The Anti-Defamation League Seems Unable to Come to Terms with Left-Wing Anti-Semitism

In a recent essay, Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), warned that “anti-Semitism is creeping into progressivism,” as if left-wing anti-Semitism were a brand-new phenomenon. Worse, writes Ran Baratz, Greenblatt’s ADL seems to impose a political double standard, issuing “sober and appropriately harsh” evaluations of anti-Semitism on the right while taking an “apologetic tone” when it emanates from the left. And that’s not all:

[D]uring Barack Obama’s second term, physical assaults against Jews [in the U.S.], certainly the worst form of anti-Semitism, rose sharply from seventeen incidents in 2012 to 31 in 2013, 36 in 2014, and 56 in 2015, according to the ADL’s own reports. This staggering rise of 330 percent in four years was not met with a proper response by the ADL. To a lesser extent, a rise was evident in all other forms of anti-Semitism throughout this period. However, only now do we find the ADL campaigning against the growth in anti-Semitism, with Greenblatt comparing the [anti-Semitism in the period since Donald Trump declared his candidacy] to that of the 1930s. . . .

[Moreover], the ADL, according to Greenblatt, . . . wants to stop “the use of excessive force and the killing of unarmed African-Americans by some in law enforcement,” “to combat discriminatory laws such as the [so-called] Muslim ban,” “to champion marriage equality,” and “to resist efforts to turn back the clock under the guise of religious freedom.” And [therefore] the ADL and Greenblatt want to partner with those radical organizations [that share this agenda].

But what does one do, as an organization sworn to fight anti-Semitism, when one’s partners turn out to be anti-Semitic? Greenblatt’s solution [is to] denounce forcefully those who would slander the Jewish community. . . . This is utterly ridiculous. This notion of “we support and collaborate with anti-Semites when they do not specifically engage in anti-Semitic activities, and we reserve the right to denounce their anti-Semitism when they do,” is not only completely detrimental to the cause of battling anti-Semitism, it is in fact helping anti-Semites to whitewash their hatred. . . .

In truth, one has to admit that the problem is more fundamental than political or organizational connections between the ADL and the radical left. . . . For example, Greenblatt declared that “there’s no doubt that the vast majority of American Jews live with what we would call white privilege.” And yet fashionable rhetoric about “privilege” is the perfect disguise for left-wing anti-Semitism. If being privileged is a sin; and if the more privileged you are, the greater the sin, then the Jews and Israel are clearly sinful, and hatred toward them is not only justified, it is almost morally dutiful. Greenblatt may not realize it, but he is riding an anti-Semitic tiger.

Read more at Mida

More about: ADL, American Jewry, Anti-Semitism, Politics & Current Affairs, Progressivism

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF