BibleForums Christian Message Board
Other Categories => Controversial Issues => Topic started by: Fenris on November 18, 2025, 12:23:56 PM
-
Jew hatred has been institutionalized in the political left in America.
But something equally disturbing is happening on the political right. Donald Trump is ignoring it, but he's a lame duck. What is more worrisome to me is that JD Vance is very tolerant of it. He also does not have a deep rooted love or appreciation for Israel, unlike many others on the right do; he has stated that we will work with Israel "when our interests coincide". That's not the definition of an ally. Perhaps it is his Catholicism at play here? I don't think that the Catholic church ever got over the theological implications of the founding of the state of Israel.
Anyway, have a read. Comments welcome, of course.
Hating Jews for Fun and Profit
Social Commentary
by Christine Rosen
How did anti-Semitism become mainstream so quickly, especially among younger Americans? Perhaps because it has become a form of mass entertainment.
In the wake of the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the significant increase in attacks on Jews and Jewish institutions in the U.S., this is an urgent question. A squad of prominent public figures, elected officials, and cultural arbiters has emerged to promote ideas many thought permanently relegated to the unsavory fringes of American life—and they are gaining an increasingly enthusiastic hearing.
Case in point: Tucker Carlson’s fawning reception of self-proclaimed white nationalist and leader of the so-called groyper movement, Nick Fuentes. As a guest on Carlson’s show, Fuentes, a fan of both Hitler and Stalin, obligingly performed his predictable routine, complaining about “organized Jewry” and the Jews “controlling the media apparatus.” Smiling and nodding along, Carlson did remind Fuentes that “going on about the Jews helps the neocons” but otherwise agreed with him, noting that Christians who supported Israel have been “seized by this brain virus.” An internal conservative battle erupted soon after, when Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, one of the conservative movement’s major institutions, produced a video defending Carlson and calling him a friend.
Water finds its own level, and Roberts’s unwillingness to denounce Carlson’s endorsement of anti-Semi-tic conspiracy theorizing places him and, by association, his institution in the most polluted part of the conservative movement’s pond. That this happened was entirely by design. As Fuentes himself gleefully noted on his show after the Heritage debacle unfolded, “We are thoroughly in the groyper war, the civil war for the GOP.”
In previous eras, anti-Semitism spread in the form of propaganda published in largely fringe newsletters, a few newspapers (like Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent) and books, and notoriously, on radio broadcasts like those of the Canadian-American priest Charles E. Coughlin. Political organizers such as America First Party founder Gerald L.K. Smith (who, like Carlson, was fond of theories about UFOs and demons) also tried strenuously to mainstream anti-Semitism, but the effort never achieved widespread acceptance.
Today, by contrast, anti-Semitism lives and thrives on the entertainment platforms of the young and very online. YouTube, streaming sites like Rumble, and social media platforms have vastly expanded their reach and scope while presenting no barriers to entry and providing anonymity to millions of people who crave communities of the like-minded—often with little regard to what they are endorsing with their time and attention. Popular streamers like Fuentes and Carlson are the arbiters of an online culture that now permeates real-world politics daily. Fuentes boasts more than 1 million followers on X and hundreds of thousands of viewers of his America First streaming show on Rumble, where he regularly, proudly, and unashamedly makes racist, misogynistic, anti-Semitic, and anti-American claims. Carlson is among the most popular public-affairs podcasters on platforms such as Spotify and Apple, where he muses about “globohomo” conspiracies and “the Antichrist’s newest manifestation.”
Motivated toxic actors like Fuentes and Carlson and Candace Owens, combined with streaming platforms and DIY media, have created a massive amount of content that can be consumed by millions almost hourly. And unlike the anti-Semitic propaganda of old, this new form allows for active, rather than merely passive, consumption. Viewers post comments, swap memes, and form fan chat groups. They feel connected to peers while enjoying the posture of being skeptical renegades “just asking questions” about how the Jews control everything. The Two Minutes Hate is available 24 hours a day.
Carlson and Fuentes and their ilk are skilled at cultivating and nourishing these parasocial relationships—relationships that have been incredibly lucrative for them. This is why more podcasters on the right are embracing Carlson and promoting his noxious ideas themselves, under the guise of their being “friends”—which was also the excuse Kevin Roberts gave for his unwillingness to condemn Carlson’s behavior.
