Category: palestine

Once More on Imperialism and the Jewish Lobby

Jay KnottLeave a comment

1. Why the best explanation of Western support for Israel is ‘Jewish power,’ not ‘Imperialism’

I started with Mearsheimer & Walt’s 2007 The Israel Lobby. I used their argument in a critique of Chomsy’s Fateful Triangle, which was published online in 2010, first on Palestine Think Tank, then on Dissident Voice, and finally, The Jay Report: https://thejayreport.com/2020/05/17/an-article-of-mine-from-2010/. Mearsheimer & Walt are more moderate than I am – they don’t talk about ‘Jewish power.’

But the three of us agree that the main reason the USA backs Israel, is the power of the Israel Lobby. Since all the Western countries, bar Israel, are submissive to the USA, I only discuss the American branch of the Lobby.

Why do I defend the ‘Jewish power’ explanation? Because it is less complex, and requires fewer assumptions, than the alternative. To summarize:

American politicians fall over each other to propose laws giving special rights to Jews. The university sector is under assault, driven by the claim that Jews don’t feel safe on campus, following peaceful protests against genocide. Several people have been arrested, and some threatened with deportation, for allegedly saying they support Hamas.

  1. No evidence has been produced showing that any of the accused have said anything in favour of Hamas, and
  2. it is legal to say “up with Hamas.”

In May 2025, Congress briefly considered a bill which would make it a criminal offence, punishable by up to twenty years imprisonment, to advocate a boycott of Israeli products. The less draconian, but still unconstitutional, Antisemitism Awareness Act, has a better chance of becoming law. 

These examples of politicians’ behaviour are clear attempts to violate the First Amendment to the Constitution. Legislators know this, yet they continue to attempt to make an exception; to ban speech which might undermine Jewish interests. 

Is the above

  1. an elaborate charade to make it look as if the Lobby can determine US policy regarding Israel, or
  2. is the most economical/parsimonious/likely explanation that Jewish power trumps American interests?

I can’t prove that this grovelling is genuine; one could believe that it’s fake. I can only argue that the more parsimonious explanation is that it is what it appears — the USA’s relationship to Israel is dictated by Jewish interests.

The right mostly claims Israel is an ally; the left tends to argue it is in the interests of US imperialism to throw money at the Jewish state. The right-wing and left-wing arguments prop each other up.

Consider the vacuity of the responses from left or right to the question of what Israel actually does for the empire it allegedly serves. They are reduced to waffling about oil, hegemony, democracy… but Israel is not a ‘forward base.’ It does not contribute troops to US adventures. It does not protect oilfields. Caitlin Johnstone, who defends the view that Israel serves the USA, points out that Israel attacks countries in the USA’s crosshairs. What she doesn’t see is that this ‘evidence’ is equally compatible with 

  1. Israel attacks countries the USA considers enemies, on behalf of the USA, or
  2. the countries Israel attacks are considered enemies by the USA, because the USA supports Israel. 

To find out whether the dog wags the tail, or vice-versa, we need to look at the internals of US politics. Other allies really are allies; they actually serve US interests. Israel needs a powerful, well-funded lobby to bribe, cajole, blackmail and threaten anyone who makes even accurate, mild criticisms – “it’s the Benjamins” – because it is not really an ally. 

2. Avoidance of the ‘Jewish power’ hypothesis

I have defended the ‘Jewish power’ hypothesis to left-wing critics of Zionism many times. But they never try to answer it – they just continue assuming that Israel is acting for US imperialism. 

‘It is important to stress the primary role of imperialism in this analysis, which means rejecting explanations that emphasize the supposed power of a “Zionist lobby,” or, worse, a “Jewish lobby.”’ – International Socialism 181, 2024, page 45. 

I suspect the reason for leftists’ inability to respond rationally is that their real motive is emotional. They have internalised the idea that talk of ‘Jewish power’ and a ‘Jewish lobby’ is ‘antisemitic.’ This signals to Jewish supremacists that they take the allegation seriously.

