Anti-Semitism on College Campuses

[DemonTree]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

But that’s clearly foolish, and that’s not what any prominent progressive thinker, from bell hooks to Ibrim X. Kendi to Thomas Piketty to Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, has advocated for. Instead, from my understanding, everyone who’s thought seriously on the subject has pointed out that a person can benefit from inequality in one case, and suffer from it in another. The wealthy White lesbian trans woman has a different experience from the poor Black straight cis man, but there’s no oppression Olympics that says the woman needs to shut up, or the man needs to sit down. Everyone brings different experiences to the table.

I know all that, but it’s still too limited. It doesn’t say each person is strictly privileged or strictly oppressed, but it does say each aspect of the person like race, gender, sexuality fits on a single line from most oppressed to most privileged. It recognises that a white person or a man can suffer discrimination due to poverty or a disability, but it insists being white and being a man is always and everywhere an advantage. It says individual instances of racism against whites, sexism against men etc don’t count or aren’t as important (“racism is prejudice + power”), thereby condoning unequal treatment and even bigotry.

Progressivism doesn’t say your two hypothetical people should sit down and shut up, but progressives very frequently do say that people should defer to those judged more oppressed on a given axis, when discussing it. I have experienced this myself: disapproval for talking about eg racial issues; sudden deference when talking about gender. And progressives frequently say that the problems of those who are more oppressed on a given axis are strictly more important and urgent than those of people who are less oppressed. I’ve seen it compared to triage in a hospital, where the white man has a cut finger and the disabled black woman is having a heart attack.

This paradigm struggles to handle groups who are privileged in some ways and not in others: wealth and success, and members of a group being well-represented in influential positions in politics, journalism, and academia are seen as evidence of privilege, and (probably more justifiably) as things that create privilege for a group. The existence of wealthy doners who belong to the group, and will put pressure on universities to fire presidents who don’t stand up for it, is a genuine advantage. Yet at the same time, that group can still be subject to prejudice, harassment, hate crimes. Are they oppressed or privileged due to that group identity?

Now apply this paradigm to Israel and Palestine. Israelis are objectively far better off. They are much more powerful. Palestinians genuinely are oppressed by the Israeli government. Since racism = prejudice + power, this implies Palestinians cannot be anti-Semitic. They are fighting against oppression, and progressives should always support groups who are fighting against oppression. Older progressives mostly object to this conclusion and try to find a way around it. Younger ones seem more inclined to embrace it.

And back in America, Muslims are more oppressed than Jews. That means when discussing religious/ethnic bigotry, the latter are expected to defer to the former. If Muslims say ‘from the river to the sea’ is a peaceful call for coexistence, good progressives are expected to believe them.

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

It’s not difficult, not really. Just don’t misinterpret progressive ideas. Others are managing just fine.

You are not the arbiter of progressive views, any more than a never-Trumper gets to say the MAGA movement is not real Republicanism. You just admitted college students commonly misinterpret progressivism, and it’s a live movement whose views are still evolving. I am talking about what I see on social media and the news, whether you believe those views are ‘correct’ by some standard or not.

[DSeid]

@Kimstu

but you can’t just handwave the issue away by asserting that it didn’t exist.

I can however cite actual population growth numbers. That’s not hand waving. That’s just the facts. Large numbers were not moving out. Large numbers were moving in. Of both ethnic groups.

Origin stories are often convenient creations formed in real time. They are real to the groups though and those conflicting perceived realities just need to be accepted, I get that.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@DemonTree

I know all that, but it’s still too limited. It doesn’t say each person is strictly privileged or strictly oppressed, but it does say each aspect of the person like race, gender, sexuality fits on a single line from most oppressed to most privileged. It recognises that a white person or a man can suffer discrimination due to poverty or a disability, but it insists being white and being a man is always and everywhere an advantage.

Would you mind quoting the prominent progressive thinker who says this?

[Kimstu]

@DSeid

Large numbers were not moving out.

