Well, my headline may be a tad exaggerated, but I’m pretty sure that the subject of this post is not friendly to Jews (she’s made some remarkably ill informed comments about Palestine). Read on.
Many Democrats have been excited about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for the young Hispanic activist (she’s 28) won the Democratic primary for a House seat in New York, gaining a big upset victory over the incumbent. She’s a Democratic Socialist, but my take on her is that she’s not particularly bright and is espousing views that, while they may win her a seat in the House, won’t advance the Democratic platform. In fact, her election may give Democrats an even worse image.
I say that because Ocasio-Cortez has cozied up to some odious characters. Here she is headlining the Universal Muslim Association of America meeting with our favorite sharia-lover and FOF (Friend of Farrakhan), Linda Sarsour (click on screenshot):
From an interview on a Leftist website (click on screenshot):
An excerpt:
AMY GOODMAN: In a moment, we’re going to talk about the travel ban, but Linda Sarsour is with us, director of the first Muslim online organizing platform, MPower Change. You supported Alexandria. This is a remarkable moment.
LINDA SARSOUR: I mean, in light of such horrible news yesterday with the travel ban and the Muslim ban, Alexandria is the hope that we’ve been waiting for. She is a young woman of color. She’s Puerto Rican. She’s a Socialist, just like me. We are both card-carrying DSA members. And she’s pro-Palestine, and she’s unapologetic. And the movement right now is elated, because this is what you’re going to see, Amy, in this election season. It’s a new day, a new generation. And Alexandria is what represents us and our values.
. . . [Ocasio-Cortez] was outraised almost 10 to one. And it’s not about money. It’s about the grassroots organizing. It’s about building power on the ground. It’s about getting voters who have been ignored and marginalized to the polls. And that’s exactly what Alexandria did. She’s charismatic. She’s young. And she was also very progressive, unapologetically progressive—tuition-free college, Medicare for all, pro-Palestine, even in the recent Great Return March putting her voice out there while she was campaigning, not afraid of any opposition that was going to come her way. And that’s the new kind of folks that are going to win. So, no Democrat is going to hold their seat for too long. And a lot of Alexandrias are coming this 2018 and 2020.
You can read about the “Great return march” in Wikipedia. It is, in short a call for the “right of return” that would destroy Israel as a state:
On 30 March 2018, a six-week campaign composed of a series of protests was launched at the Gaza Strip, near the Gaza-Israel border. Called by Palestinian organizers the “Great March of Return” (Arabic: “مسیرة العودة الكبري”), the protests demand that Palestinian refugees and their descendants be allowed to return to the land they were displaced from in what is now Israel.
With a friend like Linda Sarsour, and an endorsement from same, Ocasio-Cortez doesn’t need enemies! You know what “Pro-Palestine” is code for, too. But of course it pays, electoral-wise, to be friendlier to Muslims than to Jews, for Democrats, especially those on the extreme Left, see Jews as oppressors and Muslims as the oppressed.
Finally, there’s this, in which Ocasio-Cortez touts Ilhan Omar, a Somali woman in the Minnesota state legislature.
https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1028123094857261057
The tweet on the right?
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/269488770066313216
Another:
Drawing attention to the apartheid Israeli regime is far from hating Jews. You are a hateful sad man, I pray to Allah you get the help you need and find happiness. https://t.co/SvEXjlxlEN
— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) May 31, 2018
Just keep it up, Democrats—a party once friendly to the Jews, now siding with regressive elements of Islam. You want four more years of Trump in 2020? Just keep cozying up to people like Sarsour and Ilhan Omar.
h/t: Grania
Thought this might be relevant, by Andrew Sullivan:
“Jeremy Corbyn, 1970s Revanchist, Is Suddenly the Face of the New New Left ”
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/andrew-sullivan-on-jeremy-corbyn-face-of-the-new-new-left.html
From here – a few thousand miles east, she seems immature for a 28-year old – I think she’s a child of the TV & not informed beyond her immediate horizons. Probably gullible & perhaps being used while she rides high on the surf of goodwill & newness.
