The New Antisemitism

Great Debates
81

Jackmannii: Let’s look at your statement once again, which you made to furt in the midst of a discussion on whether European media fairly presented Middle East issues, or favored the Palestinian cause over the Israeli one. furt was trying to argue that there was a balance in political influence in the U.S. between American Jews and Arab-Americans…

Well, what he said was that the Arab and Jewish “populations” were “mutually negating”, which I took to mean that he thought the two communities had equal amounts of influence in politics and the media. That really is a separate issue from whether the influence of “pro-Jewish” and “pro-Arab” viewpoints in those areas is equal. I quite recognize that it’s possible for “pro-Arab” opinions held by non-Arabs as well as Arabs to balance or overwhelm “pro-Jewish” opinions, but I don’t think it’s accurate to describe that as the two “populations” being “mutually negating.” That’s all I was objecting to, and I think that if you do look at my actual statement once again, you’ll see that that’s all I said.

*…you are unwilling to acknowledge the inaccuracy of your statement or present facts to support it. Nice attempt at spin, though. *

Jack, I can’t help wondering: when I try so hard to be sincere, respectful, and moderate in discussions with you, why are you so spiteful and unpleasant to me? Do you honestly think that it’s more likely that I tossed out an unjustified assertion and then tried to “spin” my way out of it than that what I really originally meant to convey was only the meaning I’ve been trying to explain in my past several posts? I don’t think I’m generally regarded on this board as an irresponsible or dishonest debater, and I don’t think most people have this amount of trouble figuring out what I’m getting at or telling the difference between my assertions and my opinions. If my posting style is creating such misunderstandings between the two of us, maybe I should just take it to mean that the board gods don’t wish me to talk to you. I would rather run the risk of having you misunderstand and criticize something I say in response to another poster than spend four or five more posts trying to explain it to you directly and have you continue to misunderstand and criticize me anyway.

Interpreting Gandhi’s statements and motives does go into the realm of conjecture at this point, but why do you think he felt the need to take such pains to assure his audience that he sympathized with the British?

Well, now I’m baffled again. Earlier, you seemed to be faulting Gandhi for not being clear enough about which side he was on: you thought that his remarks about Hitler that you quoted indicated “an accomodation to the Nazis’ military success, especially in that it was weakening his major enemy, the British.” Then when I post quotes showing that he was in fact strongly opposed to the Nazis’ military success and didn’t want the British to be weakened, you complain that he’s protesting too much. Seems like Gandhi just can’t win with you either…which means I’m in damn good company. :slight_smile:

82

Kimstu, I think things are sufficiently clear to you, me and everyone. You took what you (and, as a matter of fact, I) found to be an unsupportable statement by furt about the relative political power of American Jews and Arab-Americans, and tried to counter it with another unsupportable statement about relative strength in the news media. You’ve had ample opportunity in that thread and here to back it up, and you have not.

Claims of disproportionate/untoward influence on the news media by Jews are part of the stock in trade of anti-Semites. Although I’m sure you didn’t have that motivation, I could not let a bogus statement like that go unchallenged.

Actually, I think you may have something in common with Gandhi here. You both made unfortunate remarks and then, I think, had cause to regret your words.

Gandhi recovered from his gaffe quite nicely.

If you want to make pot/kettle/black complaints about debate tactics, there’s a forum for that. Here it just looks like a smokescreen.

83

It sure does, Jack. It sure does.

84

Thanks for your support, Gad.

85

I don’t remember giving it to you, champ.

86

Re: pot/kettle/black===>smokescreen.
Yep.

Re: who’s trying to apply the smokescreen in this thread.
I agree with Gad.

87

Anyone got the hard evidence requested to back up the claim about who’s got the “much stronger voice” in the media?

No?
Time to move on.

88

Jackmannii: *Anyone got the hard evidence requested to back up the claim about who’s got the “much stronger voice” in the media? *

Of course! If what you’re asking for is simply evidence of what I actually asserted, namely, that the U.S. Jewish and Arab/Muslim populations are not “mutually negating” in terms of media and political influence because Jews are much better represented therein, that’s easily supplied.