Oh, I see, you’re using “displaced” to mean specifically immigrants causing existing residents to move out of the national/regional entity altogether, as opposed to internal displacement or property takeovers/turnovers. Yes, I agree that that sort of de-nationalizing expulsion was not a major issue in early 20th-c Palestine, AFAIK.

[DemonTree]

What I mean is the thing where progressives say eg “you may be oppressed because you are poor, but you’d be strictly worse off if you were black/a woman”. I don’t recall ever seeing a self-professed progressive say “yes, you were worse off in that situation due to being a man, even though men are more privileged in general”.

Plus “you can’t be racist against white people, because racism = privilege + power”, where they don’t mean the individual power of, say, the President of the United States, or of a man with a gun, but how powerful a group is in general.

[puzzlegal]

@DemonTree

I don’t recall ever seeing a self-professed progressive say “yes, you were worse off in that situation due to being a man, even though men are more privileged in general”.

You don’t hang out around enough progressives. Of course there is female privilege, as well as male privilege. I have a friend who says, "i want all the privileges ", and he’s specifically talking about both male and female privileges.

[iiandyiiii]

Your understanding of progressives continues to have little to do with actual progressives, but a lot to do with right-wing propaganda about progressives.

[Spice_Weasel]

@DemonTree

What I mean is the thing where progressives say eg “you may be oppressed because you are poor, but you’d be strictly worse off if you were black/a woman”.

The last time we had a diversity discussion at my agency, people were invited to talk about various biases they’ve been on the receiving end of (it wasn’t that progressive TBH. I think we are doing better now) and the host read them aloud (anonymously.) One of the things I wrote about (white female here) was the stigma of mental health conditions and disabilities, because that’s a thing I have direct experience with. After the host finished reading all these off (anonymous, from all staff members) this one (white) person felt the need to make some broader complaint about how these lines of inquiry “center white experiences” rather than addressing the needs of people of color. I mean, we’re a pretty diverse group, I’m not sure why that individual thought white experiences were being centered over anyone else’s during the anonymous recitation of people’s grievances, but apparently it wasn’t talking about racism enough, and disability isn’t as important as race in the oppression Olympics. I guess as a dutiful white person I should have ignored the question about my personal experience and shifted the subject to racism? I was not unhappy to see this person leave the agency.

In a similar manner, I have seen people on the internet comment that the reason autistic and ADHD people self-identify as such on the internet is because we can’t stand the fact that we’re privileged and we just wish we were as oppressed as Black people. This perspective ignores the fact that autism and ADHD are massively underdiagnosed in people of color and women of color in particular, but if you’re white and talking about the challenges of being neurodivergent, you’re just wannabe oppressed. That actually sounds like a conservative hot take, but it came from a progressive.

There is a person I went to undergrad with who almost singlehandedly drove me off Facebook with their constant harping about how oppressed they were, not that we ever got on swimmingly because that person has always been histrionic as hell, but they were a predominantly passing-as-white person with some alleged amount of native heritage, a law degree from one of the most prestigious universities in the country, and until recently, identified as a very feminine cisgender woman. I would give literally anyone else the benefit of the doubt but with this person, I suspect the sudden change in gender identity is almost entirely driven by a vacuous need for attention. The last interaction I had with this person they were complaining about imaginary racism against cat people in the Skyrim video game.

Oh, but I have so many anecdotes.

Are there smart and thoughtful progressives? Buckets of 'em. I work with a great many. Are there flaming idiots? Buckets of them. I encounter them mostly online, but who the hell knows what my colleagues post on the internet.

[Lamoral]

@DSeid

Most of your post is simplistic excuse making and denying that there are actual Jew haters in progressive ranks.

This though? Goes beyond. It’s not taking away the “safe room”; it is cleansing the room of them that is being chanted.

I have no intent to make excuses for anyone, what I am describing is only what I alone have observed. I did say: “There is the historical anti-Semitism which manifests in physical attacks on Jews, and is virtually always a product of right wing bigotry”.