I get the impression she’s another fledgling duck in Botany Pond trying to negotiate alliances & ideas. I watched a video that shows to my satisfaction that “Israel”, “Palestine”, “settlements” & “occupation” are not really on her dance card – she’s relying on the pond concrete ring & meal worms for support.
She used the term “kitchen table” in some comment & I think it’s that level of issues [local, American] that she’s schooled in & interested in. I suppose Sarsour & her see each other as strategic opportunities to expand influence.
I thought something similar. I find her immature too. Also, all these people saying she’s charismatic, and I’m still waiting to be struck – I don’t see that either. I find her angry and many of her opinions uninformed or plain wrong. (See this e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/08/10/fact-checking-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-media-blitz/?utm_term=.d5f8ce67345e )
As a NZer, I agree with things that USians see as socialist/communist like Medicare for all, but to me she doesn’t see able to explain why she supports those issues beyond ideology. There’s actually a good economic argument for a single-payer healthcare system (and there are lots of models to choose from). I get the impression she couldn’t debate the issue.
As a outsider, I see the US as a very racist, sexist country (not that we’re perfect by any means!, and there are a lot worse than the US). I think a lot of people are so hung up on getting diversity into their political representation (which is an excellent thing and does make things better) that they overlook faults in candidates, or don’t see them clearly, because they’re so excited to have a good candidate who’s a woman/poc. They raise them up further than they deserve on merit alone. (Of course, in the GOP, the same people often have to work twice as hard to prove they’re half as good.)
That’s very well put. All of it.
Because she hasn’t been seasoned she’s having to scrape together what she ‘thinks’ on the fly when the subject comes up – it’s all surface with nothing sunk in & integral to her.
I looked up some things she ought to have a view on, but she hasn’t spoke or I couldn’t find. A more traditional politico would have written this & that on this & that, but outside her Tweets, retweets & clunky interviews there’s no body of words. A bit like the Donald in fact, but one can hope she’s more aware of her gaps than the Orange One.
Yeah, she has time to grow into the role and get some substance behind her.
There’s no hope for Trump – he’s got to his 70s without even realizing listening is a quality, there’s always more to learn, and we all need to be able to laugh at ourselves.
28 is pretty young. My impression is that most Americans that age are even less politically savvy. Her charisma is deduced from her winning a primary in New York, which is not easy to do. I’m sure it was all about local issues, not international ones. She is probably not even up on all the national issues, let alone the global ones.
It’s not. What you see is the equivalent of shark attack news. Only 50 per year, but everyone on the planet hears about all 50.
Yes, the US is not a racist, sexist country, but there is widespread racism and sexism in the general population. I am struck by this every time we leave Colorado for a trip back to the Midwest, specifically northern Indiana. The majority of the folks we encounter are anti-minority, starting with blacks [I quote, “niggers in the White House”], and with a growing focus on Hispanics who are an ever-increasing proportion of the demographics. Sexism is easily identified in the white males, and many of the white females are racist. I see such behaviors across the educational spectrum from physicians to HS drop-outs. On our latest visit, I even heard an anti-atheist rant. Similarly, anyone who is not a Christian is disparaged. Not surprisingly, all of these folks are staunch Trump supporters.
Well, my comment was based on my limited personal observation, whereas you … oh never mind.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-white-republicans-more-racist-than-white-democrats/
Since the survey you linked shows both an extremely close correlation between GOP & Dem responses, and dramatically falling percentages of people holding these ‘racist’ views — currently a decided minority for most — it actually supports my assertion while undermining yours and Heather’s suspicion.
Guess you didn’t read the conclusion, albeit rather small. Of course most of us here know that you are never wromg.
That’s not true. US society is totally structured around race; from affirmative action to sub-cultures. In Europe, categories are natives vs immigrants, followed by national or religious categories, or ethnic groups. It’s a huge mess, and people can customize the hate on any level, from Left Side of River vs Right Side of River up to “We, the natives vs Them, the others”.
In the US, it’s race this and race that. Mixed race, and black and white, and people of color all the time. The state also keeps track of races. The US is an extreme racist country that is not intellible without racial categories.