For starters, I refer you to the recent book by L. Sandy Maisel and Ira N. Forman, Jews in American Politics, which “examines topics ranging from: Jewish leadership and identity; to Jews in Congress, on the Supreme Court, and in presidential administrations; to Jewish influence in the media, the lobbies, and other arenas in which American government operates.” Among other things, they provide an appendix identifying Jewish members of the Cabinet, the Senate and House of Representatives, the Supreme Court, Jewish governors and mayors of major cities. They note that there are two Jews on the Supreme Court, ten in the Senate, 33 in the House of Representatives; none of these bodies have any Muslim or Arab-American members. There are dozens of Jewish editors, publishers, columnists, and commentators in major US media; there are far fewer Arab/Muslim journalists, and probably only Edward Said and Fouad Ajami would be considered anything like “household names” in the way that A. M. Rosenberg, Thomas Friedman, or Paul Krugman are.

I repeat once more: that is not the same thing as saying “that pro-Israeli Jewish voices in the media drown out the pro-Arab voices”, or that Jews have “untoward influence on the news media,” neither of which I ever claimed. When I said, and still say, that “Jews have a much stronger voice than Arab/Muslims in the U.S. media”, I’m not insinuating that the Jewish voice is a unanimous pro-Israeli voice and that therefore pro-Israeli views somehow get an automatic unfair advantage or that “the Jews look after their own” or “the Jews all spin it their way” or “the Jews deliberately got a stranglehold on the media in order to brainwash the public” or any such antisemitic crapola. I’m only saying that American Jews—whatever their diverse opinions and ideologies—naturally have more influence in US politics/media than American Arabs/Muslims, because there are so many more of them in more important positions. Pe-ri-od.

If after all that, you still persist in believing that what I originally said was an “unfortunate remark” that I’m now “regretting”, fine, please yourself. If Gandhi can put up with it, I sure can. I will not take up any more of your time attempting to justify or explain remarks of mine that you have already made up your mind to interpret unfavorably, on this or any other subject. (Gad, xeno, thanks for trying! :))

89

A response to a question I did not ask. Once again, here’s your quote:

Kimstu: “…there’s no question that American Jews have a much stronger voice in US media than do Arab-Americans, or American Muslims of any kind for that matter.”

Your allegation did not cover “political influence”. As I’ve already said, I do not seriously differ with you about that separate issue.

The remainder of your reply fails to list any concrete evidence of how Jewish Americans allegedly have a stronger voice in the American news media than Arab-Americans. Simply coming forth with a laundry list of influential Jews does not in the least address whose viewpoint may be getting the most attention. Given the large number of non-Arab reporters and commentators who see to it that the Palestinian viewpoint gets detailed attention (you can count Thomas Friedman and Trudy Rubin amongst that number in recent days), you have given us no grounds to accept your claim American Jews have a stronger voice in the media than Arab-Americans.

“Don’t use disparaging adjectives. Don’t use angry verbs. And don’t raise your voices. Just point out the facts.”*

“That depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”**
*Bill Clinton, Democratic Party fundraiser, 4/22/02
**Bill Clinton, grand jury testimony, 8/17/98

90

Jackmannii: Given the large number of non-Arab reporters and commentators who see to it that the Palestinian viewpoint gets detailed attention…

Ai-yi-yi-yi-yi! If they are “non-Arab”, then they are irrelevant to the question of whether the American Arab and Jewish populations are “mutually negating” or have an imbalance in media/political voice! Once again, you are failing to grasp my reiterated distinction between populations and viewpoints!

I despair of ever getting this point across to you in this or any other lifetime during the current Kaliyuga. Goodbye, Jack.

91

The next one should be right around the corner, then. You don’t mess around, Kimstu. :slight_smile:

92

Can this really be so difficult for you to comprehend? If there are numerically more Jews participating in media than Arabs, but large numbers of non-Arabs presenting and arguing for Arab viewpoints, Jews and Arabs can indeed be “mutually negating” or Arabs can have a stronger voice.

I agree that if you are not going to substantiate or even acknowledge your comments, further discussion is pointless.