In my opinion, the issue is slightly more serious than you suggest here. Even if it’s still a very small number, too many liberals and Democrats in office and among activists fail to fully condemn Farrakhan’s history of anti Semitism. Just as we need to be right on mistreatment of women, we need to be right on bigotry, and that means rooting this out in our own ranks.
Which prominent Democrats are currently pushing Farrakhan’s agenda?
BTW, Mallory is likely to go down for that. The Women’s March really wants women of color in positions of power so it doesn’t look like a white middle class thing (which it is, for the most part - and I - as a white middle class woman - think they should embrace it - but I’ve never been a fan of tokenism - and there is a valid criticism that the traditional women’s movement marginalizes people of color). They are seriously recruiting to get women of color to front the organization to get broad appeal - and it isn’t easy - high profile qualified black female activists have a lot of causes they can work for - and there aren’t a lot of experienced ones to front a national organization. So if you are a black woman who got in early and are visible, you rose quickly and without proper vetting. That doesn’t mean it will be tolerated long term, but they are trying very hard not to marginalize women of color and dismantle any systemic bias against them - frankly, too hard if they put up with that bullshit.
There’s a guy dressed in rags downtown on a street corner ranting about the Jews, too. Do we need to denounce him also? If so, what about the guy on the next street corner? If not, why not?
That’s not fair, Czar. He said “fail to fully condemn”. He didn’t say anything about “pushing”.
My apologies.
BTW, what does “fail to fully condemn” actually mean?
Danny Davis’s response in the OP would qualify. So would the response of the activists who (rhetorically) embraced Farrakhan and then pushed back after being criticized for it.
Are they members of congress? Are they recognized community leaders? Are they policy advocates? Are they running for local office?
If so, yes, they need denouncing.
Anecdote warning: I was on the metro commuting home from work. It was rush hour so the train was full. Everybody was minding their own business, to the extent you can standing shoulder to shoulder on a moving train, looking/listening to their own media with earphones. But above the din was the distinct sound of someone playing either a youtube or some other streaming media that amounted to nothing short of “Kill Whitey!”. It was some pretty obnoxious and blatantly racist stuff. Eventually, the train cleared enough that I could see it was a young black guy, early 20’s, being an asshole for the purposes of attention seeking or I don’t know what. Eventually, someone told him to knock that shit off and put in earphones. Which started a whole argument which I didn’t stick around to witness because I had to get off at my stop.
Moral of the story: Hell if I know. Pick your battles or tell racist assholes to stop being racist assholes.
I’d love to see all politicians burn bridges with their toxic constituents and their toxic semi-allies. I’d love to see SDMB posters criticize people evenly for it, instead of quoting partisan articles using these issues to take cheap partisan shots and lumping in people like Mallory (who’s clearly at fault) with Ellison (who clearly isn’t). Also I’d like a pony.
The two posts which preceded mine. Possibly others as well.
You’re very charitably buying into Ellison’s version as if it were undisputed truth. Apparently, Ellison’s contact with Farrakhan was more substantial and continued after he was elected to Congress, including rather recently, at least acording to Farrakhan.
Depends what you mean by “significant”. And here’s where the calculus can be different for African-American politicians (particularly on the local level) and white or national-level ones.
At the local level, many AA politicians rise up by winning elections where the electorate is predominantly AA, and for this electorate, denouncing Farrakhan is a vote-loser, while supporting him is a vote-winner. Therefore many such politicians will be inclined to seek his support and will be strongly disinclined to denounce him, regardless of their own personal views about Jews or anything else (and even after they rise up in the ranks will frequently have ties to others who are connected to Farrakhan or have their own histories to worry about).
At the national level, it’s more complicated, and in my estimation, much depends on whether or not it becomes a hot button issue which attracts the attention of the media and the masses or not. On a regular basis, most people are not paying much attention to who does or doesn’t have connections to Farrakhan and many of those who are paying attention will be people sympathetic to Farrakhan. At such times denouncing Farrakhan is a losing position, partially because you’d be bringing attention to a losing issue, and partly because you will alienate some number of African-American voters, as well as some number of African-American politicians, community organizers, activists and the like who have ties to Farrakhan. But if become a hot-button issue, and begins to attract attention from mainstream people who are mostly very opposed to Farrakhan, then certainly the winning position becomes to denounce him.
From the OP:
Some?
Some other congresscritters?
Some other Democrats?
Some people who blog?
Once again, I feel the title is deceptive because you’ve got a solid sample of one and it is being used to make it look like something widespread.
I’m curious why a segment of African-Americans would be anti-Jew in the first place - why the animosity - don’t they not interact with Jews any more than they would with any other group - or don’t the two groups just not interact particularly much at all?
Well, what’s the good reason that a segment of white Americans are anti-Jew?
I think that’s a reasonable analysis. It’s just not that important to denounce Farrakhan for his anti-semitic statements because he doesn’t matter in a significant sense on a larger political stage (state, federal). The calculation is that there will always be opportunities to distance yourself from him when someone shines a spotlight. Until then, using him for reasons of political ambition and expediency gets you elected in AA communities. It’s cynical and shitty and ought to be denounced by all Dems when they see it happening within their own house.
There’s a lot of discussion here.
But as previous, I don’t think it’s primarily about many blacks being anti-Semitic, it’s primarily about (many) blacks viewing Farrakhan favorably in spite of his anti-Semitism.
No, it’s “What do you mean, ‘you people’?”
Short answer: because some people can only make themselves feel better by looking down at some other group of people, and some groups make more convenient scapegoats than others.
No, just reading his words. He very clearly denounced anti-semitism, admitted that Farrakhan and NoI rhetoric included multiple instances of anti-semitism, and repudiated his own past defenses of Farrakhan and the NoI from when he was a student. It was, IMO, a very solid public repudiation of past links to bigotry.
Do you dispute this?
If it turns out Ellison’s criticism of Farrakhan is a public lie and privately he still supports him etc., then that’s certainly worthy of criticism. I’m not going to just take Farrakhan’s word for it, though.
No, we recognized the OP for what it was.
This is precisely why I, and many other Republicans, currently support Trump.