The Gaza genocide is the greatest crime committed by a Western country since world war two. The most notorious American crime in Vietnam was at My Lai. Since 7/10/2023, there has been a My Lai every day in Palestine. The sadism with which Jews celebrate the deaths and injuries they are causing exceeds that of the Nazis. Jewish racism is in a league of its own.

It might be objected that the rulers of the Western countries support Israel to the hilt, and are therefore just as culpable. True – but there is a big difference between being a member of the racial group with power, and one of its poodles. Gentile supporters of Israel are like Chief Buthelezi, the Zulu politician who served the white apartheid regime. This means one might be able to help undermine support for Israel by persuading goyim that it is not in their ethnic interests, and that they are being used. It is difficult for the anti-imperialist left to argue like that. 

3. The eternal victim narrative

I know that not all Jews are racial supremacists. I just encountered a number of anti-Zionist Jews at the first Jewish Anti-Zionist conference in Vienna, in June 2025: https://www.juedisch-antizionistisch.at/en.

Reuven Abergel, founder of Israel’s Black Panthers, narrated a variant of the eternal victim story. He is a Moroccan Arab Jew who migrated to Israel in the fifties. His main schtick was to point out how the Arab Jews (Mizrahi) provided cheap labour for Israel, and suffered from racial discrimination. He said the European Jews (Ashkenazi) drove a wedge between the Mizrahi and Palestinian communities – “they sent us to the same villages where Palestinians had been expelled.” The Ashkenazi did this because they suffered from a “disease” which they got from living in Europe. 

Another contributor argued that, because Arabic is the first language of the Mizrahi, and because they’d lived happily in Arab lands until Western colonialism spoiled everything, the real oppression is Arabs being oppressed by Europeans. This ignores the fact that, as soon as you are born, you are either a Jew or a goy, in the eyes of the Israeli government. You might be Tunisian, but if you are also Jewish, you have the privilege of automatic citizenship of a Western economy, backed to the hilt by all the other Western countries. And, for whatever reason, those people who classify themselves as ‘Jewish’ tend to have a strong sense of ethnic identity.

Abergel added that, after the 1967 war, the Arab Jews became as racist as the rest. Another speaker, a woman from an Jewish-Egyptian family, said the Mizrahi are the most vicious Zionists.

At the other extreme, some anti-Zionist analysts appeal to Jews to stop supporting Zionism because it is harmful to Jews:

  • I wrote that Jonathan K Cook tried to persuade influential Jews to “stand foursquare against Israel.” I have a screenshot, but he appears to have deleted the tweet, so I won’t post it.

For the most part, Jews aren’t listening to these sincere, but naive, anti-Zionist voices. The genocide in Palestine is not antisemitic, but philosemitic – it’s in Jewish interests. By exterminating the untermenschen, they get more lebensraum. 

It is not necessarily true that, if you give a racial group special rights, it will take advantage. Since the end of world war two, Europeans have voluntarily relinquished all their ethnic advantages. But the same period saw the rise of Jewish privilege; while white apartheid states were abandoned, the Jewish equivalent was backed to the hilt.

The fear of stating the obvious – the existence of Jewish power – is a consequence of Jewish power. We need to lose that fear. 

Cancel Culture and Israel

Jay KnottLeave a comment

Here’s the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s database covering attacks on freedom of expression in America, with the keyword ‘Israel’: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/scholars-under-fire?orderdir=desc&orderby=year&keyword=Israel. It includes those canceled for being for, and for being critical of, the Jewish state.

And here is the College Fix’s cancel culture database, with the same keyword: https://www.thecollegefix.com/cancel-culture-database/?gv_search=israel&mode=all.

The entries are clearly selected to filter out those canceled for criticising Israel.

The Zionist Assault on Free Speech and its Resemblance to Woke Cancel Culture

Jay KnottLeave a comment

Have you noticed the adjacency of

— the terminology of the woke left, and 

— the language used by American conservatives to justify the current crackdown on free speech?

