In the past few weeks, there have been a series of stories by Jewish writers about what happened to them when they seemingly unleashed the fury of right-wing anti-Semites online by writing something deemed unfriendly toward or critical of Donald Trump, or in one case, his wife, Melania.
The toxic response from the angry internet/social media mob, now commonly described as part of the alt-right (alternative right) movement, has seemed to confirm what writers on the Left have believed for a long time: that while the Left may be critical of Israel, or its settlement policy, or of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, these criticisms reflected nothing more than policy differences. If you want to look for anti-Semites, they are on the Right, not the Left. Now it seems they have come out of their caves, attracted by — as some seem to think — one of their own.
The charge that Trump himself is an anti-Semite is ludicrous. People who know him, his family, his business associates or his company’s employees can quickly disprove that charge. If Trump were an anti-Semite, on the same wavelength as his ugliest backers, by now he would have disinherited his daughter Ivanka, or distanced himself from her, her husband, Jared Kushner, and their children. After all, Ivanka converted to Judaism, a Modern Orthodox version no less, and keeps a kosher home and is Shabbat observant.
But for those who want to label Trump a fascist or Nazi, also false characterizations, sticking anti-Semite into the brew is helpful. There are plenty of ways to criticize Trump without sticking a label on him that does not fit.
This month’s Commentary magazine has perhaps the most serious article on the new alt-right phenomenon and its anti-Semitic character: “Trump’s Terrifying Online Brigades” by James Kirchik. The article begins with the story of GQ writer Julia Ioffe, whose profile of Melania Trump, a mixed review for sure, was certainly not a great surprise for what one would expect of any mainstream glossy publication’s profile of the wife of the hated presumptive Republican nominee. The mainstream media largely has no use for Republicans in any year, but especially none for Trump. If one expected a puff piece fitting the publication, as one would surely see for a profile of Michelle Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Hillary Clinton, Jane Sanders or Jill Biden, one would have to believe that the “soft” popular magazine press is less orthodox liberal in its orientation and more interested in balance than the major networks, public radio and television, and newspapers.
In any case, the assault on Ioffe was outrageous, ugly, and scary. This was not the only such recent incident. New York Times writer Jonathan Weisman experienced a similar Twitter assault: after retweeting an article by Robert Kagan on emerging fascism in the United States. Kagan’s article and its conclusion are certainly debatable and rejectable, but again the attacks on Weisman were anti-Semitic to the core. Bethany Mandel had a similar recent experience, and there are sure to be more before the current presidential campaign is over. Without question, Trump’s campaign seems to have opened the door to nasty anti-Semites to join the “pubic discourse.”
Of course, as anyone who witnessed the attack on Trump supporters at the University of Illinois in Chicago or in San Jose, California, this week, it is obvious that horrible conduct and actions by those who do not care for Trump is as egregious, if not more so, given the real physical assaults that occurred, as the threats from Trump supporters appearing online. Much as those on the Left have sought to excuse the violence perpetrated on Trump supporters by Mexican-flag waving, American flag-burning mobs as Trump’s fault for his provocative comments that incite certain minority groups, there have also been arguments that the wave of online anti-Semitic attacks on writers critical of Trump proves that anti-Semitism is only a problem on the Right.
Kirchik put it this way: ”While it’s certainly true that most of Trump’s supporters are neither racists nor anti-Semites, it appears to be the case that all of the racists and anti-Semites in this country (and many beyond) support Trump.”
The conclusion is, to put it simply, ridiculous. Is Kirchik unaware of anti-Semitism among America’s largest minority groups, especially African-Americans and Hispanics (particularly new immigrants from Latin America), as well as among Muslims? The Anti-Defamation League conducts regular surveys of Americans by group and of populations in foreign countries to identify how many people hold anti-Semitic views. If one responds to certain questions with certain responses — Jews are too powerful, Jews control Wall Street, Jews control the media, Jews always think accumulation of money is paramount, Jews are untrustworthy — then this fits a classic anti-Semitic profile. The United States has one of the lowest anti-Semitic scores in the world, 9%. But it is more than double that among African-Americans and Hispanics and many times as high among Muslims. If only the white population is considered, the anti-Semitism rate in America is about 4%.
Does Kirchik really believe that the anti-Semites identified in the ADL survey, who number in the tens of millions if the survey results are extrapolated to the general population, are all Trump supporters? One wonders how this line made it through his Commentary editors. Is Kirchik unfamiliar with the likes of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam, or the incendiary anti-Semitism often found on black talk radio?
What we likely have is a phenomenon where the right-wing anti-Semites are very comfortable in the social media universe, and their bile is now directed at anything that maligns Trump. But because these writers who have taken on Trump have not heard from anti-Semites on the Left does not mean they do not exist.
In the past few days, Hillary Clinton, perhaps aware that new Trump supporters are created whenever a vicious attack on current Trump supporters gets a lot of media play (as occurred with the San Jose violence), called on opponents of Trump to avoid violence in the future. President Barack Obama did the same. Bernie Sanders has made a similar appeal in recent weeks. But these appeals are as likely to go unheeded as would be any calls from Trump for the right-wing anti-Semites to stop harassing writers who are critical of the presumptive Republican nominee and happen to be Jewish.
An ugliness not seen in a presidential campaign since perhaps 1968 threatens to make the two convention sites, Cleveland and Philadelphia, hazardous work for local police and the reinforcements they rely on to keep the peace. Any large Trump rally in hostile territory (cities with large minority populations) will be a potential powder keg. A large segment of the American population, feeling disenfranchised or unrepresented, or just mad at the world, or angered by the opposing candidate, are taking to the streets — both the actual ones and the online highways. And neither side has a monopoly on the bad actors.
Top Stories @ Fox News