Wall Street protests marred by anti-Semitism
We are as encouraged as everyone else about the Occupy Wall Street movement—but we continue to be disturbed by anti-Semitic elements within the movement, and even more disturbed by the fact that nobody else seems disturbed by it. Seth Weiss, writing on the website of the Marxist-Humanist Initiative, brings more such ugly examples to light. Weiss asks us to consider Nathalie Rothschild's account in the Huffington Post of the noxious response elicited by her unflattering portrait of protesters in the online journal Spiked. According to Rothschild:
I received a string of indignant emails and tweets about my Jewish, kleptocrat banking connections; demands that I reveal the details of my pay checks and that I come clean about my not-so-hidden agenda. I was told that my family name disqualifies me from having any opinion about the protest and that I have 'the karma of a demon'. One reader posted my article online, headlining the post 'Journalist & Jew – Nathalie ROTHSCHILD'.
Weiss also notes reports of protestors at Wall Street holding signs with clearly anti-Semitic statements—like one instructing passersby to search on Google for "Wall St. Jews," "Jewish Billionaires," and the like. And was there (as we would hope?) immediate and widespread repudiation of this faux pas? Weiss finds:
A recent post on the online Public Forum of the NYC General Assembly, the decentralized grouping that has emerged as the leadership of the movement, notes that "It is common for statements to be made, placing overwhelming blame and responsibility on Jews for the economic crisis" and asks "what can be done about the existence of anti-Semitic statements made by so-called supporters of the protest?" The post has received responses accusing the author of pursuing a "witch hunt" and others suggesting that readers "Look into who was involved in setting up the Federal Reserve in 1913."
And Weiss recalls that the initial call for the Sept. 17 Wall Street protest came from the Canadian-based AdBusters, an activist publication focused on "culture jamming" and anti-consumerism—which once published a list of prominent neo-conservatives with the names of the Jewish ones flagged by asterisks.
The list appeared as part of a March/April 2004 piece, entitled "Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?" and written by AdBusters' co-founder and editor-in-chief Kalle Lasn, which alleges that neo-cons have a "special affinity for Israel" that shapes U.S. policy in the Middle East. Lasn, claiming to "tackle the issue head on," offers up "a carefully researched list" of "the 50 most influential neocons in the US" and stresses that "half of the them [sic] are Jewish."
We'd be more willing to overlook this if elements of the same kind of ugly thinking were not percolating up in the current Wall Street protests, seemingly to little concern of fellow activists. Weiss concludes:
The NYC General Assembly, in its "Principles of Solidarity – working draft," includes "Empowering one another against all forms of oppression" as a "point of unity." The General Assembly, and all supporters of the Wall Street occupation, would do well to pay this more than lip service. To do so demands not only unequivocally condemning anti-Semitism in all of its manifestations in movement, but struggling to get at its roots, too. Anti-Semitism and anti-capitalism have a long, complex, and intertwined history — and it is with good reason that August Bebel, one of the founders of German Social Democracy, described anti-Semitism as "the socialism of fools."
Let's hope principled voices in the Occupy Wall Street movement will start to call out their comrades on their foolishness.
About the Author
Bill Weinberg is an award-winning 25-year veteran journalist in the fields of human rights, indigenous peoples, ecology and war. He is the author of Homage to Chiapas: The New Indigenous Struggles in Mexico, now available from Verso Books, and War on the Land: Ecology and Politics in Central America (Zed Books, 1991).
Comments
Lizards attack Wall Street
OK, we just went from bad to dramatically worse. It seems that on Nov. 17, the notorious wack-job and crypto-fascist David Icke, who believes the world is run by evil shape-shifting reptilians with Jewish last names, spoke at Zuccotti Park. Here's the YouTube link, complete with Jew-haitng comments left by viewers. E.g. one refers to another who had criticized Icke: "He's a god dam Jew....most Jews are charlatans."
And who is this fool Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change NYC who gave lizard-brain a platform?
OWS forum moderators step up to the plate
We feel very vindicated to see this on the Moderating Policies page of the Occupy Wall Street website:
We wish they could have had the forthrightness to include anti-Semitism in the "Safer Space" litany—but this still a very good start.