But these are performative and transactional relationships; not long before Carlson hosted Fuentes on his show, he was mocking Fuentes as a closeted homosexual. Fuentes pinballs between praising MAGA leaders and, before the last election, vowing to vote for Kamala Harris. The self-styled celebrity “groypers” call themselves the leaders of an army, but watching them perform is like witnessing a demented version of Lucha Libre. The incoherence is the point.
This posture also allows people who should know better to try to excuse their behavior. When a group of Young Republicans was discovered exchanging anti-Semitic and racist remarks in a group chat, Vice President JD Vance downplayed their behavior, saying the grown men in question were just “young boys” exchanging “edgy” jokes.
As Eli Lake noted in an insightful piece at the Free Press, Fuentes might be joking about some things, but he consistently saves his most vitriolic rhetoric for Jewish conservatives: “He yells into the camera and says: ‘You’re the filth. You are traitors. You are scum. You do not belong here. You are not American. You’re not home.’”
This is the language and demeanor of the leader at the fascist rallies of old, yet today it is far more likely to be consumed by someone who is literally all alone—streaming in the background of a teenager’s bedroom while he’s supposed to be doing his homework, or listened to by a man on his lunch break while he scrolls his social media feeds. The danger of the message is the same, but it is being delivered in a seemingly innocuous form—on the same screens through which we do everything else in daily life.
The flattening effect of our information ecosystem makes it more difficult to combat the constant stream of filth. In one sense, groypers are just another kind of influencer. This oddly gives them a familiar feeling to many viewers, even as the noxious things they say would, until recently, have been anathema to everyday political discourse. In a culture where everything is content, it is volume (of viewers, followers, and likes), not values, that matters. And it starts to seep into everyday life in alarming ways: The bishop of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, recently had to issue an apology to the diocese because the Halloween parade float of Saint Joseph Catholic School in Hanover “featured a replica of the Auschwitz Concentration Camp gate, bearing the words Arbeit Macht Frei.”
Popular culture has long been a vehicle for testing and mainstreaming new norms. In the 1970s, The Jeffersons featured one of the first portrayals of an interracial couple, Tom and Helen Willis, on network television; in the 1990s, Will and Grace helped encourage acceptance of homosexuality by featuring main characters who were openly gay. But as the anti-Semitic turn in culture shows, normalization doesn’t require virtuousness or perceived virtuousness to become a reality.
Marx infamously proclaimed religion the opiate of the masses. Today, with short-form video, live-streams, and social media, we have created not an opiate, but a stimulant—one that isn’t anesthetizing people but supercharging their taste for an ancient hatred. Combating this scourge is a generational challenge. It’s astoundingly difficult to overcome. To stop the combat in its tracks, Kevin Roberts denounced as representatives of a “venomous coalition” those who said Carlson and Fuentes should be anathematized. He apologized for using that language when it got him into trouble. But the adjective he and his associate Ryan Neuhaus chose was pointed and purposeful. Venom is produced by snakes. Likening Jews and those who would defend them to the serpent in the garden is literally an act of demonization. It was also a clever effort to reverse the reality. The poison that threatens the American right, the Republican Party, and the West itself is coming not from the coalition Roberts despises but from the anti-Semites Roberts said he would not ostracize, and from those, like Roberts, who would provide them cover.
-
Haven’t heard much about Fuentes so he’s likely not on my radar other than in the “loon” category. Like Kathy Griffin on the left
Owens and Carlson would fit that category for me as well. Bigger platforms but no less compelling and at time equally nutty.
In general, the philosophical and theological drought of rational thought on the left or right drives me bonkers. The right’s propensity toward conspiracy theory and false moral equivalencies related to Israel are utterly incomprehensible.
-
Owens and Carlson would fit that category for me as well.
Carlson's son works for JD Vance.
-
And suddenly the problem comes into focus.
-
And suddenly the problem comes into focus.
Just don’t give up the codes to the Space Laser.
-
From a couple of weeks ago:
The Question JD Vance Needs to Answer
by Seth Mandel
Last night, Vice President JD Vance made remarks at a Turning Point USA event in Mississippi and then took questions from the crowd. It was inevitable that one of those questions would be a provocative statement about nefarious Jewish influence masked as an innocent question about American foreign policy.
“I’m just confused,” the stammering MAGA-hatted student repeated a couple of times. What was this poor chap confused about? “I’m a Christian man, and I’m just, uh, confused why—that there’s this notion that we, uh, might have or, uh, owe Israel something or that they’re our greatest ally or that we have to support this multi-hundred billion dollar, um, foreign aid package to Israel…. I’m just confused why this idea has come around, considering the fact that not only does their religion not agree with ours but also openly supports the prosecution of ours.”
