because they're not.

...and terrorizing Jewish students from attending class is not criticizing Israel.

Jewish students, as I'm sure Eugene would be happy to note for any other group, need to grow a thicker skin. They can't claim to be "terrorized" by heated rhetoric and intense protests. And while their fears may be substantiated by threats, vandalism, and other kinds of actual attacks, that is something that they'll have to live with - just like everyone else in this country who belongs to a minority group.

[Reg Parnell]

I am not going to debate reality with you. I will just note that you’re strawmanning here. People are not, in fact, demanding the death of all Jews in Israel. That is something you are attributing to people because they say “from the river to the sea” or they describe Hamas as “freedom fighters.” But if you were to ask them directly, “Are you calling for the death of all Jews in Israel,” they would say – no, of course not. Because they’re not.

Hamas calls for the death of all Jews in Israel. If you call for Hamas winning the war and ruling Israel, which is what you are doing, you are effectively calling for the deaths of all Jews in Israel. It is like saying you want Nazi Germany to rule Eastern Europe and then denying that you support murdering the Jews there.

Jewish students, as I’m sure Eugene would be happy to note for any other group, need to grow a thicker skin. They can’t claim to be “terrorized” by heated rhetoric and intense protests. And while their fears may be substantiated by threats, vandalism, and other kinds of actual attacks, that is something that they’ll have to live with – just like everyone else in this country who belongs to a minority group.

So, Jewish students have to live with being harassed and can't expect to go to even go to class in peace. You are just saying that it is okay to harass and terrorize Jews. You are saying that in so many words. That these universities have no responsibility to ensure that Jews can exist on their campuses without being harassed and abused by protestors.

I will just let your statement here speak for itself. There is no point in rebutting it. It proves my point.

[SimonP]

If you call for Hamas winning the war and ruling Israel, which is what you are doing...

Where the fuck are you getting that from?

So, Jewish students have to live with being harassed and can’t expect to go to even go to class in peace.

Who's "harassing" Jewish students? Do you think every student who walks on campus with a skull cap or tzitzit is getting egged and spit on? Or are you just doing the thing you're doing above, where you're making up shit?

[Reg Parnell]

"From the river to the sea" means a Palestinian state that encompasses what is now Israel. It means Hamas ruling Israel. It means destroying Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian state. Stop pretending it means anything else.

Who’s “harassing” Jewish students? Do you think every student who walks on campus with a skull cap or tzitzit is getting egged and spit on? Or are you just doing the thing you’re doing above, where you’re making up shit?

The examples of it are all over the place. It happened at MIT. Google is your friend. I am not here to do your homework. Then, there was the example of the public school teacher in NYC.

Just as one example, 73% of all Jewish students report seeing or having experienced antisemitism since the start of this school year

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/73-jewish-college-students-experienced-seen-antisemitism-start-school-rcna127014

[Randal]

Suddenly the right embraces microaggression theory!

[Reg Parnell]

Having a mob show up and threaten you is not a microagression. Only a lying piece of shit leftist would claim otherwise.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It's always hilarious to watch right-wing bigots -- such as those found every day at the Volokh Conspiracy, top to bottom -- latch onto a chance to assail others for perceived intolerance.

Right-wing racists, conservative misogynists, superstitious gay-bashers, Republican immigrant-haters, half-educated Islamophobes, law professor transphobes, chanting antisemites at Unite the Right rallies, and other conservative bigots are among my favorite culture war casualties.

[Reg Parnell]

From the same story

The survey, released by Jewish advocacy groups, found that only 46% of Jewish college students in the U.S. said they felt physically safe on campus after the Oct. 7 terrorist attack in Israel.

And your response to that is "they just need to toughen up" and stop wearing short skirts or something. Do you think it is evil white supremacists who are causing this? This is leftist antisemitism.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Bullshyte -- what happened at MIT was WRONG!

A student at a university has a reasonable expectation of safety.

[Don Nico]

"Jewish students, as I’m sure Eugene would be happy to note for any other group, need to grow a thicker skin."
Nice bit of victim blaming. If you witnessed what is actually physical intimidation you might not be so stupid in your comments

[Bored Lawyer]

"When Billy Ackman and the rest of his crew take it upon themselves to attack universities as pretty much the only place in American society where people can criticize Israel safely,"

I take it some moron that I muted posted this, and you are responding.

Like anyone in American has been made "unsafe" by criticizing Israel. If unsafe means what normal people think it means.

(The older I get, the more I appreciate Orwell.)

[Reg Parnell]

Then he goes onto say in response to me "They can’t claim to be “terrorized” by heated rhetoric and intense protests. And while their fears may be substantiated by threats, vandalism, and other kinds of actual attacks, that is something that they’ll have to live with – just like everyone else in this country who belongs to a minority group."

The amount of mendacity and double speak these people are capable of is really terrifying when you think of it. According to this guy, having someone disagree with you if you are criticizing Israel is totally unacceptable but Jews students being harassed and intimidated by protestors is just something they have to live with.

I don't know what you say to that. I really don't. These people are demonic. I can't think of another way to describe them.

[SimonP]

These people are demonic. I can’t think of another way to describe them.

There it is!

[Reg Parnell]

If anyone has a better word, I am open to suggestions. Demonic is a good analogy but not literally true. It is hard to describe the amount of virulent mendacity and double speak you are engaging in. You are pressing the limitations of the English Language with your behavior. Maybe there is another language that has a good word. I don't know.