Being critical of Israelie Policies is not anti semitic
Why would anyone think that making a factual statement re: Israel and Palestine,would be anti semitic? Jews are semitic people too. That old diatribe doesnt fit facts. I am not an anti semitic, but I do have facts regarding what the right wing settlers (likud party) and other zionist organizations have done to Palestinans on a regular basis. So why would any progressive Occupy person even consider throwing out comments or a critique of Israelie foreign policy as being anti semitic. That word has lost its meaning and shuts down all conversations that are nothing more than a discussion or a debate on issues relative to Israel. How many occupiers even know this fact. In june 1968 Israel attacked the USS Liberty killing 34 sailors and wounding hundreds more in international waters! Was that an Act of War. Of course it was and is. When Israel fires on humanitarian ships headed to Gaza in international waters is that an attack on humanitarism? You betcha.
We in this country need a well structured fact based discussion on Israel and palestine...and it should never be considered anti semitic to do so. My 2 cents.
How can you repeat the same tired mantras?
What does the USS Liberty attack have to do with anything we wrote here? In what sense has the word "anti-Semitism" lost its meaning? Do you think anti-Semitism becomes acceptable if you call it anti-Zionism?
More lugubrious examples
The blogger Zombie at the right-wing PJ Media ("Voices from a Free America") provides more examples of egregious Jew-hatred form the Occupation protests. The right cynically exploits it; the left cynically ignores it.
Not much principle on either side.
UK parliament passes resolution against OWS anti-Semitism
Which, even if it were well-crafted, would still be problematic at best—because emanating from such a citadel of power, it will just be dismissed as propaganda. But, on top of that, it isn't well-crafted. Here is the text, from the parliament website:
None of the examples cited here are really legitimate. The "Google Jewish Billionaires" sign in New York has already been roundly repudiated by the protesters, as we have noted. The "Hitler's Bankers" sign (image online at The Commentator) is ambiguous; seemingly a reference to Western bankers backing Hitler before World War II, not necessarily anti-Semitic. Unless you count the LA schoolteacher (who didn't direct her vile remarks at any particular Jews), there has been no verbal abuse of Jews by demonstrators, and certainly no physical abuse.
What we really need is clarity about what happened in LA—whether, as reported, Occupiers rallied on behalf of the hate-spewing teacher, and if they repudiated her hate. And we do not need pronouncements from on high. We need repudiation on the ground by the Occupiers themselves.
Meanwhile, a post on Buzzflash does a masterful job of calling out the double standard of the righties now accusing OWS of anti-Semitism. It seems the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA, which appears pretty far to the right even for contemporary Zionists) issued a statement entitled "ZOA to President Obama & Congress — Condemn Anti-Semitism of Occupy Wall Street Protestors." Buzzflash recalls that last year, after Fox TV's Glenn Beck excoriated George Soros in typically anti-Semitic terms as a "Puppet Master" and Nazi collaborator, ZOA responded with a press release in which it "expressed its concern over the strong criticism that a number of American Jewish leaders and other prominent Jews in recent days have directed at...Beck, for his criticism of Israel/US-basher, financier George Soros..." So much for consistency.
To top it all off, the wacky Alex Jones on InfoWars suggests the whole Occupy Wall Street movement is a CIA creation (yet also has a "very strong socialist and communist agenda"!), noting its apparent inspiration from the Serbian protest movement Otpor. The Soros-phobia can't be far behind here either. Wacko-right types like Free Republic (and others) portrayed him as a secret mastermind of the Arab Spring, noting that the Egyptian protesters also took inspiration in the Soros-backed Otpor.
The politicians and right-wing bloviators are going to continue to dominate and exploit this issue until the Occupiers themselves speak up on it—and in real terms, not bogus ones.
More anti-Semitism, more denial
From KTLA in Los Angeles, Oct. 19:
OK, we have no problem with OWS supporters protesting on behalf of McAllister on free speech grounds. She she should not have been fired, which does indeed violate her rights, and makes her look like a martyr. But she should have been roundly repudiated by her fellow protesters. Hopefully, she was—but the news accounts don't mention it, and that is disturbing. If the Occupiers had a responsibility to protest her firing, they have an equal responsibility (at least) to repudiate her claptrap.
Meanwhile, Keith Olbermann tells us in his last rant that "there aren't any" anti-Semitic elements in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Oh please, stop. Just because the right exploits a phenomenon doesn't mean the phenomenon doesn't exist. This is like the 9-11 "Truthies" who tell us Bush must have been behind the attacks because he used them to justify his wars. Not to be taken seriously.
When is the left going to get serious about confronting anti-Semitism in its own ranks?