Now, there are a few possible ways to answer this type of “question.” Vance could have been combative and rejected the premise forcefully, deterring any other clowns from trying to hijack the vice president’s event. That would have been a show of strength. He also could have ignored the sniping about Judaism to appear diplomatic while trying to show that he won’t take such bait. In that case, he could’ve just answered the policy part of the question by correcting the kid’s warped description.
The third option would be the weakest: accept the premise of both parts of the question and try to convince the young man that the White House knows what it’s doing.
As you can probably guess, the vice president chose the third option:
“First of all, when the president of the United States says America First that means that he pursues the interests of Americans first. That is our entire foreign policy. And that doesn’t mean that you’re not going to have alliances, that you’re not going to work with other countries from time to time…. In this example, the most recent Gaza peace plan that all of us have been working on very hard for the past few weeks, the president of the United States could only get that peace deal done by actually being willing to apply leverage to the State of Israel. So when people say that Israel is somehow manipulating or controlling the president of the United States, they’re not controlling this president of the United States.”
A good follow-up question might have asked Vance which specific presidents he had in mind when he suggested that other presidents have been controlled by Israel.
Vance then treated the other part of the question as equally legitimate:
“Now you ask about, you know, sort of Jews disagreeing with Christians on certain religious ideas. Yeah, absolutely. It’s one of the realities is that Jews do not believe that Jesus Christ is the messiah. Obviously, Christians do believe that. There are some significant theological disagreements between Christians and Jews. My attitude is: Let’s have those conversations. Let’s have those disagreements when we have them. But if there are shared areas of interest, we ought to be willing to do that, too.”
Vance said he was fine with, for example, working with Israel to maintain open access to Christian holy sites. Then he concluded: “What I’m not OK with is any country coming before the interests of American citizens.”
Vance was plainly unprepared for this question, even though he should have known it was coming. In the end, he came off as a guy who really wants the vote of a college-age groyper who came to troll him that night.
In recent weeks, there has been a growing chorus on the right calling on Vance to state clearly where he stands on the mainstreaming of rabid right-wing anti-Semites. That mainstreaming has been orchestrated by, among others, Tucker Carlson, who recently hosted Nick Fuentes, a white nationalist with nice things to say about Hitler.
That chorus will only grow louder after Vance’s performance in Mississippi. I join them: I’d love some clarification and straight talk from the vice president and prospective heir to President Trump, now that Vance has gotten that question publicly and flubbed it.
Meanwhile today, in the “not helping” department, we have the president of the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts. He posted a video responding to “speculation” that the pathbreaking conservative think tank is distancing itself from Carlson. He managed to defend Carlson while doing so in JD Vance’s name, quoting the vice president’s comments last night.
This came at the end of Roberts’ statement. The preceding two minutes had been filled with dog whistles about “the globalist class or their mouthpieces in Washington.” Carlson is a friend, Roberts reaffirmed, calling Carlson’s critics a “venomous coalition” who are “sowing division” on the right.
To sum up: According to Roberts, free and open debate is important, which is why Carlson’s critics should shut up.
I think the vice president is playing a cynical game. I imagine he thought he could put off having to choose between the traditional conservative mainstream and the groypers until much closer to the election he plans to run in 2028. He miscalculated, and the anti-Semitic right is giddy over it because Nick Fuentes and Tucker Carlson see this entire public debate as a victory for them.
It would be spineless to let Fuentes and Carlson think they’ve won if Vance disagrees with them and opposes their continued ability to set the terms of the debate. The microphone is yours, Mr. Vice President.
Vance didn't come off looking great during the exchange.
Kevin Roberts, the president of the Heritage Foundation, fumbled his response as well.
-
This is not a Jewish problem. It's a general electoral problem for Republicans. The problem is multifactorial.
Vance's behavior on this issue is going to split the Republican party. Allow me to explain. The political right can be divided into moderates and the far right. Vance playing footsie with the far right is going to turn off moderates. It might hurt him in potential 2028 primaries, or it might not. If it doesn't hurt him, it will very likely depress Republican turnout in 2028. Mind you, Vance already underperformed other Republicans when he ran for the Ohio senate seat, so this is already a known problem.