Republicans opposed cancel culture in academia and elsewhere. Now they are in government, they lecture Europeans about freedom, while organising the biggest crackdown on free speech since McCarthyism: hauling college presidents to inquisitions, firing dissidents, and deporting legal immigrants, for their alleged opinions. There are narrow exceptions to constitutionally protected speech, but these are limited to planning crimes, and incitement to immediate violence. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression explains:

https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/unprotected-speech-synopsis

Chutzpah isn’t just a jokey term in Yiddish for breathtaking hypocrisy; it’s a strategy for advancing Jewish interests. It means the only criterion for deciding what to say, write, or advocate, is not “is it true?” but “does it advance Jewish interests?” 

How else to describe the Orwellian inversions which we hear and view every day? 

— There have been numerous protests in universities, against the Israeli genocide. Zionist Jews and their politicians claim these protests are for the genocide of Jews.

— Politicians have claimed “Israel doesn’t need America; America needs Israel”: the opposite of the truth.

— Zionists claim their critics say “Zionists” when they mean “Jews”; in reality, Zionists say “Jews” when they mean “Zionists.” 

— In a double lie, they falsely claim students are breaking the law by expressing sympathy for Hamas, and persuade administrations and government departments to expel and arrest them. 

  — It is not illegal to express sympathy for Hamas, and 

  — no evidence of any of those targeted expressing such sympathy has been produced. 

The claims of Zionism are ridiculous, yet the most powerful government on earth is completely committed to them. 

Government and Zionist proclamations on the “antisemitism crisis” in academia bear a striking resemblance to the campaign against “racism,” which reached a climax during 2020. The premises of both campaigns are false. There is no evidence that George Floyd was murdered for being black. Black students at Yale, Evergreen, etc. have not experienced racial discrimination. Neither have Jews at Harvard, Columbia, etc.. Every protest against the Israeli genocide has included a significant Jewish contingent. What has upset some Jews — the racialists — has been the criticism of Israel. It makes them feel unsafe:

https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2023/11/02/i-am-a-target-dozens-of-jewish-students-report-feeling-unsafe-on-campus/

The women who run the universities have accommodated the Jewish supremacists as cravenly as they did other minority activists. But the Jewish assault on freedom is worse than woke. It is backed by the government, and reinforced by the withdrawal of funds from non-compliant institutions, expulsions, arrests, and the threat of deportation. Most importantly, it helps Israel commit genocide, by undermining opposition to it within its most important supporter.

The manipulations of America and other open societies by different minority activists look similar because they exploit the same weakness: the eagerness with which people of European descent, despite, or because of, their unique efforts to end discrimination, are prepared to accept allegations of harbouring prejudice. The nearest thing I am aware of, to an explanation of that weakness, is Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition, by Kevin MacDonald; I don’t know if I agree with it.

https://www.amazon.com/Individualism-Western-Liberal-Tradition-Evolutionary/dp/1089691483

Avoiding the J-word

Jay Knott1 Comment

Supporters of Israel refer to it as “the Jewish state.” 

Critics rarely use that term. Some even argue “It is not a Jewish state.”

The reaason is, these critics are intimidated by the word ‘antisemitism.’ While the left overuses the allegation ‘racism,’ the right cries ‘antisemitism,’ to smear opponents of Israel’s crimes. On 7/10/23, the right adopted a far more comprehensive ‘cancel culture’ than the one they oppose. 

When asked why the USA gives unconditional support to Israel, both right and left mostly argue Israel is America’s ally. The right think this is a good thing; the left tends to argue that it is an expression of European colonialism, or a tool of US imperialism. Over and again, one finds leftists on social media labeling Israel ‘white supremacy.’ Apartheid South Africa was an implementation of white supremacy. Israel? White supremacy! The intellectual gymnastics the left performs to avoid the J-word could win Olympic medals. 

Almost twenty years ago, Michael Neumann savaged the tactical ineptitude of left-wing anti-Zionists, claiming they put feelings before facts: “What’s the welfare of the Palestinians compared to the left’s emotional commitment to anti-imperialism?” 

https://www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/18/the-palestinians-and-the-party-line

If Israel is a tool of the US, it follows that patriotic Americans should support Israel. It is both more accurate and more effective to argue that Israel’s relationship to the US is parasitic. Perhaps some on the left are worried that arguing it is unpatriotic to support Israel could lead patriots into… white supremacy. As if that remote possibility is worth considering, in the context of the daily genocide being carried out, not by Nazis or the KKK, but by the Jewish state. 