Did LA protesters rally on behalf of McAllister?
Could the KTLA account above be distorted? Another KTLA video indicates that the LA Occupiers staged a protest at the school district headquarters to oppose budget cuts and teacher lay-offs, not to rally on behalf of McAllister per se. We appeal to the LA Occupiers (and the KTLA) to make clear what is going on here...
In any case, we still see no evidence that McAllister's ugliness has been repudiated by the Occupiers, which remains disturbing...
LA protester issues pseudo-repudiation
The Daily Breeze runs a piece quoting ADL regional director Amanda Susskind saying:
On the Occupy Los Angeles site, someone who seems to be a chief blogger or moderator posts a "Reply to ADL":
Nice try, but this falls way short of a real repudiation. It starts out with a self-contradiction: "no anti–Semitic remarks...have been verified," yet the writer does not question the veracity of McAllister's remarks, which were made into a live camera and rebroadcast repeatedly. File under "Huh?" Then, the writer implies McAllister's remarks were made with "the intention" (italics in original) of misrepresenting the occupation movement—as if she were some sort of government plant. There is no evidence to suggest that whatsoever. The writer concedes: "If someone with similar views makes themselves known, they will be asked to find another venue." But it is not made clear that McAllister herself was "asked to find another venue."
If this were any other kind of open racism, the repudiation would be (appropriately) much more forthright.
Most ironically of all, many of the comments that follow on the page are again openly anti-Semitic! (E.g. "JEW ARE ON A MISSION. [Sic.] THEY ARE USING OUR COUNTRY IN THEAR [sic] INTERESTS.") And, predictably, meet with little and lukewarm repudiation. We are not impressed.
Assumptions
Bill
Why do you assume that the new media would report any "repudiated by her fellow protesters" It should be clear by now that the mainstream news is utterly incapable of reporting on this truly grassroots movement.
Since you have heard about the NYC OWS movement ejecting anti-Semitic signs and protesters, I would think you would give the movement the benefit of the doubt -- at least until you see evidence otherwise.
And simply showing someone on the news holding a sign or espousing some racist garbage is not enough. As you, yourself, have witnessed, this is a truly leaderless movement. It attracts all kind of people, some good, some bad.
And your jump to Keith Olbermann is a bit out of context. His guest clearly says that there are some anti-Semantic people at these rallies. The whole point of the segment is to say that these anti-Semantic comments are not representative of the movement.
Re: Assumptions
I'm not sure what you mean by the "new media," but I certainly do not assume the MSM would report that LA OWS had repudiated the ugliness. However, I will say that the Occupiers who protested on McAllister's behalf had a responsibility to make clear that they reject what she said. Did they do so and KTLA simply failed to report it? I don't claim to know. Do you? Are you the one who is making assumptions about the situation?
Olbermann says at the start of his rant that "there aren't any" anti-Semitic elements in the Occupy Wall Street movement. Which is obvious bunk.
Repudiating OWS anti-Semitism
An Oct. 20 story on Salon by Justin Elliott notes that the guy at Zuccotti Park with the "Google: Wall Street Jews" sign has become a regular fixture—but is, in fact, being challenged by fellow protesters: "Occupy protesters have taken to surrounding the man, who gave his name to me recently as David Smith, with rebuttal signs, including one that reads, 'Asshole —>'." This is the perfect response: a clear repudiation, without resorting to censorship or police involvement. Salon also notes an account in The Forward indicating that Smith "was picketing the Financial District long before Zuccotti Park was occupied." Elliott accuses the Emergency Committee for Israel of "nutpicking" by focusing on Smith and a handful of other atypical wingnuts. He also notes the Yom Kippur seder that was held by Jewish protesters at Zuccotti Park, and that even the Jewish Telegraphic Agency has written of the OWS camp's "Jewish flavor."
All well and good. But we question whether any protesters would have taken the initiative to repudiate the wingnuts if right-wing propagandists like the Emergency Committee for Israel hadn't jumped on the anti-Semitism charge. It would be nice—that is, tactically astute as well as ethically correct—to be proactive about this and beat the right-wing propagandists to the punch for a change. And Elliott fails to note the anti-Semitic reaction to the initial calling out of OWS anti-Semitism on the OWS website (as documented by Seth Weiss above). We wish the whole thing could be foisted off on to a small handful of wingnuts.
Meanwhile, of course, David Duke is trying to get in on the act...