Then we have crossover voters. The Democrats running all sorts of fringe candidates has created the possibility where long-time independents and Democrats might decide that the Republican party looks appealing. Truly this is a once in a generation opportunity. A Republican party headed by Vance will send them right back where they came from.
Of course, the left and right both agreeing that there is a "Jewish problem" is bad for the country as a whole.
-
At least Majorie Taylor Green is doing us all a favor…
-
Mamdani met with Trump. They got along great. "I feel very confident that he can do a good job. I think he is going to surprise some conservative people".
At what point do I regret my vote?
-
Right after you finish watching the Kamala speeches…
-
This is not a Jewish problem. It's a general electoral problem for Republicans. The problem is multifactorial.
Vance's behavior on this issue is going to split the Republican party. Allow me to explain. The political right can be divided into moderates and the far right. Vance playing footsie with the far right is going to turn off moderates. It might hurt him in potential 2028 primaries, or it might not. If it doesn't hurt him, it will very likely depress Republican turnout in 2028. Mind you, Vance already underperformed other Republicans when he ran for the Ohio senate seat, so this is already a known problem.
Then we have crossover voters. The Democrats running all sorts of fringe candidates has created the possibility where long-time independents and Democrats might decide that the Republican party looks appealing. Truly this is a once in a generation opportunity. A Republican party headed by Vance will send them right back where they came from.
Of course, the left and right both agreeing that there is a "Jewish problem" is bad for the country as a whole.
I saw a headline recently that suggested even the wacko AOC would beat Vance in a presidential election. As much as I'm leery of President Vance I can only imagine the chaos under AOC. Suddenly President Kamala seems like an attractive alternative.
-
Machine politician Gavin Newsome will be the significant contender to dread for those concerned with an (inevitable?) swing to the left
-
For some reason, I doubt God is wringing His hands over any of it…
-
I saw a headline recently that suggested even the wacko AOC would beat Vance in a presidential election.
Vance doesn't have crossover appeal and a lot of Republicans don't like him either. So it doesn't surprise me that even weird fringe candidates on the left could beat him.
-
For some reason, I doubt God is wringing His hands over any of it…
Since the topic is Jew hatred on the political right, everyone should be wringing their hands over it. We know where that leads. And what starts with the Jews never, ever, ends with the Jews.
-
"The idea that Tucker Carlson, who has one of the largest podcasts in the world, who has millions of listeners, who supported Donald Trump in the 2024 election, who supported me in the 2024 election, the idea that his views are somehow completely anathema to conservatism, that he has no place in the conservative movement, are frankly absurd. And I don't think that anybody actually believes it". JD Vance at TPUSA.
This, my friends, is called gaslighting.
Tucker is on the take from Qatar. It's completely obvious. He did a podcast where he said that Qatar is America's greatest ally. He bought a house there. He attacks Israel on every single broadcast. He's a conspiracy loon who sees Jews behind everything. And Vance chooses to support him and invite him into the conservative movement.
-
I shudder at the thought of him being the front-runner in 2028. His loss would be as detrimental as his victory--just for different reasons. (Trump was as misguided in choosing him as his running mate as he was with most of his cabinet). I really wish Ron DeSantis had won the nomination instead of Trump.
-
Of my associates who are Jewish, not one will vote Republican, even even if their discourse seems to favor the right. Something I've often found frustrating as a lifelong conservative (until 2014).
I quit "all" party idealism and parisanship then.
My late friend Ron was typical and hailed from a family equally as prone to side with the Democrats regardless.
-
"I’m not saying you have to be a Christian to be an American,” Vance said. “I’m saying something simple and truer: Christianity is America’s dream.”
.
NOTE: This is not true and that is not Christianity. It is quazi-Catholic ad-libbing.
-
I shudder at the thought of him being the front-runner in 2028. His loss would be as detrimental as his victory--just for different reasons. (Trump was as misguided in choosing him as his running mate as he was with most of his cabinet). I really wish Ron DeSantis had won the nomination instead of Trump.
Vance was hand picked by Peter Thiel. I can't stand DeSantis, but he's not a malignant narcissist so that's a positive.
-
"I’m not saying you have to be a Christian to be an American,” Vance said. “I’m saying something simple and truer: Christianity is America’s dream.”
.
NOTE: This is not true and that is not Christianity. It is quazi-Catholic ad-libbing.
The so-called “American Dream” is the church’s greatest nightmare…
But the typical “church” and the typical “Christian” in North America is too stupid to recognize it
-
More JD:
"99% of Republicans, and I think probably 97% of Democrats, do not hate Jewish people for being Jewish".