The US is also an extremely pious and religious country; politics is far right shifted. So, it’s reasonable to assume that it’s more sexist, too.
Yeah, I’m getting a little tired of argument by assertion about American society from foreigners.
Well-intentioned people falling over themselves to get “diversity” do not understand that they are exacerbating the problem. A diverse candidate should be held to the same standards as any white male. Now, every bigot can point at Ocasio-Cortez and say: “See? This is the best Latinos / women can offer!”
I can’t read the WaPo link because EU privacy bollix
I’m guessing she will win a perfectly safe seat for the Dems, and cost it a bunch elsewhere.
Sadly, that seems so likely.
Here’s a 34-year old from Britain. In my opinion a voice of reason:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/10/saudi-arabia-israel-civilians-britain-yemen-palestinian-arms
I have little respect for Owen Jones.
He is very emotional and subjective and not the brightest either.
I dunno, boss. I don’t like Linda Sarsour any more than you do, and I hate to see AOC hang around with anybody who’s hung around with Farrakhan. But I’m chary to take this taint-by-association thing too far. And I’m willing to cut young Alex from da Bronx a little slack until we see what’s what. If she expresses any antisemitism herself, she’ll be dead to me soon enough.
You know Amy Goodman is the grand-daughter of an Orthodox rabbi, right?
++
Would we cut that same slack to a young Republican politician who appeared with Richard Spencer? And, as Jerry notes, Sarsour isn’t the only (very well-known to be, at this point) antisemite with whom Cortes has associated herself.
Just watched The Guard. It may be the most “vivid” movie I’ve seen, with a garish palette that recalls Kubrick. Like Calvary, it was gorgeously lit and photographed, including (again, like Calvary) with its beautiful outdoor locations in and around the Irish seacoast.
Brendan Gleeson is always riveting on screen. The movie had me from the opening scenes, even before the arrival of Don Cheadle, another actor who’s always riveting. Their scenes together crackle. The supporting cast was wonderful as well.
J. McDonagh is clearly a filmmaker with a mastery of his craft and of the Anglo-American movie canon. In its subject matter and its quirky humor, The Guard reminds me a bit of a less frenetic version of my favorite Guy Ritchie films — Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smocking Barrels, but with even greater poignancy and depth.
I’ll need to see The Guard a few more times to pick up on the subtleties, but I love it.
I’m so glad you feel that way, especially because now I want you to watch his latest, War On Everyone, and try to explain to me the bemusement and despair you feel after. It’s…unthinkable. Literally. You will not believe the same filmmaker made it. It makes no sense. It literally cannot be explained.
Aside from War, John might be even better than his brother, Martin. I’m not sure yet. I do think he’s better with visuals and drama, considering Calvary and The Guard. Of course, Brendan Gleeson always elevates a film several levels.
Aside from everything you said, I love how The Guard takes the best of American filmmaking and genre tropes and crafts them into an Irish versions in suburban/rural Irish world. They’re familiar, and yet entirely different. They take on new meanings and provide new jokes and insights. It’s quite brilliant.
Of course, Calvary is something entirely different. I still don’t know how to describe that one beyond “deeply moving and beautiful to the point of transcendent.”
I loved The Guard also, not only because of Brendan Gleeson, but because I lived in that part of Ireland for a while and know lots of the places it was filmed. And a guy I know has a (very) short appearance in the film (playing accordion).
Ummm. . . it’s not just who she hangs around with but who she endorses. And Octavio-Cortez endorsed the Great March of Return, as I said in my post. What more do you want?
On Firing Line, she spoke out against the “occupation of Palestine” but was unable to define or describe that so-called occupation.
There is no occupation of Palestine.
Oh. Come. On. I don’t know what she’s spoken about in some American show, but all adult Europeans, and I’m not exaggerating here, feel the Palestinian homes stolen, and I mean literally stolen, by Israeli settlers, can be compared to the Putin occupation of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.