"Occupy Brooklyn" FB - David Icke & the UFOs
if you like antisemites at OWS, you should check out the "Occupy Brooklyn" FB page, with numerous links to David Icke etc. From a competitor page that was forced to be set-up:
"Although the administrator of the Occupy Brooklyn page has engaged in many "questionable" practices, at least the 1500+ followers have posted useful links and announcements... But today the administrator deleted all of them, and the top post is a question: "Do you feel the UFO cover-up by the elite 1% is real?" I really don't wish to make a big deal about this, but that page has 1500 followers, and clearly is the one that people find for Occupy Brooklyn."
That sounds utterly wacky, but...
A Google search for "Occupy Brooklyn" brings back this inoffensive page...
facebook page
FB = FACEBOOK page, Bill..
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-Brooklyn/243880748996101?ref=ts
OWS: Psyops "honeypot" devised to ferret out the "dissidents"
OWS: All the authenticity of a CIA/NSA psyop, fronted by agit-prop rent-a-protester agent provocateur phonies, a honeypot to ferret out alleged "dissidents" so they can be thrown into the Security State's extrajudicial persecution matrix, thus bolstering the bottom line of the defense contractors who profit from the war on (genuine, not "controlled opposition") dissent. Read this by a veteran (Jewish) journalist and eight-year victim of a fusion center- based American Gestapo:
http://nowpublic.com/world/thugocracy-u-s-fed-police-vigilantes-persecut...
If link is sabotaged, see NowPublic.com/scrivener (links above bio and lede stories)
As a Jew
As a Jew, I am sad and angry to have witnessed over the years, how my fellow Jewish boomers and their parents have mindlessly gone down this same road to disaster as was travelled in our past. How dare you greedy sons of bitches, suits neatly pressed, have displayed to the world that there is merit in all of the old prejudice and characatures about Jews that was used as justification for our genocide. We had a chance to prove otherwise, but YOU ruined it. When time comes for your burning in public, if I am allowed to live by lighting the flames, I will.
Leftist denial
The both of you don't get it. It isn't the pressed-suit set that is spewing this nonsense, but protesters. And there is absolutely no reason to believe this is the result of CIA provocation or disinformation. Take some responsibility.
Yom Kippur services at OWS
Was this published before the 500 or so people showed up for the Yom Kippur service at Zuccotti Park? The questions being asked in the above article are important but it's very strange to see any view by Natalie Rothschild and Spiked Magazine given any credence. These folks may not be as looney at the LaRouche movement but they're just as unprincipled.
The trouble with Spiked
We just read about the Yom Kippur service on the other Jewish anarchist blog, Mobius1ski. We applaud.
Yes, there are big problems with Spiked magazine. Wikipedia informs us that it is the libertarian-right incarnation of the former idiot-left journal Living Marxism, which we had to call out over Bosnia genocide revisionism:
http://www.ww4report.com/node/1239
Definitely ugly and cultish. They even have a website dedicated to following their bizarre antics:
http://rcpwatch.wordpress.com/
But the problem with Spiked is assuredly not that Natalie Rothschild is Jewish, or that her last name is Rothschild. Alas, five seconds on Google will demonstrate that the Jew-baiting comments she complained of were real:
http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=Nathalie+Rothschild
Weiss responds
Seth Weiss responds via e-mail:
Wow, this is a really lame argument. You need go no further than Spiked's "about" page to find that Rothschild not only writes for them but is part of their "core team" along with Mick Hume, whom they identify as having "launched" Living Marxism:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/about/article/335/
But, as you suggest, no one found her reporting on the Wall Street protests suspect because of her association with pioneers in genocide denial, but rather because of her ethnicity. As Andrew [Kliman] notes in the comments on the MHI [Marxist-Humanist Initiative] website, the tags on the Live Leaks republication include "Jew," "Jewish," "Zionist," "Greed," and "Greedy." See:
http://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/news/wall-street-protests-marred-by-anti-semitism.html
Bad news and good news...
A story from the Jewish Journal comparing the Wall Street protests to this year's rent protests in Tel Aviv was posted to the Occupy Wall Street Facebook page, where it was met with the following comments (names deleted here):
On the other hand, Chris Hedges on TruthOut interviews a "petite 22-year-old" protester at Zuccotti Park named "Ketchup," who relates the following:
Propaganda vultures jump on OWS anti-Semitism charge
Well, it was only a matter of time. The watchdog Media Matters notes that Rush Limbaugh has been fulminating about "anti-Semitic code" in phrases like "We are the 99%" and even "Occupy Wall Street" itself. Nice irony. Rush's bogus protestations actually play into the stereotype that all the big bankers and brokers are Jewish. Thanks a lot.
