Why are Jews Liberals by Norman Podhorest

[Selene]

Folks:

Again, not sure this belongs in ethics.

I heard this gentleman interviewed a few weeks ago and was quite impressed with his analysis. I found this on C-span, it is almost an hour. I thought it was brilliant, probably because he agrees with me. His opening joke about the Rebbi's death bed vigil is hilarious.

He also clearly identifies that the current Jewish voter still voted at the second highest rate for O'biwan the diminished at 75%, despite the clear fact that he was anti-Semitic and anti-Israel.

I found him to be refreshingly intellectual and profoundly insightful. Well worth it in my opinion and cuts across a number of current threads that are in progress.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=288972-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Podhoretz

Adam

[BaalChatzaf]

.

http://www.c-spanarc...cts_id=288972-1

http://en.wikipedia....orman_Podhoretz

Adam

Podhoretz is brilliant and articulate. He has a razor-sharp intellect. His observation that no amount of rational argument will shake liberal Jews loose of their liberal commitments is right on the mark. This adherence is totally without logic, but there it is.

I live in a retirement community where most of the Jewish alte kockers (old farts) are still loyal to FDR and by extension to Barak Obama. They think I am crazy (number one) and even slightly evil (number two) for pointing out that Obama is really their enemy. I have tried arguing the point and I no longer do. It is futile. I have better luck with the gentiles. My father of blessed memory, alahava shalom, was like that. I could not convince him that what FDR was pushing was bad for the country and he went to his grave believing that FDR was the best thing that ever happened to the USA and the Jews.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Edited January 10, 2010 by BaalChatzaf

[Selene]

See if you are from the religious church of liberalism...you can't be a racist! Cool!

"We have reached the astonishing point where there is no apparent connection between race and racism. How can that be? Barack Obama explains:

"I accepted Harry's apology without question because I've known him for years, I've seen the passionate leadership he's shown on issues of social justice and I know what's in his heart," Obama said in a written statement. "As far as I am concerned, the book is closed."

So, even though Harry Reid made absurdly racist comments about Barack Obama, he is absolved because of his "passionate leadership" on "issues of social justice." Which is to say, he is a liberal. So a liberal, by definition, cannot be guilty of racism. Whereas a conservative--someone who attends a Tea Party rally, say--by definition is a racist, even though his or her political actions have nothing whatsoever to do with race.

i guess that's what is meant by a "post-racial" America: neither charges of racism, nor absolution from such charges, need relate in any way to race.

It's a strange world we live in, but the logical consequence is that the concept of racism, having been denuded of any possible meaning, should be done away with.

PAUL adds: My take is somewhat different. In my view, Reid's statement about Obama -- that he is "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one" -- is not racist. The statements are true and arguably relevant to assessing the electoral prospects of a black presidential candidate. To be sure,Reid's comments assume that certain racial characteristics matter to some voters, but that's probably a fair assumption. Would it be sexist for a political pro to say that Sarah Palin is attractive and speaks with whatever that accent is that she speaks with? I don't think so.

I agree with John, however, that there's a scam being played out here, and at several levels. At the first level, conduct that isn't really racist is sucked into that category. This increases the reach of political correctness and the ability of the likes of President Obama and Jesse Jackson to pass judgment on whites who aren't sufficiently careful. At the second level, the useful liberal is absolved of "racism," where the conservative would not be."

Pitiful.

Adam

[Darrell Hougen]

Hi Adam,

The Podhoretz piece was great. Podhoretz has been around long enough to understand the actual history of Jews in this country and Europe and he brings the full weight of his experience to his observations about why Jews are liberal.

One thing I hadn't realized is just how nervous Jews are about Christians, especially devout Christians. I've heard Dennis Prager talk about the fact that Evangelical Christians are the Jews' best friend before, but I didn't understand why Jews rejected that friendship. I guess that from the viewpoint of a minority religion, the zealousness of some Christians looks pretty scary. The reaction is similar to the reaction I, as an atheist and Objectivist, feel towards Islam. Any irrational zeal that doesn't correspond to one's own form of belief (whether rational or not) looks frightening.

The disheartening aspect of Podhoretz's speech is that he doesn't expect most Jews to change their beliefs, even with Barack Obama in office and the buyer's remorse that many are probably feeling right now. Jews provide much of the intellectual ammunition to the left. If the conservatives or libertarians could coax the Jews into their camp, I think it would be over for the liberals in this country. And, I should point out that there are a number of prominent, conservative or libertarian Jews --- Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, and Jonah Goldberg come to mind. Locally, we have Mike Rosen. However, I don't know what it would take for other prominent Jews to switch sides or at least end their religious loyalty to the left.

Darrell

[jeffrey smith]

Hi Adam,

The Podhoretz piece was great. Podhoretz has been around long enough to understand the actual history of Jews in this country and Europe and he brings the full weight of his experience to his observations about why Jews are liberal.