[SimonP]

I am not the one engaging in lies and doublespeak. You are. Your other comment demonstrates this nicely: "from the river to the sea" is a slogan that you assert has only one interpretation. But this is not true; it is being used by multiple groups, with different meanings. Hamas might mean one thing, in its charter; a student with a poster is calling for something different - namely, a single nation where Israelis and Palestinians can live together peacefully and freely.

And you say: "stop pretending it means anything else"! That is very clearly demanding that the phrase mean the only thing you declare that it means. You are the one insisting that we see the slogan offered by campus protesters and interpret it in a way contrary to their apparent intent, so that you can further smear them as antisemites.

And then - and then! You are asserting that I am calling for Hamas to win the war and destroy Israel. The chain of reasoning that you are following to reach that conclusion is: I am expressly saying that people are not, in fact, calling for the destruction of Israel, when they use the slogan "from the river to the sea." You say that there's no other possible interpretation of that slogan. Thus, by "defending" their use of a slogan that you have asserted is genocidal in intent, you are attributing to me the same genocidal intent, based on the fact that the whole point I was making is that no one has this genocidal intent!

That is doublespeak!

[David Nieporent]

.

You are. Your other comment demonstrates this nicely: “from the river to the sea” is a slogan that you assert has only one interpretation. But this is not true; it is being used by multiple groups, with different meanings. Hamas might mean one thing, in its charter; a student with a poster is calling for something different – namely, a single nation where Israelis and Palestinians can live together peacefully and freely.

The left is all about calling out "dog whistles," until they themselves say something obscene and then pretend that it could mean lots of different things.

[SimonP]

I take it you don't quite grasp what "dog-whistling" is.

"Dog-whistling" is the intentional invocation of slurs, or racist sentiments, etc., through the use of equivocal, "plausibly deniable" statements.

It generally isn't using language that sounds like those slurs or racist statements, while purportedly putting them to some other use.

Examples:

Dog-whistling: I can't stand it! Zionists control the US media, government, and financial system! They must be stopped!

Not dog-whistling: AIPAC and other pro-Israel lobbying groups have too much money and influence in Washington, and are pushing American policy away from what's in our interest!

[Randal]

I have no doubt that protesters have figured out that "from the river to the sea" pisses off all the right people.

That doesn't make it a dog whistle. It's not designed to send a coded message to antisemites. It's designed to get under your skin, at which it's proven to be astonishingly successful.

[Reg Parnell]

There is nothing coded about it. It is a call for genocide. The fact that people like you then lie and pretend it means other than what it says doesn't change what it means or what the people using mean when they say it.

[Randal]

See what I mean, David? It's a catcall, not a dog whistle.

[Harvey Mosley]

Want to see the left change their tune on “from the river to the sea”? Start saying it in reference to Israel instead of “Palestine”.

[SimonP]

I take it some moron that I muted posted this, and you are responding.

See the fun you're missing out on?

(Also, I know you haven't really muted me. You're just playing this childish game where you're pretending you have. You've responded directly to me elsewhere since you first claimed to have "muted" me.)

[Randal]

David Bernstein plays that same game with me! Mutesy, let's call it.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Speaking of Bernstein . . . are Bill Ackman and other loudmouths still responding to Elon Musk’s antisemitism with a blend of silence and figuratively licking Musk’s scrotum?

[Dr. Ed 2]

It is hypocritical to condemn Israel without also condemning South Africa for the same things.

So AIPAC is selecting candidates to challenge incumbents -- Emily's List didn't? Or is that somehow "different"?

Likewise, I think that "doxing" should be illegal --- but if it isn't, then how can you condemn one group from engaging in it without also condemning everyone else who has done it in the past?

You can claim not to be antisemetic -- and I insist that there is more than just antisemitism here -- but explain how the Jews and Israel doing specific things is different from other peoples doing them unless the Jews are somehow "different" -- and that, my friend, IS antisemitism.

[SimonP]

You can claim not to be antisemetic — and I insist that there is more than just antisemitism here — but explain how the Jews and Israel doing specific things is different from other peoples doing them unless the Jews are somehow “different”...

The people who are criticizing Israel's war on Gaza are applying the same standard that they would apply to other similar conflicts, like Russia's war on Ukraine, Assad's war on his own people, the ongoing conflict in Sudan, and on and on. Name a conflict, they will oppose the intentional targeting of civilians and wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure.

The ones applying a "double standard" are those who expect us to condemn Russia but not Israel. Including Biden himself.

There's another group, of course - the "war is hell" contingent - the ones who've discovered that war crimes are cool, after all. Like Eugene. They're also applying a consistent standard to Israel. The Allies were justified in firebombing Dresden and nuking Hiroshima; Israel is justified in leveling all of Gaza.

[Macy's Window]

The problem with your argument is that Israel is NOT targeting civilians and is taking a fair amount of care to limit civilian casualties.

Hamas, on the other hand, not only targets Israeli civilians in the most horrific ways, it also seeks to maximize the numbers of its own civilians killed to use as a propaganda tool.

PS: From a utilitarian POV, the Allies were certainly justified in bombing Hiroshima as it doubtless saved many times the number of lives it cost.

[SimonP]

The problem with your argument is that Israel is NOT targeting civilians and is taking a fair amount of care to limit civilian casualties.

