Can you give some examples please?
I’m not being flippant, I’m just struggling to find examples…when I google for offended parties, all I am getting are Republicans and RW media (ok, a couple democrats who I think are bending over backwards to appease Republicans, as always). And articles by Jewish people saying Omar shouldn’t be condemned for her words.
I sure can, in this thread:
There are others in this thread, but I’m not sure who’s Jewish, and I’m not sure if @FinsToTheLeft actually objected to what Omar said–they seemed to be making an orthogonal point about who gets to determine whether something is antisemitic.
Well played sir.
I question the logic of some of my fellow dopers, but I agree they count as examples.
This is correct. I’m a left-leaning, fairly non-observant, Canadian Jew. I’m no fan of The Squad with their positions on Israel and I am uneasy about the comments Omar has made, but I’m not going out with the tar and feathers.
What I do have a problem with is an otherwise well meaning person telling me what should I think and feel about the very real problem of antisemitism.
That all seems fair to me. I’m a huge non-fan of Netanyahu and his allies, and so I align more closely with the Squad, but I understand the unease with how Omar has phrased things. I think the way you put it–uneasy, but no tar and feathers–seems fair, and probably fits the “stepped on toes” analogy from earlier.
I’m just not clear on how @Jimmy_Chitwood is interpreting your unease, or what @iiandyiiii or @Johnny_Bravo said.
The “straightforward meaning” that you’re seeing there is only one possible meaning. It’s no more the only “straightforward meaning” than “most of Congress is taking outright bribes” or “everybody knows about Jews and money”.
Which last is a cultural reference from a lot of people’s youths; and all too many people’s current lives.
How about everything I, and a number of other people, have posted in this very thread?
– OK, I see you’ve at least partly acknowledged that. Not at all sure how you missed it earlier.
I am a left-leaning, almost entirely unobservant, American Jew. I agree with the above. I am also a huge non-fan of Netanyahu and his allies, but also a strong proponent of Israel’s right to exist, and think that much of what Palestinian politicians, and in addition Israel’s neighbors, have been doing is working against the interests of the Palestinian people, not in their favor.
I will add, in case it isn’t entirely clear already, that I object to being told in this thread that I’m being entirely unreasonable for the below and similar posts:
Yep. Like I said: it’s fucking exhausting.
What the otherwise well-meaning people don’t understand is that every country on earth - except perhaps Israel - is never more than a demagogue or two away from state-sponsored violence and antisemitism. Ilhan Omar makes us uneasy not because she’s a Muslim echoing old tropes, but because she’s an elected official echoing old tropes.
Shit like that isn’t how it starts. It’s how the end starts. It’s a quick and logical jump from there to pogroms.
Every time we throw a fit about this kind of stuff, it’s because we’re desperately trying to beat back the tide of history and eke out another couple generations of relative safety before it all cycles back around.
It always cycles back around.
I mean, when she said “it’s all about the Benjamins,” in response to a question of why AIPAC had authority in American politics, what did she mean? Are you unsure? If you treat that statement as a text, are you telling me you aren’t sure what the point of the text is? If your position is that this is an unknowable question, do you apply that to every statement anybody makes in your life? Do you ever hear a statement and just think to yourself, ah, that means what it says?
I am not going down the “telling people how to feel” rabbit hole other than to note that it is quite possible to point to a criticism such as “there is a straight line between saying a lobbying group for Israel uses money to achieve political goals, and pogroms,” and say “this criticism is not reasonable” without encroaching in any way on a person’s private right to feel how they feel. It can be true that pogroms are bad, and that some things are not related to pogroms.
I’m not clear what you are saying here. Are you saying it is impossible to hear “it’s all about the Benjamins” and think that someone might be insinuating “everybody knows about Jews and money”?
Note: I am not saying one way or another what Ilhan Omar meant; I’m trying to clarify if you feel that that interpretation is reasonable, impossible, in bad faith, semi-plausible, or what.
edit note: removed a “not” in my first paragraph
…no it isn’t.