One thing I hadn't realized is just how nervous Jews are about Christians, especially devout Christians. I've heard Dennis Prager talk about the fact that Evangelical Christians are the Jews' best friend before, but I didn't understand why Jews rejected that friendship. I guess that from the viewpoint of a minority religion, the zealousness of some Christians looks pretty scary. The reaction is similar to the reaction I, as an atheist and Objectivist, feel towards Islam. Any irrational zeal that doesn't correspond to one's own form of belief (whether rational or not) looks frightening.

The disheartening aspect of Podhoretz's speech is that he doesn't expect most Jews to change their beliefs, even with Barack Obama in office and the buyer's remorse that many are probably feeling right now. Jews provide much of the intellectual ammunition to the left. If the conservatives or libertarians could coax the Jews into their camp, I think it would be over for the liberals in this country. And, I should point out that there are a number of prominent, conservative or libertarian Jews --- Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, and Jonah Goldberg come to mind. Locally, we have Mike Rosen. However, I don't know what it would take for other prominent Jews to switch sides or at least end their religious loyalty to the left.

Darrell

Darrell--I think you are overestimating Jewish discontent with Obama at this point. The president whom most Jews would probably think of as being least friendly to Israel would be George Bush, Sr., because of his pressure on Israel exerted through the loan guarantees (which, if memory serves, did not actually produce much results) and because his Sec'y of State was James Baker, whom many Jews considered to be definitely pro-Arab. Carter would be runner-up: after the euphoria of Camp David, most Jews began to discern his pro-Arab bias, and not a few Jews voted for Reagan because of that. (I'm a sort of illustration of that: it was my first Presidential vote, and as a born and bred Democrat, I decided that while I couldn't vote for Carter, I couldn't vote for Reagan either, so I voted for Anderson. That was a long time before I became a libertarian, and to tell the truth, while I've voted Libertarian in the past two election cycles, I have yet to vote for the GOP.) Obama hasn't come near to that yet, and, since many Jews now think the government of Israel is too hawkish and too religiously dominated, some anti-Israel action might actually help Obama's cause among Jews, especially as long as Rahm Emmanuel is around to give him cover.

The two main reasons Jews vote Democratic is, first, the legacy of socialist political activity in modern Jewish history (remember that the first Zionists were generally socialists in political views, that socialism dominated Jewish politics both in Europe and in Israel, that Israel is still a socialist country in its orientation and developed probably the only economically viable model of voluntary communal living in the modern world (the kibbutz and moshav movement, which only in the last two decades or so has begun to die out or transform into non-communal arrangement, after roughly a century of existence)) and second, the linkage of the political right with anti-Semitism both in Europe (the Dreyfus affair is a good example) and here (although he was from the 1930s, Father Coughlin, who attacked both Jews and FDR with equal zest, is a good example of that). When civil emancipation came, it was generally supported by the left and opposed by the right (speaking in terms of 18th and 19th century European politics)--which in itself predisposed Jews to favor the left over the right. So when Zayde and Bubbe came from Europe, they were already inclined to vote leftist, even if they were not active socialists already, and FDR sealed the deal for them (my grandmother waited thirty years to become a US citizen, and did so simply because she wanted to vote for FDR in 1940), and the political inclination was passed on and confirmed in later generations.

I think what would push most Jews towards conservatism is not anything Obama himself might do, but the general attitude of the modern left towards Israel: it's realizing how endemic anti-Semitism is among the left that pushes most Jews rightward. (To continue the illustration from personal history, it was realizing how pervasive anti-Semitism was on the left as I encountered it on the Internet at the end of the Clinton and beginning of the younger Bush presidencies that catalyzed my changeover from "blue dog" Democrat to libertarian, by getting me to rethink my political principles.) Not that a lot of Jews already are not to the right of the modern left--many of them have always been conservative minded Democrats (I used to hear the term "Scoop Jackson" Democrats). When affirmative action was first considered in a SCOTUS case, the president of our synagogue thought it important enough to give a short speech on the topic, warning against it as simply another form of the quota system that was used agains the Jews in the early 20th century (often enough by establishment bastions connected in their public image to the country club set that, at least in the popular imagination, used to dominate the GOP--in other words, there's another reason not to vote Republican).

If Podhoretz made any of these points, I apologize. I haven't viewed the video, for the simple reason that long videos and dial-up don't mix very well.

Jeffrey S.

[Selene]

Jeffrey:

He made pretty much all of your points and more. As I was reading your post, I am saying in my mind, he did not see the video yet...lol.

I, as a goy, had been arguing this since the '60s with all my NY Jews and still continue to argue with them today.

75-78 % of Jews nationwide voted for O'Biwan the diminished, despite the fact that they knew he was anti-Israel. Many, many Jews, too many are self hating secular leftists who are pro Palestinean and anti Israel.

As well as anti-American.

That percentage was the second (2nd) highest, blacks, Negroes, persons of color, colored, African Americans or black or whatever the current phrase de jour is.

Next at 60 + % was Latino/Hispanic.

He makes some even finer distinctions. Well worth a listen.

Adam