Might there be some people like this in progressive ranks - maybe so. I’m not saying there are NONE.

I’m trying to say here that I’m sympathetic to the supporters of Israel - not necessarily the actions of Israel’s government, but the idea that Israel should exist as a Jewish state. I even specified in the next post, that the “anti-colonialist” narrative promoted by the anti-Israel progressives is, in a way, a form of racism because it’s implying that Jews are not entitled to claim indigenous status of Israel. I have even seen the “Khazar” theory promoted by radical left wing anti-Zionists, which is in a word, BULLSHIT. The Jews, ethnically, genetically, descend from the indigenous people of the Eastern Mediterrenean Coast (The Levant.) Geneaological studies have shown close relation to Lebanese, Syrians, and Palestinians.

As I said, I feel like a lot of the “anti-settler-colony” people - who one would expect to be the most staunch proponents of the rights of indigenous people - seem to believe that the status of Jews as indigenous people has somehow “expired.” And I would describe that belief as a form of racism.

I think you and I are closer in our outlook than you might think.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@DemonTree

What I mean is the thing where progressives say eg “you may be oppressed because you are poor, but you’d be strictly worse off if you were black/a woman”. I don’t recall ever seeing a self-professed progressive say “yes, you were worse off in that situation due to being a man, even though men are more privileged in general”.

Oh, well here you go: I had to sign up for the draft, and my sister didn’t. Voila!

This example is so trivially easy to come up with that I suspect you haven’t paid much attention to what progressives are actually saying. So I’ll repeat my request: with the moved goalpost, can you cite any progressive thinker of note making the claim you’re claiming they make?

[WalterBishop]

@iiandyiiii

Your understanding of progressives continues to have little to do with actual progressives, but a lot to do with right-wing propaganda about progressives.

In DemonTree’s defense, it’s my experience that the sort of progressives they’re describing are far from rare. In fact, on social media they seem to be quite common. For instance, I’m semi-active on Threads and I’ve had dozens of interactions with progressives who genuinely seem to believe that it’s physically impossible for a black person to be racist, who believe that whites have always held every scintilla of institutional power America has to offer, and who believe that the most disadvantaged white man in America has it easier than Beyoncé because he’s a white man and she’s a black woman and that’s all there is to that. They seem completely incapable of thinking about concepts like privilege in anything but the broadest, most simplistic terms, and they’re happy to write off anyone who doesn’t align with them as a racist.

Now, I’m happy to acknowledge that these people are idiots. I accept that they aren’t familiar with the nuances of progressivism. I understand that they haven’t done the reading, and that their knowledge of progressivism probably owes more to Instagram memes than anything else. But the fact is these people do exist, and my experience indicates that they seem to exist in quite large numbers. Based on their posts in this thread, I imagine that DemonTree’s experience is similar to my own. There’s a limit to how many such interactions a person can endure before their view of progressivism becomes tarnished. And there’s a limit to how many of these aforementioned idiots can spread their kindergarten understanding of progressivism on social media before it simply becomes unfair to dismiss views like DemonTree’s as the product of right-wing propaganda.

[iiandyiiii]

Sure, people like that exist. And each one, whether real or manufactured, is a gift to the right wing propagandists who are sure to make sure knowledge of their existence is spread as far and wide as they can.

I don’t buy that it’s much more than that. A sprinkling of vocal idiots (and many bots and fakers too) who are sure to be amplified by the propagandists who love (and create) them.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@WalterBishop

For instance, I’m semi-active on Threads and I’ve had dozens of interactions with progressives who genuinely seem to believe that it’s physically impossible for a black person to be racist, who believe that whites have always held every scintilla of institutional power America has to offer, and who believe that the most disadvantaged white man in America has it easier than Beyoncé because he’s a white man and she’s a black woman and that’s all there is to that.

“Physically impossible for a black person to be racist” may mean they’re talking about institutional racism in the United States, and even then they may be speaking hyperbolically and may be uninterested, when discussing broad conditions, in whatabouting edge cases. As for the rest, I’m still interested in seeing quotes. I believe there are dummies out there, but are there actually any dummies with any sort of power saying this sort of un-nuanced thing?