Others argue that the USA supports Israel, even when Israel’s interests are at variance with its own, because US politicians are selected for their eagerness to serve the interests of Jews. The most obvious example of this selection process is the millions of dollars the Jewish organisation AIPAC donates to the campaigns of pro-Israel candidates.

I believe that it’s impossible to resolve this issue by accumulating evidence for one side or the other. For example, the fact that Israel attacks countries which are not US-aligned doesn’t show that it’s doing it on behalf of America, as Caitlin Johnstone believes. It could just as well be that these countries are not US-aligned because the USA supports Israel. 

The evidence doesn’t tell us whether the groveling of US politicians toward their Israeli counterparts is a reflection of Jewish power in the USA, or whether they’re just pretending, in order to cover up for the role of Israel in acting for American hegemony in the oil-rich geostrategic blah-blah-blah.

The reason I favour the ‘Jewish power’ explanation of the competition among politicians for who can genuflect to Israel and its supporters most fervently, is that it’s the most parsimonious description of the data. 

Mearsheimer and Walt, in their book The Israel Lobby, ask the right question:

 – US presidents mildly criticize Israeli policies

 – Israeli politicians express open contempt for the supposedly most powerful man in the world, bragging of how ‘The Jewish Lobby’ (their words) will bring this uppity goy into line

 – And so it comes to pass…

is this all

 1. an elaborate charade to make it look as if the Lobby can determine US policy regarding Israel in order to cover up for US hegemony, by diverting attention to the Jews, or

 2. is the most elegant/economical/likely explanation that Jewish power trumps US interests?

Let’s make it simple. Given all the examples of US politicians groveling to Israel, is this a facade to disguise the fact that Israel is really subordinate to the US empire, or is the most parsimonious explanation, that Israel really does tell US politicians what to do?

Since 7/10/23, it has been difficult to keep track of the examples of politicians falling over each other to compete in groveling to the Jewish state and its supporters. To take one example, the Antisemitism Awareness Act passed 320 to 91 in the House of Representatives, though it clearly violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution. For example, it proposes to penalise

“denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”

(An aside: Caitlin Johnstone, bless her, is a committed critic of Israel. She would argue that claiming Israel is racist does not deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination: https://x.com/caitoz/status/1806497727272071622?t=7DOueWdBMkLCwu8FYNHvNA&s=19. I would rather say I don’t care if it does deny them that right.)

Witness the rabid attacks on academic freedom, with politicians regularly claiming that university protests against genocide are comparable to the genesis of the Nazi party. 

It is far more parsimonious to describe the groveling as a result of Jewish power, than to describe it as a facade to make it look like a result of Jewish power.

One reason the Palestine solidarity movement has been so spectacularly unsuccessful, contrasted to the anti-apartheid campaign, is that it doesn’t point to the cause of the problem it is trying to solve: the power of Jews in Western institutions, media, and culture, particularly in the USA. Jewish power is difficult to oppose because of the power of Jews. Part of this power is our fear of repeating what happened when Jews were singled out in the past.

But until we point to the real cause of the West’s support for genocide, we are at best wasting our time.

US Imperialism or the Jewish Lobby?

Jay Knott1 Comment

What drives America’s support for genocide?

The View of the Left

Most, but not all, the left, denies that the Israel Lobby is the most significant factor in the support given to Israel by the USA and its allies. I’ll give three examples. One from Noam Chomsky, one from Britain’s Socialist Workers Party, and one, from someone I like.

Caitlin Johnstone says that “the ‘Israel lobby’ is really the western empire lobby”.

This means that the Lobby transmits imperial interests to Israeli leaders. Moreover, it implies that the money poured by the Lobby into influencing politicians to support Israel unconditionally is an effort to remind them that this is in the interests of the US empire. 

The SWP is more aggressive: “It is important to stress the primary role of imperialism in this analysis, which means rejecting explanations that emphasize the supposed power of a “Zionist lobby,” or, worse, a “Jewish lobby.”” – International Socialism 181, page 45.