More than 17k dead, 70% of which were women or children (NB that the IDF's claim that they've killed 5000 Hamas combatants would therefore imply that they are counting almost every single dead man as a combatant), and more than 56k wounded. 80% of the Gazan population has been internally displaced. Israel continues to cut off the territory from necessary aid. The facts speak louder than Israel's lies.

Yet you will give them credit for dropping leaflets over their targets and advising that millions of people flee under the threat of bombardment. It's ridiculous. The only thing that is remarkable about Israel's genocidal campaign is that they feel the need to provide a fig leaf for their allies in the West.

PS: From a utilitarian POV, the Allies were certainly justified in bombing Hiroshima as it doubtless saved many times the number of lives it cost.

I've said it before, I've said it again: "from a utilitarian POV," there is no point in speaking of "war crimes" at all. War crimes are committed often because, "from a utilitarian POV," they make all too much sense. That is why an international framework for regulating and punishing them was found to be necessary after the Second World War. You're adding literally nothing to the debate, by saying that "the Allies were certainly justified...from a utilitarian POV." You're just saying that war crimes are justified by the utility they generate. It's asinine.

[David Nieporent]

.

NB that the IDF’s claim that they’ve killed 5000 Hamas combatants would therefore imply that they are counting almost every single dead man as a combatant

No; it would therefore imply that the 70% figure is pure, unadulterated fiction.

[SimonP]

Is there a reason you trust the IDF's unsubstantiated claim about the number of Hamas militants killed more than the Gaza Health Ministry's number, which IDF also notes as credible - apart from simply wishing it to be so?

[Macy's Window]

How can the IDF both claim that they Gaza Ministry of Health — an arm of Hamas — is “credible” and also say that it is wrong?

Either you or the IDF doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “credible.”

Why would anyone believe an arm of Hamas, which is trying desperately to seek as much death on both sides as possible?

[SimonP]

Most people treat the Health Ministry's numbers as the most reliable count of Palestinian deaths.

[Bob from Ohio]

The "ministry" reported 500 deaths when the Hamas rocket landed in the hospital courtyard. It was under 50.

They report figures within minutes from all over the strip. Israel is still finding bodies from 10/7.

[Nige]

Yeah. Within minutes. Not so much the rest, though.

[David Nieporent]

.

Most people treat the Health Ministry’s numbers as the most reliable count of Palestinian deaths.

The careful reader will notice that I did not say that the Palestinian death figure was false. I said that the 70% figure — that is, the percentage of deaths who were civilians — was false.

(The IDF may accept the total number of deaths announced by the Health Ministry as a reasonable, if rough, estimate. It by no means accepts the absurd Hamas claims about civilians. Hell, even if Hamas were honest, they would have no possible way to know such a figure. Counting bodies is one thing. Determining whether they're civilian or military, in the middle of combat, when Hamas do not wear uniforms or fight on a battlefield, is absurd.)

[Jason Cavanaugh]

How much do you want to argue over, David?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-officials-2-civilian-deaths-for-every-1-hamas-fighter-killed-in-gaza/

Seems that Israel accepts a 2-to-1 ratio as accurate.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You’re harshing Nieporent’s bloodlust.

[SimonP]

The careful reader will notice that I did not say that the Palestinian death figure was false. I said that the 70% figure — that is, the percentage of deaths who were civilians — was false.

And an even more careful reader would have noticed that the 70% figure referred not to the Health Ministry's claims as to how many of the dead were "civilians", but rather to how many of the dead were women or children.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Don't forget the announcements on social media of which neighborhoods Israel plans to destroy next, though it's important to note that social media generally requires electricity and functional infrastructure to access.

Israel's actions amount to kettling on a national scale. The more they pack the Palestinians into a smaller area, the worse the humanitarian situation will get, and the greater the ratio of civilian casualties will be.

The moral high ground has been thoroughly and deliberately abandoned.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Cell phones have batteries and get a signal from a distant tower.

Having lived through a week-long power failure caused by the freak Halloween snowstorm of 2011, I can assure you that folks find creative ways of recharging their phones.

[Bwaaah]

"Kettling."

I first heard that term in 2020 during the riots. We used to call it "surrounding the troublemakers."

[Stephen Lathrop]

Goes back at least to the German Eastern Front in WW II.

[Macy's Window]

The Israelis are doing the opposite of kettling. They are trying hard to get the fighting areas evacuated. It is Hamas that prevents civilians from leaving to create a propaganda victory.

Under international law, it is clear that it is Hamas' responsibility to facilitate evacuation of civilians and to segregate its fighters from them. It does precisely the opposite.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Why should anyone bother discussing anything with you, when you're willing to come here and lie through your teeth that Israel is not in fact, packing more and more Palestinians into a smaller and smaller area?

I'm not going to argue reality with a fucking liar.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

They are trying hard to get the fighting areas evacuated.

Except when they are bombing refugees in a camp or bombing the areas to which they directed innocent civilians -- right, you bigoted, worthless, right-wing stain?

[Macy's Window]

You don't understand either war crimes or utilitarianism if you think that utilitarianism means "makes sense" for the actor. That is not what utilitarian ethics mean.

Further, most war crimes don't actually advance the interests of the perpetrator.

There has been no international framework for prosecuting war crimes, only ad hoc arrangements such as the Nuremburg trials or ineffectual, self-satisfied arrangements by countries that plan on being protected by others, such as the ICC.