More sophisticated if no less cynical is David Brooks of the New York Times of Oct. 10, who makes note of the unseemly Adbusters faux pas that we first pointed out above. We think it's likely that Brooks picked up this angle from us, but we're almost glad he didn't credit us. Because his aim is clearly to discredit the protesters altogether. The insufferable Brooks has made a career of defending elite power and, even at this late date, blaming those at the bottom of the social pyramid for their own fate. (We had to call out his vile blame-the-victim spewing on Haiti after last year's earthquake, just f'rinstance.)
This exemplifies the danger of the left's unwillingness to confront anti-Semitism within its own ranks—it lays itself vulnerable to those who would cynically exploit the charge to delegitimize any challenge to the system. As we've stated before: The cynical "weaponizing" of the accusation of anti-Semitism does not lessen our responsibility to be clear in calling out real anti-Semitism. On the contrary, it increases it.
We make no apologies for our ruthless truth-telling, even if it provided propaganda ammo to Brooks. Let the record reflect that this issue was first raised not by a conservative commentator dissing the Occupy Wall Street movement, but a progressive website offering principled dissent within a position of support for the protests.
More propaganda vultures jump on OWS anti-Semitism charge
William Kristol, editor of the the Weekly Standard, co-founder of the Project for a New American Century and, most recently, chairman of the Emergency Committee for Israel, is the latest to use the anti-Semitism charge against Occupy Wall Street, writing of himself in the third person:
There's an accompanying video in which OWS participants spew ugly Jew-baiting rhetoric—at one point directly baiting an old bearded fellow with a kippah, telling him to "go back to Israel." The sign we pointed out earlier reading "Google: 'Wall St. Jews,' 'Jewish Billionaires,' 'Jews & Federal Reserve Bank'" is provided for viewers' edification. Disturbingly, it ends by appropriating the slogan long used by progressives, "Hate is not an American value."
While OWS supporters are likely to jump up and down about how they are being mis-portrayed, this new development points up again the dangers for failing to take responsibility for anti-Semitism within our own ranks. However marginal the Jew-baiters in these video clips may be, the footage is apparently real.
Most frustratingly, the Daily Kos blogger who brought this to our attention describes himself as an Israel supporter. He does a good job of deconstructing Kristol's propaganda: OWS is a leaderless movement, the wingnuts featured in the video were not representative but cherry-picked, the double standard in cutting a pass for the racism of the Tea Party movement, etc. But are there any anti-Zionist voices out there that are concerned with anti-Semitism? I mean, apart form ourselves?
Antisemitism at OWS
Mr. Weinberg- why do you think the Left is not taking responsibility for anti-Semitism at OWS? You might also want to check the American Nazi Party site- head of that organization gives a formal endorsement of OWS, says the "lefties" (his word) share the ANParty goal of bringing down "Judeo-Capitalism". How about a condemnation from the OWS leadership of this endorsement?
Antisemitism is an inconvenient truth for the Left, which is choosing to ignore it . it doesn't really fit into the worldview of universal brotherhood..and they can't quite get their anticolonialist mindset around the idea that white middle class Americans are victims of bias. Not the right victim profile. Or, as in the case of Natalie Rothschild, even with blatant evidence of antisemitism staring them in the face, they discredit the source(Rothschild) and so feel justified in ignoring the evidence. In the case of Kristol, again, the source is discredited and his comments, like many Conservatives comments, are blown off as just right wing propaganda meant to bring down the movement. Trouble is, only the conservatives are monitoring antisemitism, except for you. Thanks for trying. Just FYI, I have a distinctly Jewish surname and just endured a weeklong harassment of multiple anonymous phonecalls from a group of individuals who said they were coming to our house to "get our Jew gold." In the suburbs of NY.
Why is this pic on the side of your page?
Why is this pic on the side of your page (Rachel Corrie story)? I know you do not think Israel controls the U.S., or am I missing something?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8897254@N05/4423243154
Pics on right-hand panel are Flickr-generated
I don't put them there. Flickr does, by scanning key words. Consider it a barometer of the general climate around such issues on the Internet.