Given his exceptional grasp of logic, Noam Chomsky is remarkably contradictory on the Israel Lobby. In his 1999 book Fateful Triangle, on page 337, he refers to the normal state of politics in the USA as “complete obedience” to Zionism. But on page 462, he regrets Israel’s “dependence on the US with the concomitant pressure to serve US interests”. 

My 2010 critique of Fateful Triangle: https://dissidentvoice.org/2010/09/faithful-circle/. Veteran anti-Zionist campaigner Jeffrey Blankfort called my review ‘required reading.’

By waffling vaguely about oil, domination, and hegemony, leftists give the impression that Israel is a tool of US imperialism. Right-wing politicians claim an attack on Israel is an attack on the USA. Both left and right give the impression that support for Israel is in US interests.

The USA and Israel do have interests in common. When Israel acts in accordance with these common interests, it is impossible to tell if the dog wags the tail, or vice-versa. When their interests differ, Israel goes its own way, and its politicians openly brag of biting the hand which feeds them. No other country can get away with this. There are British troops in Iraq; there are no Israeli ones. There’s no British Lobby. Britain obeys America; Israel doesn’t. With a few minor exceptions, Israel has always been able to defy the USA.

In his 2005 essay, The Palestinians and the Party Line, Michael Neumann argues persuasively that Israel offers the USA nothing, and America would gain more from friendly relations with the other Middle Eastern countries than from bombing them: https://www.counterpunch.org/2005/11/18/the-palestinians-and-the-party-line/.

The USA didn’t suddenly find, on 7 October 2023, that it was in its imperialist interests to exterminate the people of Gaza. 

Mearsheimer and Walt’s 2007 book The Israel Lobby asks and answers the right question.

– US presidents mildly criticize Israel

– Israeli politicians express open contempt for the supposedly most powerful man in the world, bragging of how ‘the Jewish Lobby’ (their words) will bring this uppity goy into line

– And so it comes to pass

Is this

1. an elaborate charade to make it look as if the Lobby can determine US policy regarding Israel, in order to cover up for US hegemony, by diverting attention to the Jews, or

2. is the most economical explanation that Jewish power trumps American interests?

In court, a witness who asserts something too strenuously sometimes persuades the jury that he doesn’t really believe it.

“We write to affirm our support for our strategic partnership with Israel… The US has traditionally stood with Israel because it is in our national security interest… Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle East… Israel is also a partner to the US on military and intelligence issues in this critical region. That is why it is our national interest to support Israel…” – Senate resolution, 21 June 2010.

Immediately after 7 October 2023, politicians fell over themselves to declare fealty to Israel. Nikki Haley led the way, by asking Congress to give Israel everything she needs. “An attack on Israel is an attack on America.” Haley is particularly reliable at saying the opposite of the truth: “Israel doesn’t need America. America needs Israel.”

Deviation from submission to the interests of a foreign country is routinely denounced as treason. 

Israel is the only country which American politicians openly say should kill children. 

Israel Lobby or Jewish Lobby?

Jews tend to have, or believe they have, interests in common, and they are good at defending them. I believe this is an extension of genetic interests, and it should be uncontroversial. A detailed account can be found in another essay I wrote for Dissident Voice, Invention, Imagination, Race, and Nation:  https://dissidentvoice.org/2013/10/invention-imagination-race-and-nation/.

The fact that almost all Americans have no ethnic interest in supporting Israel is not an argument that the left can use.

I use the term ‘Israel Lobby’ to cover organizations like AIPAC whose task is to ensure US politicians support Israel. ‘Jewish Lobby’ includes organizations which additionally defend Jewish interests in other areas. For example, the Anti-Defamation League does more than slander critics of Israel. Elon Musk and others have complained that the ADL is ‘far left.’ This is because it exaggerates ‘white supremacy,’ and so on. It’s left-wing when this serves Jewish interests, and right-wing when this serves Jewish interests. 

Why don’t Israel’s left-wing critics state the obvious? I can’t be sure, but there is tremendous pressure on all of us not to be ‘antisemitic.’ Fear of this allegation is deep-rooted, perhaps deeper than fear of any other ludicrous allegation of racism.

