FPM: As the Democrats Go Socialist, They Go Anti-Semitic. Jew-hate and socialism have always gone hand in hand

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273078/democrats-go-socialist-they-go-anti-semitic-daniel-greenfield

Conservatives charge — Dinesh D’Souza most prominently — that anti-African racism in America has historical roots in the Democratic Party. Democrats offended by the charge often respond by claiming, laughably, that all the white racists of the South transmogrified into Republicans because of Richard Nixon.

15 thoughts on “FPM: As the Democrats Go Socialist, They Go Anti-Semitic. Jew-hate and socialism have always gone hand in hand

  1. Now conservative writer Daniel Greenfield is charging that anti-Semitism in America has its historical roots in the international Socialist movement. We should expect a familiar counter-rationalization any day now. How might all the American anti-Semites have transmogrified into capitalists because, say, of Donald Trump?

    It won’t be an easy defense to mount, especially for those Democrats who allege that socialized medicine, socialized pensions and socialized environmentalism are not really instances of public ownership of the means of production. Once you have argued that socialism is, in fact, capitalism your anti-Semitism has no logical place to go. It becomes, as it were, a Jew without a homeland.

    And thus the Congressional Democrats’ response to blatant anti-Semitism among their members. Under Nancy Pelosi’s powerful leadership, they piously voted for censure, but not by name and not by person. Those Democrats own their anti-Semitism now by trying to ignore it.

    Just as FDR and the NYT tried to ignore the “Jewish question.” Until they couldn’t.

    Like

    1. I will say one thing about your link. If nothing else, it sounds as if Greenfield is doing his best to paint anti-Semitism with a paint roller labeled Democrats.

      Anti-Semitism has been around since the crucifixion. The connection with money has been around since the Middle Ages. As a matter of recollection, the pamphlet with Hillary’s face and the Jewish Star of David on a stack of money was part and parcel of the Trump campaign.

      Omar’s remarks were a stretch for being called anti-Semitic. Her lament was about lobby support for Israel. The implication being that politicians who received campaign contributions supported Israel as much or more than the US. Politicians support Israel primarily because the Evangelical support Israel. And the Evangelicals could care less about the Jews as a religion. They are looking for the prophesies about the promised land to come true.

      Obama and some Democrats came under fire because of the friction between them and Netanyahu and the Likud Party brand of hard line conservatism that the majority of Israelis don’t adhere to.

      Greenfield is trying hard to deflect the long simmering anti-Semitism from many conservative corners. Soros, International Banking conspiracies, Hollywood, “Jews will not replace us” folks who marched under the permits and auspices of “Unite the Right”.

      The Democrats want universal health care, affordable education, to maintain SS and have a clean environment.

      Tying that to anti-Semitism is a propaganda piece to the gullible, IMHO.

      Like

  2. It is more than a little ironic that the Republicans – a party whose most faithful members roam through the streets in mobs shouting “Jews Will Not Replace Us” and whose political leaders routinely demonize Jewish supporters of the other party – are now wringing their hands over Antisemitism. As usual they are relying on the lack of education and critical thinking skills of their base. Criticizing Israel, Likud and the pernicious influence of AIPAC is not Antisemitism, it is Antifascism.

    Like

    1. Riiight. and Germany’s National Socialist Party wasn’t Socialist. Talk about lack of education and critical thinking skills!

      Like

      1. “Talk about lack of education and critical thinking skills!”

        Again a total lack of self-awareness. You display a remarkable amount of ignorance AND accuse others of being ignorant.

        There was NOTHING “socialist” about the Nazis. Ask any competent historian and he will tell you that actual socialists were rounded up and murdered by the Nazis. They used the word “socialist” to suck in the ill informed in much the same way that Trump uses the word “conservative.” There actual policies were pretty much the opposite of socialism which is why so many of Germany’s capitalist magnates were supporters of Hitler’s rise to power.

        I have read this book twice. I am not ignorant on this subject. You should give it a try . . .

        Like

        1. No thanks. Your book doesn’t get very good reviews among scholars. Wikipedia notes: “The harshest criticism came from those who disagreed with the Sonderweg or ‘Luther to Hitler’ thesis. In West Germany, the Sonderweg interpretation was almost universally rejected in favor of the view that Nazism was simply one instance of totalitarianism that arose in various countries.”

          Like

          1. If Hitler was redefining socialism as an alternative to international socialism and free market capitalism and he rejected Marx’s class struggle, then he and his party were not socialists.

            Industry was still privately owned.

            Dictators lie to get the people behind them. That is what Goering meant when he explained how to get people to go to war. “ Common good” rallies people and in Hitler’s case it was for the Aryan race.

            Above all he as a Dictator.

            Like

          2. Rejecting Sonderweg still does not make Hitler nor his regime socialist. It just rejects a theory of blind obedience to authority by the Germans.

            Like

          3. RE: “Industry was still privately owned.”

            You mean like the factories the Reich confiscated and operated as government-owned slave labor facilities?

            Like

          4. Confiscated factories?

            “However, the state did not proceed along this path. There occurred hardly any nationalizations of private firms during the Third Reich. In addition, there were few enterprises newly created as state-run firms.”

            http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capitalisback/CountryData/Germany/Other/Pre1950Series/RefsHistoricalGermanAccounts/BuchheimScherner06.pdf

            The article makes a clean distinction between the Third Reich and the Soviet Union.

            Like

        2. “Socialism as the final concept of duty, the ethical duty of work, not just for oneself but also for one’s fellow man’s sake, and above all the principle: Common good before own good, a struggle against all parasitism and especially against easy and unearned income. And we were aware that in this fight we can rely on no one but our own people. We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism. ” Adolph Hitler

          Liked by 1 person

          1. The position that fascism and socialism are one and the same with universal healthcare, affordable education and decent support for the elderly is wrong.

            You can parse the concept that Hitler was a socialist all day long. He was a dictator with a worldview that concerned a master race. He provided the capitalists in Germany with slave labor.

            His writings and speeches were pablum for the masses to rally to his cause. It helped to find a scapegoat for Germany’s troubles. The Jews.

            Like

          2. If you won’t accept Hitler’s own words (above), perhaps these from the Wikipedia article on National Socialism will help: “The term ‘National Socialism’ arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of ‘socialism’, as an alternative to both international socialism and free market capitalism. Nazism rejected the Marxist concept of class conflict, opposed cosmopolitan internationalism, and sought to convince all parts of the new German society to subordinate their personal interests to the ‘common good’, accepting political interests as the main priority of economic organization.”

            This, really is the mainstream view.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s