In future, you might wish to consider informing yourself of a matter before weighing in on it:
https://www.pbs.org/video/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-barhhq/
See if you can top O-C by actually providing details of this “literal” theft of homes you speak of, which in your assessment is comparable to the military invasion & annexation of half of one sovereign nation by another.
I was replying to your comment “There is no occupation of Palestine”. For that I don’t have to see O-C’s opinion, but thank you for the link.
On the settlement issue my views don’t differ in any way from those of Barack Obama, John Kerry, Bernie Sanders or, indeed, the United Nations.
http://time.com/4619064/john-kerrys-speech-israel-transcript/
John Kerry (my one-time senator) is a blowhard, and the UN is a joke — your appeals to neither of these ‘authorities’ resonate with me.
What do you think is Palestine’s status under international law, so that the current situation constitutes an “occupation” under international law? What about Gaza’s?
Yes, whenever UN and you disagree, I guess the world just has to decide which one’s “a joke”.
Concerning international law, Palestinian territories and Israeli settlements, I’ll just refer you to Wikipedia. But let me add that 137 of the 193 UN member states have recognised the State of Palestine.
I asked you to refer to international law and you failed to, instead issuing a vague mention of wiki, and UN recognition. You also ignored my question about Gaza’s status.
FYI, Palestine fails to meet the requirements for statehood under international law. Recognition by other entities, or the lack thereof, has no bearing. That goes for the UN’s observer status invitation to Palestine.
Having now watched the PBS interview (it’s 10:50 am in Finland) I’d vote for O-C. Can’t say I disagreed with anything she said.
To get a realistic multi-faceted view on the Israeli settlements I recommend this YouTube search:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=israeli+settlements+documentary
In that interview, O-C added considerably to her growing list of patently false and uninformed statements. Since you are in Finland, you likely aren’t aware how blatantly wrong O-C was when she claimed that US “unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs”, that “[w]hen this country started, we were not a capitalist — we did not operate on a capitalist economy”, or that low-skilled immigrants boost the economy.
But perhaps you are a fellow socialist like O-C, and agree with her marxist-destiny prediction that “[u]ltimately, we are marching towards progress” as capitalism inevitably “evolves” into socialism.
Of course I’d like to see O-C interviewed by BBC’s Stephen Sackur or some other European journalist, just to find out what her views are on the economic feasibility of her goals.
All continental Social Democrats know, from experience, that most of them are feasible, but selling that stuff to tax-hating American Republicans, like yourself, is another thing.
FAIL.
This is enough one-on-one. This argument is dominating the thread, and it’s enough. Read the posting Roolz, please.
Speak for yourself. I am an adult European, and I do not feel that way. Besides, even if what you said was true, it could just make one wonder whether Europeans have changed much since the 1940s.
“You know Amy Goodman is the grand-daughter of an Orthodox rabbi, right?”
Why is this relevant?
Amy Goodman, if you’re unfamiliar with her oeuvre, is an old-line activist and peacenik (as well as an investigative journalist). I seriously doubt she’s a self-loathing Jew.
Hi Ken,
I am very familiar with Amy, I watched Democracy Now regularly during the early Iraq War days.
Maybe I am being an facetious ass, she is obviously Jewish, whether her grandfather is an Orthodox rabbi should not make a difference?
Ok. Fair point.
“Just keep it up, Democrats—a party once friendly to the Jews, now siding with regressive elements of Islam.”
It’s way too early to make this kind of statement. Ocasio-Cortez won in a very untypical district in the Bronx and Queens. While the Party is moving left on some economic issues (a heartening trend in my opinion), I see little evidence that there is a significant shift to embrace the anti-Israel partisans. Linda Sarsour is just bloviating about “more Alexandrias,” at least those who will Democratic primaries. Certainly, at least as yet, the Republicans are not using Ocasio-Cortez as their punching bag. Good old standby Nancy Pelosi serves that purpose. Only in a very few selective districts will the Sarsour message have any resonance.
++
The shift seems to be trickling toward the young, hip new politicians, which makes sense, as the antisemitism is spreading mostly among the young left.