I think Omar has fucked up in the past. She may well fuck things up in the future. And while she apologised, I thinks its fine if you don’t accept her apology, or if you don’t think that its sincere.
But you are facing some real big problems in America right now. And when really bad things happen, I can guarantee you that Omar won’t be on the side of the baddies. Its okay to call her out. But it isn’t a It’s a quick and logical jump from anything she has said to pogroms. That is inflammatory rhetoric out of proportion to anything she has said or done and should be reserved for those members of congress who actually hold those inflammatory views.
That helped, haha.
No, I’m not saying that’s impossible. Clearly many people heard that and did think what you described.
What I’m saying is that I’m not aware of anyone who actually does not understand what Omar’s statement meant on its face. Republicans say they’re going to punish Omar for criticizing Israel. Omar says it’s all about the Benjamins and then says “AIPAC” when she’s asked who she is talking about. I do not believe that there is anyone who isn’t sure what the actual statement being made there is (Republicans have been lobbied to punish criticism of Israel in American politics). I do believe, of course, that there are a lot of people who considered that statement unacceptably similar to saying “everybody knows about Jews and money.”
Do you hang out with a lot of virulent antisemites? That’s rhetorical - I’m sure you don’t.
Don’t you get that I’m not concerned with how you - a presumably reasonable and empathetic human being - react to antisemitic canards? I’m concerned with what the literal American Nazis think and do when they hear that shit.
That’s not the point I’m making. I’m saying there’s a logical jump from government officials amplifying antisemitic tropes to government sanctioned antisemitic action. That’s why it’s important to react strongly and quickly regardless of which corner it’s coming from.
…and when she made those statements, people did react strongly and quickly. And she responded, and she apologised.
So when you say things like " Ilhan Omar makes us uneasy" that makes me feel uneasy no matter what qualifier you add. Because the way I see it, Omar is an imperfect person, who admits they are an imperfect person, who will make mistakes, who will fuck things up, but has expressed nothing but unrepentant support for Jewish people, and saying that she makes you feel uneasy makes me feel uncomfortable.
She makes me exactly as uneasy as any politician who repeatedly expresses antisemitic tropes - something I think I’ve made clear.
If that makes you uncomfortable, I’m not sure what can be done about it.
…and if Omar makes you uneasy, even after she has apologised for the hurtful things she has said, and after expressing unrepentant support for Jewish people over and over again, then there isn’t any more that can be done.
You know what?
My mistake for engaging.
There’s a reason why I haven’t been posting in this thread
Good grief.
When I first heard of it, I thought she meant “Jews have money and they’re using it to bribe American politicians.”
Having read her statements since, I’m willing to believe that she meant “AIPAC, and possibly Benjamin Netanyahu, specifically, are buying American politicians.” I’m even willing to believe that she didn’t know that a fair chunk of her potential audience – antisemites included – wouldn’t take it to mean what I first saw in it. Or worse.
It sure as hell is.
It has been explained over and over and over in this thread that she did not say “this specific lobbying group for Israel uses money to achieve political goals”. And it has been explained over and over and over in this thread what her actual choice of words has to do with pogroms.
I am willing to accept her apology, and I think it’s quite likely that it’s sincere. What I, and I believe many others in this thread, are saying is that it was entirely reasonable to expect her to educate herself about her wording, admit that there was a problem with her wording, and apologize for it. And we object to people saying that there was no problem with her wording, and that anyone who objected to that particular wording was being entirely unreasonable.
…but the thing is: as much as this thread is about antisemitic tropes, I don’t think we can ignore the existence of anti-muslim tropes as well. And I’m explicitly not calling anyone in this thread anti-muslim. But saying Ilhan Omar “makes us uneasy” is problematic as fuck. Even with the qualifiers.
That kind of wording plays into those tropes. I think it’s the sort of thing that we should all be doing our best to avoid.
You’re saying that “uneasy” is a problematic phrase to use about a Muslim person, because a 2010 article in the American Psychological Association used that term in the title to describe how Muslim people themselves feel? Come on, man.