Hiroshima/Nagasaki were more than justified. They saved more lives than any other action during WW2, or perhaps any other war. They saved Allied lives, they saved (many) Japanese lives and they saved many Asian civilians.

[SimonP]

You don’t understand either war crimes or utilitarianism if you think that utilitarianism means “makes sense” for the actor. That is not what utilitarian ethics mean.

I understand what utilitarian ethics means. If you want to rigorously sketch out a utilitarian ethic re: “war crimes,” I suppose we can go there, which would help to clear up the levels of abstraction that are otherwise a bit muddled here. Though I don’t imagine you’re quite up to the task, since you’re just engaged in sophomoric act-utilitarian analysis.

Suffice it to say that under a rigorously utilitarian framework, it’s hard to make sense of what international humanitarian law treats as “war crimes,” since none of these crimes are evaluated in strictly utilitarian terms. Targeting civilians, for instance, is gauged in terms of the military value of the intended target, measures taken to avoid civilian casualties, availability of alternatives, etc. An ethnically-motivated massacre designed to persuade a community not to engage in violent resistance is not justified because it leads to fewer deaths of soldiers and a quicker resolution of an unjust war, for instance.

There is no universally accepted tribunal for punishing war crimes, no. The ICC, the ad hoc tribunals, some national courts exercising universal jurisdiction, etc., are about what it has come to. But we have an established body of law that guides those courts with the power to act.

[Nige]

Using WWII to justify the mass slaughter of civilians is an obscenity.

[David Nieporent]

Because?

(Note that nobody is using WW2 to "justify" anything; WW2 is its own justification. People are using WW2 to illustrate that the sophomoric invocation of phrases like "war crimes" is incompatible with the real world.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Do you like the avoidable slaughter of innocents independently, or are you just parroting Prof. Volokh and clingers in general?

[Nige]

'They're not war crimes because WWII' is pretty much the same thing, except I get that labelling things 'war crimes' induces nothing but cynicism in war supporters because of course it's the tough grown-up thing to do to commit war crimes in wars because they learn literally nothing from anything ever.

[Sarcastr0]

Israel is NOT targeting civilians and is taking a fair amount of care to limit civilian casualties.

There's some good reporting in quite a few outlets (NYT, NPR, The Guardian, WaPo, etc.) that this is not the case. Or at least not the case absent some loud press-facing demonstrations.

[Macy's Window]

Oh, the NYT, NPR and the Guardian?

I'd no idea the reporting was so reputable.

Did they lead their reports with denunciations of the "colonialist apartheid state"?

[SimonP]

If what you're asking is, "Have these outlets gone out of their way to repeatedly acknowledge the atrocity of Hamas's initial attacks, to give comments by the Israeli government and military fair hearing, and to humanize the continuing hostage crisis by devoting significant coverage time and space to released hostages?" then the answer is, yes.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, their reporting is reputable.

You seem afraid to actually see what they reported?

Oh and you strawmanned again. Bad habit, that.

[Bob from Ohio]

Every report at these papers are written by freelancers in Gaza, all Arabs. Check the bylines.

Do you think they are free to report?

Here is an example of a "reputable" reporter:

‘How great you are, Hitler,’ posts journalist rehired by the New York Times
Freelance filmmaker Soliman Hijjy was rehired by the New York Times despite his history of antisemitism.
By DANIELLE GREYMAN-KENNARD
Jerusalem Post OCTOBER 21, 2023 17:30
Updated: OCTOBER 21, 2023 20:20"

[Bob from Ohio]

"Israel is taking steps to reduce the number of Palestinian civilian casualties from the Israel-Hamas war, US National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby told ABC’s This Week on Sunday, two days after the IDF resumed its military campaign to oust Hamas from the enclave.
“We believe they [Israel] have been receptive to our messages in terms of trying to minimize civilian casualties,” he said.
“In the last 24 to 48 hours, they [the IDF], published an online map of places where people could go to avoid combat... to find safety from combat. There is not a whole lot of modern militaries that would do that,” Kirby said as he referred to Israeli actions in the South."

What would a retired admiral with a top secret clearance at NSC know about things as compared to NYT, NPR, The Guardian, WaPo? Its a mystery.

[SimonP]

Why would a Biden administration official parrot Israeli talking points on a political talk show that might not correspond to actions on the ground? Hm, who can figure.

[Bob from Ohio]

Better to listen to Hamas vetted freelancers in Gaza!

[SimonP]

Well, look, I’m not saying that most modern militaries would tell civilians where to flee in order to avoid being bombed.

I’m just questioning why that’s supposed to be some kind of humanitarian gold star, when we know that they’ll just issue a new order in a week telling people to leave those spots, too.

Gaza is somewhat bigger than Manhattan. But imagine if some foreign government warned all Manhattan residents that it was going to carpet-bomb the city north of 59th street, and that residents would be well-advised to move south of it. That would be a mass exodus of older residents on the UES and UWS, the Hispanic and Black communities of Harlem, Washington Heights, and neighborhoods to the north. We would all cram on the south side of the island. We’d manage the best we could for a while. Then the government says, now move to the east side of Manhattan south of 59th street; everything west of Sixth Avenue is now fair game. So then we all pick up and move over there.