It’s far more common for me to encounter this as a straw man of the right’s creation than in reality, so I’m pretty skeptical when yet another person offers this claim without cites.

[DSeid]

@Kimstu

as opposed to internal displacement or property takeovers/turnovers.

Yes. The relevance is to competing claims of indigenousness which function as origin myths for both groups.

You are correct that I have no knowledge to share about internal displacement or turnovers.

@Lamoral maybe I misinterpret what you wrote. Certainly possible. But taking away the safe space is not really the issue. I think I speak for many that we American Jews do not see Israel as a possible lifeboat from a sudden American turn to Nazi like practices, or even from rises in expressed antisemitism here. My dad felt that way about Israel but I don’t know of many age let alone younger who do. It really is that the clear meaning is a call to cleanse the river to sea, “the room”, free of Jews.

Personally I dismiss claims of indigenousness based on genetic ties and continued presence and competing Arab claims both. Reality now is an established state of Israel and a group with a solid identity as Palestinian. My take is both identities have the same strength both “should” be able to have homelands in the area. Getting there is another story and far beyond the scope of this thread.

[puzzlegal]

@DSeid

My take is both identities have the same strength both “should” be able to have homelands in the area. Getting there is another story and far beyond the scope of this thread.

I agree with both of these statements. And also that this is becoming a hijack.

[DSeid]

Completely agree and my apologies for getting off topic.

Back to the only more slightly off OP subject!

The protests by @iiandyiiii and @Left_Hand_of_Dorkness (and you) that the sorts of classification into more or less oppressed vs privileged analysis of conflict and both expressed antisemitism concepts and allowance antisemitism even more, because relatively Jews are powerful/cannot be victims, are just idiots who do not understand the concepts they blather about, starts to remind me of when the Tea Party was fairly new.

Remember the days? GOP leadership were very confident that these were just a few idiots who they could contain, and expressed clearly that supporters of that group just did not understand what the GOP really stood for. “We” are the GOP. Do they even today really understand that those specific idiots are the GOP now? Or are they still in denial?

You old guard progressives dismiss that sort of thinking, which again I think is more common among foot soldier college aged progressives than you think, too easily. It is nice to read in some posts here about how those sorts of thoughts from those who identify as progressives need to be responded to, but that reaction was … not your first response … and how are you intending to respond?

Just saying but be aware that at some point you may suddenly realize that your place in the progressive movement is the same as Mitt Romney’s in the GOP. One can only be the denying enabler for so long. You won’t have left progressivism but progressivism will have left you.

[Spice_Weasel]

@DSeid

Just saying but be aware that at some point you may suddenly realize that your place in the progressive movement is the same as Mitt Romney’s in the GOP. One can only be the denying enabler for so long. You won’t have left progressivism but progressivism will have left you.

The thing about it is, when we dismiss these idiots as the product of right-wing propaganda, not a true part of the progressive movement, we lose credibility with virtually any person trying to understand progressivism who is well aware these twits exist. I think the GOP’s refusal to acknowledge the ideological rift in its own party was ultimately its undoing and I don’t want to go out like that. I really hate the idea that we can’t talk about problems in the progressive movement, or conservatives have won. That’s a toxic idea, IMO. We have a duty to keep our house in order.

The best way I could respond to someone who says “progressives believe x y and z crazy thing” is the same way I have responded to people saying that "feminists believe x y and z crazy thing. “I am progressive and that’s not what I believe. Let me explain to you what I believe. Let me explain to you why I believe it.”

[puzzlegal]

@DSeid

You old guard progressives dismiss that sort of thinking, which again I think is more common among foot soldier college aged progressives than you think,

I learned the theory of privilege, etc., from college students, quite recently.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@DSeid

The protests by @iiandyiiii and @Left_Hand_of_Dorkness (and you) that the sorts of classification into more or less oppressed vs privileged analysis of conflict and both expressed antisemitism concepts and allowance antisemitism even more, because relatively Jews are powerful/cannot be victims, are just idiots who do not understand the concepts they blather about, starts to remind me of when the Tea Party was fairly new.