Thus there is a paradoxical correlation between the woke, antiracist ideas of the left, and the allegations of antisemitism which stream continuously from the right. Both take advantage of our weakness, our fear of being labeled, or even of being, bigoted. 

We need to lose that fear, and just seek the truth. More precisely, try to find the most parsimonious description of the data. To claim that US support for Israel is in US interests requires intellectual gymnastics. To say that it is the result of Jewish lobbying requires little more than observing the behavior of Jewish organizations, and the response of the establishment.

How lobbies work is no great mystery. There’s a bug in democracy. Most of America wants cheap steel, but congressmen from steel states insist on adding steel tariffs to unrelated bills, or they won’t vote for them, so the other states give in. The Israel Lobby is a bit more complicated. Representative Ilhan Omar pointed to the simple fact that a significant minority of Jews have a lot of money, and use it to persuade politicians to back Israel. She was forced into a groveling apology, using the woke language of the Democrats, for fear of losing her seat, proving her point. But it’s not just ‘the Benjamins.’ Additional power is given to the Lobby by the craven fear of being accused of ‘antisemitism’ which permeates the American polity.

On 8 May 2024, the Guardian asked if the dog wags the tail, or vice-versa:

https://web.archive.org/web/20240508233616/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/08/biden-hold-arms-shipment-israel

One week later, we got the answer:

https://web.archive.org/web/20240515064154/https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/may/15/israel-gaza-war-rafah-hamas-middle-east-latest-news-updates

Jewish power in American politics meant President Biden was powerless to halt arms shipments in order to persuade Netanyahu to halt the invasion of Rafah.

Max Blumenthal, speaking at the University of Massachusetts, explains how Israel acts contrary to US interests, and to the interests of US imperialism:

The most parsimonious, and thus, the most likely, explanation of the subservience of the USA to Israel, is the power of the Israel Lobby. The tail wags the dog.

r

Palestine solidarity and political correctness

Jay KnottLeave a comment

alison-weir-book-pic

It might seem like a good thing that a Zionist head of major theological consortium has been pushed out, especially since the decision by the Graduate Theological Union appears to have been inspired by If Americans Knew founder Alison Weir.

Unfortunately, the decision is influenced by social justice. I’ve been aware for a long time that the Palestine solidarity movement is dominated by social justice warriors. This put me in a dilemma. I support the former, but oppose the latter. But this case –

The letter urged GTU to take four actions on the issue. These included issuing apologies to the Muslim community.

– reminds me of Antifa attempting to make a Palestine solidarity activist apologise to Jews. As long as the Palestine solidarity movement is run by people who go on about ‘people of color’ and ‘systemic harm’ and demand apologies from people for their opinions, it’s part of the cancer of social justice, which is a threat to everything that is good about Western civilization. It’s more of a threat than Zionists, who use social justice arguments when it suits them, but they are only part of the problem. Social justice IS the problem.

Anti-fascist logic undermines Palestine solidarity

Jay Knott2 Comments

what-the-splc-really-wants

This is a response to Spencer Sunshine’s article for Political Research Associates, Drawing Lines Against Racism and Fascism, 1. I argue that it doesn’t oppose racial discrimination, rather, it defends one form of it by greatly exaggerating another.

There are a few factual errors in the article. As an example of a passage which I could pick apart, because I directly experienced the events in question, but don’t think it’s worth the effort, here’s Sunshine’s account of the reasoning behind the successful efforts of Jewish leftists to oust a Palestine activist from the co-operative movement:

Pacifica Forum members attended Occupy events in Eugene and Portland, Oregon, attempted to use a left-wing bookstore in Portland to host an antisemitic speaker, and one was a board member at an annual co-operative conference.

But that’s not the main problem. More important is to explain the hidden cause of Mr Sunshine’s logical errors.