“Oh,” you would say, “How humanitarian! They’re telling civilians where not to be, to not get killed!” Yeah, but most of us are homeless, without any way to cook for ourselves or store food, no regular access to water or toilet facilities, most of our hospitals are within the firing zone, all of us carrying whatever remains of our possessions. Even if we don’t get bombed – and I haven’t seen much evidence that Israel abides by these ridiculous orders – what the fuck are we supposed to do with ourselves, but wait for death?

[Bwaaah]

"There’s some good reporting in quite a few outlets (NYT, NPR, The Guardian, WaPo, etc.) that this is not the case."

You do understand how counter-persuasive that remark is, don't you?

[Sarcastr0]

Only to fringy folks who are really into fooling themselves.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Disaffected right-wing bigots despise our strongest newspapers as part of hating modern America.

Well, until replacement.

[Toranth]

Tell me, were any of the sources for those statements NOT Hamas or Hamas-aligned?

As far as I can tell, not one of your claimed "good reporting" sources (NYT, NPR, Guardian, WashPo, etc) has actually done anything but regurgitate statements from others.

You DO understand the difference between a newspaper doing its own investigation and reporting, and reporting on a statement made by a party in the conflict, right?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Maybe EV can explain this better than I -- computer programs are run in lower level languages (I believe "assembly code" is one) upon which higher level languages (e.g. C or Pascal) are operated, with the C programmer not having to know the underlying machine language.

What I am trying to say is that *this* incarnation of anti-semitism is actually the reflection of a lower level "something else" that is running unseen below the surface. A certain rejection of Enlightenment values which many Jews share (and which much of Israel is based on) is appearing as antisemitism, but like as with unix, what you see is not necessarily what is causing it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Israel pretty much a gay-friendly country? Don't women pretty much have rights in Israel -- I remember Goldia Mayer being PM back in the 1970s and we still haven't had a female President here. (Compare that to the Arab world where women literally are property -- something I believe we passed a 13th Amendment to outlaw...)

So why are the feminists and LBGT folks supporting Hamas?

Logically, if it were self interest alone, they'd be championing Israel.

So why aren't they?

[Krayt]

There's a meme video floating around where a right wing asshole and a left wing asshole are arguing over Gaza. The left wing guy happens to be gay. The right wing guy points out all these Muslims there don't support gay rights. The other guy says yes they do. Just then some women in hijabs walk up, so they ask them. "Nope." The left wing guy is shocked, shocked.

This you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours is a political thing in the US. The last time this happened was when latinos approved Prop 8 in California, and the Democrats were shocked, shocked, and so ran off to the courts.

I have no problem overturning The Will of The People to increase personal rights. But I do not run around screetching democracy uber alles.

[shawn_dude]

The moral of this story: you can still be opposed to wanton demolition and killing of innocent civilians even if those civilians wouldn't respect your own freedom.

Besides, the new right wing campaign of calling American homosexuals pedophiles and banning books containing even non-sexual references to same-sex couples undercuts your fake sense of moral outrage. Like Dr Ed, this is just another attempt to coopt the tragedy in Israel to flex your local homophobia.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And when it's a realistic fear?

[shawn_dude]

Are you saying you're afraid of homosexuals? Or just afraid of them being happy? (and isn't that the literal meaning of the word "homophobia?")

[Krayt]

I beg your pardon. If it were up to me you'd have had gay rights decades before even the Democrats officially wanted them.

[Sarcastr0]

why are the feminists and LBGT folks supporting Hamas?
They are not.

[Don Nico]

No, they are just SILENT about the rapes committed in the SInchat Torah pogrom.

[Sarcastr0]

Demanding feminists kowtow to your chosen cause for them or they aren’t real feminists is not how it works.

Kinda misogynism and controlling, if you think about it.

[Don Nico]

Oh sure defend their silence. I don't ask that they kowtow to anyone. only that they react to horrific acts if they are genuine.
You call that misogyny. Fuck you. I ask that they stand up to their sisters in Israel. That is how it works.
You never fail to surprise about the poor behavior that you defend.

[Bob from Ohio]

I just don't think asking groups to live up to their stated principles or purpose can be bad. It took two months for the UN women section to just issue a statement saying "rape is bad, Hamas shouldn't do it".

[Sarcastr0]

I don’t ask that they kowtow to anyone. only that they react to horrific acts if they are genuine.
You getting to choose what counts as genuine.

You dictating how feminists gotta act, under threat of you not thinking they're genuine.

And then calling it poor behavior if I point out you don't get to police what's feminism.

Gatekeep a gate that's not yours all you want. No one who isn't already looking for a fight with feminists will care.

[Nige]

'I ask that they stand up to their sisters in Israel.'

Hilarious. Thousands and thousands of women are being killed in Gaza. You're gatekeeping through ignorance.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Are they? Did you survey all of them?

Please tell us the methods you used to come to this remarkably universal conclusion.

[Nige]

Are they? Or is that just what the same people who think criticism of Israel is support of Hamas are saying?

[Bob from Ohio]

"LBGT folks" They are not."

Who is waving those Queers for Palestine signs then?

[Randal]

Are you one of those people who think all Palestinians are Hamas and should therefore all die?

Yes, yes you are.

[Bwaaah]

Well, there you go. A question and an answer. It's like a conversation. Only, it's with yourself.

[SimonP]

Mr. Ed, how supportive of LGBT folks and women's equality are you?

[Dr. Ed 2]

I don't advocate murder & burkas....