So, if someone says something sympathetic about Palestinians they are automatically “anti-semite?”
The header to this Prof. Coyne post you’re commenting on reads:
Please point me to the part where Prof. Coyne writes that Alexandria O-C is an anti-Semite. Or is the “someone” not Alexandria?
You’re correct, but there is a tendency in WEIT bloggers to go for it. From my totally bias point of view, I’m still waiting for an article critizicing Ingraham racist comments. Non whatsoever, yet; however, NYT times as enemy of free speech several ahd counting……
Angel. Who are “WEIT bloggers” – do you mean you’re waiting for Jerry posts criticising Ingraham’s racist comments? I’m having difficulty understanding you. Sorry.
You and others. No offense ,
Yes, to the second Q
Is it clear now?
Angel
You’re still wondering about Ingraham? Like I said last time you brought her up: we all know she’s a shit. Everybody does. The only people who listen to Ingraham are a few million people like her. Jerry knows she’s a shit. Jerry is on the Left and, like me, doesn’t see Ingraham threatening the Left, but Sarsour doing so.
Sarsour has an ever-growing audience of young people (and an ever-growing circle of friendly, supposedly justice-oriented media and politicos and academics). She pretends to promote justice and equality. She partners with and gets endorsements from important progressive Dem politicians.
If you care about the left and where it’s heading, this should be more important. I don’t care about Ingraham because Ingraham isn’t ruining my side, and she’s not gaining ever more influence, and she’s not part of a group that is slowly taking over and destroying the only Party I’ve ever voted for from within by spreading hate toward myself and my family.
The absolute worst way to stop people like Sarsour is to scream “but what about X person over there” every time they’re brought up.
Finally, if you want talk about Ingraham, there are 500 other websites you could read. Jerry wants to write about what’s hurting the side he cares about, and the person/people who hate him for being Jewish. He doesn’t need to write about Laura Ingraham every time he brings up Sarsour. This is just whataboutism.
Couple of comments :
I don’t know if you’re commenting for JC, are you? Are you a self a pointed censor? Deciding who can or cannot read/comment in WEIT*
I never heard of Sasour, and I don’t care, as in my circles she doesn’t represent anyone. So, not everything is revolving around this topic. People concerns are different than yours, and that’s why the left will never be in power.
I don’t know what most of that meant or was responding to. Nobody said you can or cannot talk about X. Jerry has mentioned many times why he discusses the things he does, and I brought that up. Who knows, maybe he will post about Ingraham at some point? And while you’re free to bring her up every time Jerry posts about racism on the left (and you’ve done it in at least two threads in the last few days), it seems like simple derailing/whataboutism. And I’m not going to continue assisting in that. So, I bid you adieu.
Whataboutism and Whahhabbism is a lousy combination 🙂
Well, plenty of other people are criticizing right-wingers like Coulter and Ingraham; I tend to concentrate on the left because there are fewer people writing about the Left’s perfidies. Read the Roolz about not telling me what to write about, and I find your claim that I have to write about Ingraham to out of line. I suggest you go read some other website.
Angel:
Yes thanks – all clear
I’m a Brit with an interest in US politics, but Ingraham doesn’t interest me particularly – she’s a provocateur, loon & seems to have been a bully all her life [from gays at Dartmouth through to Hogg] – she once dated D’Souza & frankly they’re a perfect matched couple of assholes. She changes her views to maximise her appeal – no real convictions that I can see.
I have disparaged Alexandria O-C twice out of two on WEIT – the second example is comment #2 in this thread. She’s not got the depth to matter until she’s spent at least 10 years filling the huge holes in her CV [weak on knowledge, experience & playing the game] – I’m betting she’ll disappear or be sidelined into irrelevance because she doesn’t come across as tough enough to survive the nonsense.
Regarding WEIT – I don’t expect to read a whole spectrum of reports by Jerry on his personal website. He rarely features dogs, he proudly displays cowboy boots & not a sign of any other footwear. It’s a personal
blowebsite. 🙂It is quite bizarre to make claims about someone on the basis of what the *don’t* say. I am sure there are many nutballs I have never heard of out there making racist rants. Does the fact I haven’t condemned them make me a racist? Has Angel ever publicly condemned Mao or Pol Pot for the murder of millions? If not, does that make him or her complicit? Weird logic.