The above sentence follows from a passage in which Sunshine asserts, without explanation, that anyone who tolerates the airing of what he labels “far right” ideas, should be treated the same as someone who actually believes these ideas. This is subject to a logical contradiction. Suppose you adopt Sunshine’s prescription, and treat anyone who tolerates any “far right” ideas in the same way as people who actually hold those ideas. What about someone who tolerates people who tolerate “far right” ideas, but doesn’t herself tolerate those ideas? Do you treat her in the same way as those whom she tolerates, who tolerate “far right” ideas? Where do you draw the line?

Whereas most of us might be concerned about how how true or false a given proposition about the world is, Sunshine’s position involves adopting a complex classification system, in which some ideas are classified as “far right”, and some as “progressive”. His elaboration of this classification makes it clear he cares primarily about “anti-semitism”. He uses this term very broadly, to include anyone who challenges Jewish interests.

Apart from the logical absurdity of Sunshine’s position, it could lead to violence.

I’ve written some articles which, while generally what Sunshine would call “progressive”, utilize some “far right” ideas. This is one of them: Invention, Imagination, Race and Nation 2.

Part of Spencer’s anti-fascist front uses violence against peaceful “far right” meetings (see my 2012 article on the incident at Tinley Park 3). So, if generally “progressive” people who make use of some “far right” ideas are regarded as being as bad as these “far right” activists, some of Sunshine’s friends might try to disrupt our meetings. This could lead to a tragedy.

So far, in my experience, anti-fascist harassment has only led to one Palestine solidarity activist getting fired, because he worked at a co-op which was easily persuaded by Jewish activists that he believes “far right” ideas. The real reason was that he was trying to persuade the co-op movement to boycott Israeli goods.

Why take anti-fascism seriously? Sunshine’s article includes warning of “a revival of fascist influence within countercultural music scenes”, and the influence of the “far right” among environmental activists.

The article becomes more serious when Sunshine says the president of the Palestinian rights advocacy group, If Americans Knew, Alison Weir, is “crypto-antisemitic”, because she talks and writes about the power of the Israel Lobby. Since it can be shown that the Lobby is the main reason for American support for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, suppressing discussion of this issue helps it continue (see my article, Faithful Circle 4).

His attempt to discredit Weir is the most obvious giveaway of Sunshine’s real aim – thought-policing the left in the interests of Jewish privilege. Alison Weir is liberal to a fault. Her message of support for the victims of Jewish supremacy is becoming increasingly heard. That’s why Jewish racialists within and without the left are slandering her more than ever.

Another clue as to Sunshine’s covert racialist aims is his attempt to amalgamate any critique of any aspect of Jewish over-representation, in positions of power and influence, with Nazism:

The same goes for those who repeat traditional Nazi-era antisemitic conspiracies, such as that Jews control the government, banking system, or the mass media… while repeating classical antisemitic narratives, deploy code words such as “Zionists,” “Jewish neocons,” or the “Frankfurt School” — instead of “the Jews.”

He wants us to believe that if you attribute the notorious pro-Israel bias in the US media to Jewish over-representation in its ownership, or criticize a large section of the Jewish community for its support for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, or mention the role of the neo-conservatives in persuading the US government to massacre the inhabitants of Arab and Muslim countries in various wars since September 11th 2001, while noting that the majority of the neo-cons are self-identified Jews, you are in the same league as the murderers of Anne Frank.

The degree of Jewish control of the media, and whether or not it matters, are empirical questions. We shouldn’t care at all whether or not a theory conforms to a “classical antisemitic narrative”. Objecting to a position because it sounds like Nazi propaganda is illogical; just because the Nazis claimed the Soviet government murdered the Polish officer corps 5, doesn’t mean it’s not true.

Chutzpah is a Yiddish word meaning “breathtaking hypocrisy”. Sunshine alleges

Allowing Far Right participation can also pose a security risk. Far Right actors may use such opportunities to collect personal information on progressive activists and information about their organizations. This has been an ongoing problem, in particular for antifascist and other groups that monitor the Far Right.

But this is at least as true of allowing anti-fascist participation in progressive movements. The Portland 9/11 Truth Alliance has had its members’ details publicized, because, of the wide range of conspiracy nuts hosted by the group, one or two of them mentioned the idea of Israeli involvement in September 11th. Overt Zionists are copying what anti-fascists do – “doxxing” (publishing the names etc.) of Palestine activists, hoping employers will take notice, while remaining anonymous themselves.