[loki13]

Wait ... Dr. Ed doesn't advocate murder?

Oh, I forgot the implicit, "On every thread."

He doesn't advocate murder on every thread. Just, you know, most of them. But I guess they have it coming!

[SimonP]

So you're saying that, here in the US, LGBT folks and women need only tolerate a slightly less extreme social conservatism?

Do you grasp what I'm saying? It's easy for LGBT folks to feel sympathy for Palestinians because we ourselves live in a religiously-conservative country. Many of our family members, and the vast majority of the Republican party, hold views that are indistinguishable from the Palestinians'. It's not actually that remarkable.

[Reg Parnell]

"Many of our family members, and the vast majority of the Republican party, hold views that are indistinguishable from the Palestinians’. "

Yeah because lots of people are calling for the legal execution of gays. Saying gays can't give gay pornography to 1st graders is totally the same thing.

You would be dead within 24 hours in Gaza living as an openly gay man. Give it long enough and let the borders be open enough, and you will look back on the 2020s as a golden age of tolerance, assuming you are not already dead.

You are well and truly suicidality stupid.

[Macy's Window]

^+10.

[SimonP]

Yeah because lots of people are calling for the legal execution of gays.

Lots of prominent Republicans? No. But it would not be hard to find that sentiment in many communities, in our churches, on our local governing boards.

You yourself are only a few keystrokes from fantasizing about my being murdered by Hamas. I don’t want to titillate you, but what do you think would happen if I engaged in a little same-sex PDA in some parts of the South?

Saying gays can’t give gay pornography to 1st graders is totally the same thing.

This is not an accurate characterization of the book bans. Nor is it comprehensive of the issue. We’re not just talking about “don’t say gay” in primary school. We’re talking about “don’t say gay” in high schools, colleges, and employers; we’re talking about expanding rights to discriminate against LGBT people in the provision of medical care, housing, employment, and on and on; we’re talking about expanding the rights of public employees to deny benefits or services to LGBT people; and on and on.

You would be dead within 24 hours in Gaza living as an openly gay man. Give it long enough and let the borders be open enough, and you will look back on the 2020s as a golden age of tolerance, assuming you are not already dead.

Republican politics and rhetoric is only a few steps behind where Russia now is, when it comes to LGBT issues, which is itself on the verge of simply executing members of the LGBT community. And if Republicans continue to have electoral success among socially-conservative Blacks and Hispanics, they will make quicker progress in that regard. Are you not familiar with Mike Johnson’s views on the LGBT community? The House is only a few Republicans-in-Biden-districts away from an open campaign to trying to nationalize their campaign against the LGBT community.

I live in New York, a blue corner of a blue state, where LGBT folks can generally live openly and even with a degree of institutionalized acceptance. But I share this country with many, many people who consider that anathema and are fighting to destroy these sanctuaries. And as far as I’m concerned, the terrorism they want in their hearts, and are seeking to exact through political, legal, and extra-legal means, land much closer to the values of Hamas than they do mine.

[Reg Parnell]

I can't fight the voices in your head. You can live anywhere in America you like and no one will care you are gay. Again go anywhere in the Middle East and get back to me about how that goes.

[Nige]

Except for the ones who claim gay people groom and molest children. Like you.

[SimonP]

I can’t fight the voices in your head. You can live anywhere in America you like and no one will care you are gay.

This is just demonstrably not true.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

You can live anywhere in America you like and no one will care you are gay.

That could be disingenuous partisanship, or there could be some clueless, on-the-spectrum right-wingers who genuinely believe it.

[Nige]

Gay people you have happily oppressed prefer you don't use them as justifiction for mass murder.

[Reg Parnell]

How have I oppressed gay people? Is not being able to prey on children now "oppression"? Don't worry sport, there are thousands of gays and trans all over America grooming and molesting children all over America as we speak.

[Nige]

'Is not being able to prey on children now “oppression”?'

I mean, there it is.

[Randal]

Wanna see what grooming actually looks like?

https://nypost.com/2013/09/18/french-senate-non-to-child-beauty-pageants/

The vast majority of child sexual assault is committed by straight men. Like, almost all of it. Anyone complaining about gay or trans grooming is simply a misguided homophobe.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Pointers on degrees of bigotry from reprehensible conservative gay-bathers are always a treat.

If your God tells you to be a gay-brasher, your God is a paltry piece of shit.

And illusory.

Carry on, bigoted, Republica, right-wing clingers. So far as your betters permit.

[shawn_dude]

Israel is a democratic nation with a government representing Jews, Christians, Muslims, and others. It’s actions are not immune from criticism. Hamas is an authoritarian government that largely represents its own needs and those of its sponsor, Iran. Neither government’s actions represent 100% of their citizens, Hamas less so given it’s authoritarian nature. Criticism of the Israeli government is not automatically anti-Semitic. If they pass dumb laws, criticizing those laws is no more anti-Semitic than criticizing dumb laws passed in any other country. Support for Palestinians is not automatically pro-Hamas. One can support civilians in countries like China and Russia while still raising legitimate criticisms of their government.

You build a strawman here where criticism of multi-ethnic Israel is, by default, anti-Semitic and support for Palestinian citizens is, by default, pro-Hamas. And then, you tie “feminists and LBGT folks” to this strawman and subsequently accuse them of being anti-Semitic and pro-terrorism.