Also, PCC has written many posts condemning racism.
You’ve lost me darwinwins. Where have I made “claims about someone on the basis of what the *don’t* say”? – give me a quote of something I’ve written & the “claims” I’m drawing from that.
It feels like you’re talking to someone else – I don’t recognise me as doing what you say I did.
Sorry. It was meant as a comment to Angel.
That’s a relief – though i was going bonkers. 🙂
She won a primary, against a lazy incumbent who did not even show up for debates. She did so by dint of effective organization of a small group and very low turn out. She endorsed many other candidates in Democrat primaries; all lost. She spouts nonsense and falsehoods with a Trumpian alacrity.
This is the new face of the party? No. That’s fake news. She will likely win, because it’s a gerrymandered safe seat.
I recall when people were saying Terence Darby was going to be the new Beatles, but bigger.
If any person went around saying about other minorities what Sarsour says about Jews, and being friends with, say, David Duke, they would never be allowed to do this. They wouldn’t get on NPR or any other left-leaning show, or get any article written about them without it being negative and focusing largely on that relationship. They wouldn’t be able to endorse/appear with politicians without having 1,000 articles and TV news pieces done about how that endorsement/appearance is terrible for the politician, forcing the politician to make statements and give contrite appearances.
But Sarsour promotes antisemitism and antisemites, so it’s all good. She’s a hero!
Been asleep? Someone who says worse things just got a job on the NYT editorial board.
Yeah, but white people and men are the only other two categories about which you can say such things.
Plus, Jews are far more vulnerable than the people Jeong criticized and, more importantly, Jeong doesn’t have nearly the power that Sarsour does, and at least was forced to address her comments. Sarsour just continues to get a pass because…well, Jews, I guess, and because she’s a Hijabi Sharia-supporting feminist hero (a contradiction in terms if ever there was one).
Oh, man, how depressing and how predictable.
I’m wait-and-see on AOC. No one is yet wowed by her intellect, but the left is trying to cast that view as sexist/racist.
On the other hand, I thought the way she phrased her rejection of a debate with Shapiro was inspired. Her implied sexist accusation was subtle, but it was a dog whistle her admirers would easily pick up on.
sub
She got lucky, running against an apathetic candidate who didn’t show up. That doesn’t make her a “leader.” If media companies didn’t have HQ in New York she’d never get this amount of press.
If Laura Ingraham can disavow David Duke’s endorsement, then O-C can & should disavow Linda Sarsour’s.
But of course she won’t, as uninformed hatred of Israel and blind coddling of Islam are integral parts of the regressive Left’s credo.
Ingraham disavows David Duke while parroting his nativist, racist code about “changing demographics.” (Which “demographics” do you suppose Ingraham is concerned about? The population’s age?)
Ingraham distanced herself from Duke solely out of concern over once again losing sponsors, as she did after her inane remarks regarding the Parkland school massacre.
It comes as no surprise that you completely missed the point, Ken.
Oh, I got your point, such as it is, Matt, but you don’t get to hold up Laura Ingraham as anyone worth emulating when she’s still voicing the same repugnant views that make the person whose support she disavows repugnant — when her only motivation in disavowing that person’s support is concern over her show’s bottom line.
Obviously, you didn’t. But keep digging.
O-C states her sources for information on Israel/Palestine are the vehemently anti-Israel sham orgs Jewish Voices for Peace & J Street, plus unnamed “Palestinian rights organizations.”
She imagines herself some modern-day Joan of Arc. But really she’s just an ignorant & foolish naif, a loose cannon who could single-handedly wreck the Dems’ chances this November.
Linda Sarsour isn’t really known in Europe, but it seems she doesn’t believe in a two-state solution, whereas O-C specifically says she does.
I share your “take” on her. lol
I find it depressing that this thread was attended by critics of Israel (mildly put).