This is an interesting analogy, that deserves a full unpacking. I can think of four main categories: relevance, timeline, power, and response.

Relevance: first, I’m not sure how close we are to the topic of the thread. This whole tangent started because someone came in with a cite-free rant about how progressivism logically leads to antisemitism. Are we still related to the topic of antisemitism on campus, or are we too far afield? I don’t know, but maybe we should continue this elsewhere.

Assuming it’s relevant, I’ll keep this post in this thread, which brings us to:

Timeline: as I said before, I’m no Johnny-come-lately to progressive activism. And neither are the dummies. And neither are the right-wing amplifications and distortions of the dummies in an attempt to smear the left. I’ve been seeing dummies misinterpret left-wing ideas for decades. They’ve always been around. Back in the eighties, Rush Limbaugh talked about Feminazis and the PC Police and absolutely terrified the right into thinking that man-hating lesbians were the bulk of feminism, and that feminist ideas should therefore be dismissed. This whole dynamic isn’t new. What’s changed, perhaps, is your age, and your perspective on the ideological development of youth. You suggest that I’m in danger of becoming the Mitt Romney of the left, but I think that’s not quite right; I think you need to be careful not to become the Grandpa Simpson of the left.

But even if this were a new phenomenon, we get to:

Power: The Tea Party wasn’t scary because a bunch of college kids suddenly started reading Ayn Rand. It was scary because prominent conservatives, from megadonor Koch Brothers to major GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul to vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin to Fox News personality Glen Beck, promoted and funded the campaign. There’s a reason I keep asking for quotes from prominent figures on the left: it’s because they’re the ones with power. When it’s a bunch of college kids saying dumb shit, it’s absolutely nothing like a major national movement with tens of millions of dollars and an entire TV network behind it.

But even if this were a new, powerful movement, we get to:

Response: Leftists who hold nuanced, multilayered understanding of power based on an intersectional framework need to respond to dummies who misunderstand that framework or who use it for bad purposes. The response should be to persuade them to change, and/or to marginalize them so they don’t hold power. And that’s exactly what’s going on here. What you’re proposing seems to be an abandonment of leftist principles, which is bizarre.

If you really want to know how I respond–how, after three decades of encountering this small problem alongside the much much larger problem of systemic inequities, I’ve settled on working for a complex and nuanced understanding of intersectional power dynamics–maybe start a new thread and don’t call me Mitt Romney.

[DSeid]

I do agree it is a bit strayed but FWIW I do see and tried to tie in the relevance to the OP: this foot soldier on the ground different than your understanding of intersectionality and power as arbiters of which is the side of justice and of who is worthy of standing up with is the intellectual (yes intellectual) underpinning of a tendency to discount the experiences of Jewish college students.

I do not think this is completely astroturfing.

And I do think some leadership intentionally exploits and encourages this misunderstanding for their advantage when they portray Israel as genocidal colonists and allude to the Jewish lobby’s power (Omar and “all about the Benjamins baby” comes to mind) and make implications about Jewish loyalty to Israel.

Tlaib’s gaslighting defense of “River to the sea” as a peaceful call comes to mind.

Not sure where you draw the line on power but the divided loyalty bit is around progressives.

In U.C.L.A. Debate Over Jewish Student, Echoes on Campus of Old Biases...

Do you really think McGill and Gay would have flubbed it so badly if the question was about calling for genocide of native Americans, Blacks, immigrants, gays, or the transgendered?

I’m not exactly sure what you are pointing to as a bold text worthy “exactly what’s going on here”?

I don’t think there is enough to expand on for a new thread. I will note though, I never called you Mitt Romney but don’t come complaining the first time some young punk calls you a PINO …

[shakes cane]