This whole screed of yours is just a way to coopt the war in Israel to attack and dehumanize two sets of Americans you dislike.

[Don Nico]

shawn,
How about you inform yourself about the rapes plus mutilations on Oct 7.
And then go out and buy a very powerful hearing aid to see if you can hear and criticisms of that from the feminist and LGBTQI+ crowd.

[shawn_dude]

Don Nico, you won't find LGBTQ opinions on FOX news or OAN. If you were open to hearing what we had to say, you'd have heard it already. There are LGBTQ Israelis, Palestinians, Jews, and Muslims in Israel and the Palestinian territories along with every US state. Just as there are LGBTQ Ukrainians and Russians. I don't recall seeing you lament a lack of LGBTQ opinion on that latter conflict. Nor do I recall you lamenting their status and difficulties in their home countries before these wars.

I'll add you to the list of people coopting the tragedies in Israel and Palestine in order to demonize women and LGBTQ persons in the US.

[Don Nico]

Who mentioned Fox news except you. (what the hell is OAN?)
Your ilk just love putting people in boxes, don’t you. I am demonizing no one. In fact, you are the one doing that.
"There are LGBTQ Israelis..." yes and so what. Are are you just taking an opportunity for virtue signaling
I expect politically vocal people not to be silent in the face of genocidal terror. But that is too much to expect from you.

[Sarcastr0]

I expect politically vocal people not to be silent in the face of genocidal terror.
You're attacking a group, not individuals.
Not that you know their actual position, but because they haven't been *loud enough* for you, who isn't looking hard, to see what you want to see.

Everyone has a cause; attempting to dragoon everyone into your cause is a recipe for righteous bitterness. Your standard has most of the world and America condoning genocide.

That's not the truth, but it's where you seem to want to go.

[Randal]

Uh, Don, you seem to be the one putting people in boxes.

And then go out and buy a very powerful hearing aid to see if you can hear and criticisms of that from the feminist and LGBTQI+ crowd.

Those criticisms are everywhere. You've just excluded those voices from your bubble.

[Nige]

'if you can hear and criticisms of that from the feminist and LGBTQI+ crowd.'

How would you know?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Thanks for the bigoted right-wing perspective, Don Nico.

[Magister]

Dr. Ed 2 explaining computer languages? UNCOL! UNCOL!

Correct me if I am wrong

This has been tried repeatedly without noticeable effect.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This contribution by Prof. Volokh supports some hope. He acknowledges that bigotry exists. He exhibits empathy with respect to those harmed by intolerance and baseless hatred.

If this derives from a change in perspective, this could be great. For years this blog has been remarkably devoted to protecting bigots of various stripes, creating safe spaces for intolerance, and suggesting that whites and males are the persecuted groups. This blog has published bigoted and bigot-hugging content -- racism, gay-bashing, misogyny, antisemitism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, transphobia -- in posts and especially comments. The target audience of this blog has seemed to include our vestigial bigots.

If this indicates a new page at the Volokh Conspiracy, I will welcome it. Less partisanship, perhaps (criticizing the antisemitism expressed by Marjorie "Jewish Space Laser" Greene at least occasionally, or even that of Elon Musk), and more principle. Or recognition that "many American universities" exhibit a "magnitude of hostility" toward gays, unmarried mothers, and transgender people, even if those bigoted institutions are operated by the Volokh Conspirators' ideological allies.

Maybe even, for many Americans, the Volokh Conspiracy, Volokh Conspirators, and Volokh Conspiracy fans will stop causing mainstream Americans to perceive that conservatives occupy an unattractive position the "who are enemies are, who our friend area" continuum described by Prof. Volokh.

The Instapundit polemics and partisanship to which Prof. Volokh points do not generate optimism, but I will retain hope that the Volokh Conspiracy will change course, exhibit some principle and decency, learn a lesson along the lines Prof. Volokh has described, and improve.

[Reg Parnell]

For years this blog has been remarkably devoted to protecting bigots of various stripes, creating safe spaces for intolerance, and suggesting that whites and males are the persecuted groups.

This blog has allowed you to post for years. So, to the charge that it provides a platform for bigotry and ignorance, it is guilty by virtue of it not banning you.

I can't say you don't have a point once in a while Rev.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Baby steps can be progress. Let's hope this is a new chapter.

[Reg Parnell]

I really think that went right over your head. I honestly forget how stupid you are sometimes.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I get it.

You don't like it when someone likes me points out how bigoted, cowardly, partisan, and hypocritical the right-wingers who operate and adore this blog show themselves to be every day.

Or when I mention that the bigotry and backwardness are important reasons underlying the victory of the reason-based, inclusive, educated liberal-libertarian mainstream in the American culture war and at the modern marketplace of ideas.

Or when I observe that some clingers are sentient enough to recognize that their preferences are doomed and that old-timey conservative thinking is being replaced daily, which is why the culture war casualties at this blog are such disaffected, antisocial, cranky misfits.

I hope Prof. Volokh's post indicates he and his blog might move toward principle, modernity, tolerance, and reason and away from principle-deprived partisanship, backwardness, incessant bigotry, and superstition. You have vindicated to some degree my doubt that most of his right-wing fans share that aspiration.

[Bwaaah]

No, Reg. The Rev gets it. He said so, with all that additional snotty stuff after it.