For example, The Canary Mission “is publicizing the identities of pro-Palestinian student activists to prevent them from getting jobs after they graduate from college. But the website is keeping its own backers’ identity a secret” 6.

As a result of its chutzpah, the anti-fascist left is immune to irony. Sunshine’s piece treats the Southern Poverty Law Center as if it is an authority. The SPLC describes a group as a hate group if it spreads ideas about some other group of people which inspire a person, or persons, to commit violence against that second group. But the SPLC’s labeling of the Family Research Council as a hate group led a man to shoot a security guard at the group’s headquarters with a 9mm Sig Sauer semi-automatic pistol – which means, using its own criteria, the SPLC is a hate group. The attacker can be heard on this Youtube video admitting to the police that he found the FRC via the SPLC 7.

“Anti-semitism” is one form of racial discrimination which has never been very important in the US. You can tell this by looking at statistics for lynchings – if a particular minority has been seriously discriminated against in US history, you can be sure some of its members will have been murdered by mobs. What the SPLC and its allies mean by “anti-semitism” is opposition to a minority using its privileged position to oppress others. Logically, genuine opponents of racial privilege would surely prioritize undermining Jewish supremacy, rather than exaggerating the danger of white nationalism. The role of anti-fascists like Spencer Sunshine is to try to prevent us from drawing that logical conclusion.

A Response to Alison Weir

Jay Knott1 Comment

alison-book

In a response to my review of her recent book, “Against Our Better Judgment“, Alison Weir writes

Knott’s accusations against me are a bit schizophrenic. On the one hand, he chides me for not discussing “Jewish power.” At the same time, his inaccurate descriptions of me and my motivation echo Zionist mistruths about me.

But in regard to Jewish power, I merely argue the book hints at it, “doesn’t take this further”, and “we need a theory” which explains it. My review starts by lavishly praising her book, and her skill in holding a conference against Zionism in the occupied territories.

However, I have valid criticisms. Alison is correct that, unlike her, I don’t take the State Department’s statements seriously. Its secretary recently lectured the president of Russia, to universal derision:

You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext

She is also right to say that I am wrong to say that her book mentions the USS Liberty, attacked by Israel in 1967. However, her organizations and websites distribute a patriotic version of this tragic story. But a naval spy ship is a warship, even in peacetime, and this was during the Vietnam war. Weir says claiming it was a warship is “echoing Zionist mistruths”, but in this case, they are telling the truth.

Same with the Zionist attack on the King David hotel in 1948: it’s not a war crime to bomb a building partly occupied by enemy soldiers. Civilians staying in that hotel were idiots.

More seriously, an important part of my critique goes like this:

Patriotism also leads Weir to quote opponents of the Lobby within the Pentagon as follows: ‘no group in this country should be permitted to influence our policy to the point where it could endanger our national security‘ without realizing that this could imply the suppression of any movement which endangered US imperialism.

She responds:

Knott foolishly writes, “Patriotism also leads Weir to quote opponents of the Lobby within the Pentagon”

This misses out the sinister quotation from the Pentagon, which I found in her book, implying the suppression of all unpatriotic movements, not just Zionism.

In response to my sarcastic remark

Weir gives the impression America is inhabited by well-meaning, simple, Christian folk, who are manipulated into supporting the oppression of the Palestinians by dishonest, clever Jews

she says I have ‘missed an important point in the book: “Zionist” is not synonymous with “Jew.”’. But my interpretation of her book does not imply that. “Manipulated by dishonest, clever Jews” does not imply that I think that she thinks that all Jews are dishonest, or clever, or Zionist. Why does she get defensive when I mention the J-word? I’ve consistently argued that the Palestine solidarity movement should not dignify the allegation of “anti-semitism” with a response. To Zionists, this concern surely looks like a weakness. It only reinforces their elitist attitude.

P.S. 5/28/14 – Read Alison’s latest over-the-top tribute to the USS Liberty:

http://ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/legion.html