(You thought it went over his head. But he looked up and didn't see anything passing by. So, yeah, he gets it.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

When right-wingers are groveling at the feet of their betters, begging for reconsideration of the decision to stop subsidizing Israel's deplorable, violent conduct and superstition-addled right-wing government, I hope the modern American mainstream remembers these exchanges and tells the clingers to move to Israel or stay and watch the consequences of their right-wing belligerence unfold.

[ReaderY]

I’m not sure this argument is such a good one.

When we legalize things, pretty much anything, we tend to find out that more people do them than we might have imagined. Making it illegal keeps it hidden. People do it secretly. When we legalize, people come out into the open and we discover what’s really going on. Some do it who might not have done it at all with it illegal.

But is this really a good argument for legalizing things? Doubtless if we legalized rape, we’d find more of it happening and we’d discover that more people are inclined to do it than we might imagine with it illegal. But is learning this lesson really a good reason to legalize rape? Or anything that we actually think, on its own merits, should be kept illegal?

[Krayt]

https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0931580536/reasonmagazinea-20/

Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes In A Free Society

[Reg Parnell]

The various idiots on this thread who claim these protests are not anti-Semitic need to answer one question; if these protests are just criticism of Israel and not about attacking and harassing Jews, then why are the protests not directed at Israel but any Jew anywhere instead?

Suppose someone started a protest movement against the Egyptian genocide of Coptic Christians and instead of protesting at the Egyptian Embassy or the UN, they protested on college campuses and in front of Mosques and Muslim owned businesses and attacked and harassed any Muslim they found without any regard to whether they were even Egyptian. Would anyone claim with a straight face such a movement wasn't just anti Muslim bigotry disguised as protest? No, of course they wouldn't because that is exactly what such a movement would be.

How are the post October 7th protests any different? They are not protesting Israel. The are protesting Jews and showing up in front of Jewish owned business and synagogues and harassing Jewish college students. If anyone thinks otherwise, I encourage you to put on a Yakima and walk in front on any of these protests and see what happens. The protestors won't be asking your opinion the events in Gaza. By virtue of your being Jewish or seen as Jewish, you will be considered the enemy.

So, don't start a protest movement that does nothing but target and harass Jews and then piss down my leg and tell me it is not really about targeting and harassing Jews.

[Randal]

The restaurant, for example, was Jewish owned... but a notoriously outspoken pro-Israel owner engaged in lots of pro-Israel advocacy. The protest was a response to that advocacy, not the fact that the owner was Jewish.

It doesn't work for Jews to advocate for Israel, and then accuse counter-protesters of antisemitism.

The ADL is even slimier in this regard. They've been trying for decades to conflate Judaism with Israel so that one can't be criticized without implicating the other. They encourage Jews to throw in with Israel as a fundamental part of the Jewish identity. And at the same time, they try to suppress the speech of pro-Palestinian voices by characterizing any criticism of Israel as an attempt to "delegitimize" it, making it easier to one day eliminate, and therefore automatically antisemitic.

It's not the pro-Palestinian protesters who've conflated Judaism with Israel. It's the explicit strategy of pro-Israeli propagandists.

[Reg Parnell]

The restaurant, for example, was Jewish owned… but a notoriously outspoken pro-Israel owner engaged in lots of pro-Israel advocacy. The protest was a response to that advocacy, not the fact that the owner was Jewish.

And protesting against someone who said something in Philadelphia is going to change Israeli policy how? Lots of people are outspoken critics of Hamas and supporters of Israel, most of them are not Jews. Yet, only Jews get mobs outside their restaurants.

And at the same time, they try to suppress the speech of pro-Palestinian voices by characterizing any criticism of Israel as an attempt to “delegitimize” it, making it easier to one day eliminate, and therefore automatically antisemitic.

So the guy who applauds mobs showing up outside the businesses of anyone who is a "strong Israel supporter" is complaining about the ADL suppressing speech.

Try again Adolph.

[Randal]

Can you name a significant non-Jewish pro-Israel philanthropist restauranteur?

Protesting a business is speech. Getting student groups banned from campus is suppression of speech. That should be butt obvious to anyone whose head isn't up it.

[David Nieporent]

I assure you that Israel as a fundamental part of the Jewish identity predates the existence of the ADL by several thousand years.

[Randal]

Just like slavery as a fundamental part of Black Americans’ identity predates the existence of AOC by several hundred years. That doesn’t prevent AOC from reminding them of it constantly for political purposes.

Now just imagine that the institution of slavery was waging a war against North Korea, and AOC used that occasion to insist that any criticism of North Korea was tantamount to support for slavery, and therefore a racist affront against Blacks. You’d probably be like… what the huh? I just don't what North Korea's been up to. How did that end up making me racist?

[harryk]

"Let the pogroms begin!" is the next step, and in reality that applies to Jews, Palestinians, and critics of the narrative de jour. It probably won;t get that bad because almost all of the noisy ones are, on a fundamental level, pussies.

[Sarcastr0]

Pogroms are not a brave thing to do.

[DaveM]

Collectivism is the root of the evil. Any bias against the individual based on their association with or affinity to a group rather than to them personally is a catefory error. Racism? Yes. Antisemitism? Yes. Sexism? Yes. Yes, yes, and yes. Every one of these evils come from the exact same place.

[Bwaaah]

It comes from "us"?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The exact same place? The Republican Party platform?

What about the Federalist Society’s commentary series?