Now he's covering for Jew haters on the left and the right. I despise gaslighting.
How does he explain this?
"What is actually happening is that there is a real backlash to a consensus view in American foreign policy. I think we ought to have that conversation and not try to shut it down. Most Americans are not antisemitic, they’re never going to be antisemitic, and I think we should focus on the real debate."
Ohhh. So people aren't happy with US foreign policy towards Israel (even though opinion polls show that a majority of Americans do support Israel) and that's why they don't like Jews. This is classic antisemitism. "I don't hate Jews because they're Jews, but for some reason that makes my hatred completely justifiable".
-
Of my associates who are Jewish, not one will vote Republican, even even if their discourse seems to favor the right. Something I've often found frustrating as a lifelong conservative (until 2014).
I've been a steadfast Republican voter for as long as I've voted. And I'm out. This is not conservatism, this is good old fashioned Jew hatred. If the current trajectory continues, I expect Republicans to get rocked in the midterms. And I'm fine with that. If Vance is the 2028 nominee I may even consider voting Democrat. This is the party you want? Appeasing the lunatic and racist fringe? Then deal with the consequences.
-
Machine politician Gavin Newsome will be the significant contender to dread for those concerned with an (inevitable?) swing to the left
I'd vote for a clown and a buffoon over a man who breaks bread with racists.
-
For some reason, I doubt God is wringing His hands over any of it…
I'm really upset by this comment RK. I expect better from you. God doesn't care what happens here and neither do you?
It brings to mind a criticism of Christianity by rabbi Leo Baeck that I've shared here before:
Another development has been no less calamitous and no less frequent. This finished perfected justice, this self-assurance of the possessing, has also often found expression in a tranquil, comfortable, almost smug indifference. Being satisfied with itself, the Church was capable of beholding a great deal without being at all upset. Since it considered itself a world apart, it could leave many matters in this world to take care of themselves. Having issued from divine grace, the pious faith was superior to everything impermanent and human; hence it could regard earthly deeds, of whatever character, as something inferior and indifferent, as beneath it. So one was prepared to overlook and discount and indulge anything: the correct faith was easily satisfied with itself for "whoever believes in him is just."
A good deal of Church history is the history of all the things which neither hurt nor encroached upon this piety, all the outrages and all the baseness which this piety was able to tolerate with an assured and undisturbed soul and an untroubled faith. And a spirit is characterized not only by what it does but, no less, by what it permits, what it forgives, and what it beholds in silence. The Christian religion, very much including Protestantism, has been able to maintain silence about so much that it is difficult to say what has been more pernicious in the course of time: the intolerance which committed the wrongs or the indifference which beheld them unperturbed. Perhaps such indifference is even more romantic than intolerance, for it is more passive. It is wholly fitting for the faith which does not want to wrestle and act, but is content to wait and experience; it is entirely commensurate with the repudiation of the Law. The moral duty of justice and the fight for justice are associated with the phase that lies in the past and has been overcome.
-
My comment was about the political wrangling and gamesmanship.
Not about antisemitism
Of course God is concerned about antisemitism
He’s concerned about everything that impacts humans
However, on a Christian theological framework (which I understand you do not follow) what happens here on earth has limited importance compared to eternity
-
However, on a Christian theological framework (which I understand you do not follow) what happens here on earth has limited importance compared to eternity
Christians do not care about human suffering? That's in the here and now and I would not consider it of "limited importance". I know that many Christians feel likewise. Are you not one of those Christians?
-
Donald Trump, Jr: "This isn’t the Republican Party anymore. It’s the MAGA Party and we are not going back."
Buh bye.
-
However, on a Christian theological framework (which I understand you do not follow) what happens here on earth has limited importance compared to eternity
Christians do not care about human suffering? That's in the here and now and I would not consider it of "limited importance". I know that many Christians feel likewise. Are you not one of those Christians?
please don’t be obtuse. It’s unbecoming of a man with your intellect and character. That’s not what I wrote and you know it.
-
Machine politician Gavin Newsome will be the significant contender to dread for those concerned with an (inevitable?) swing to the left
I'd vote for a clown and a buffoon over a man who breaks bread with racists.
My concern, not that I get a voice in the matter ("no taxation without representation" went missing somewhere between Boston in the 1770s and Washington in the 2020s), is that both sides have the pretty(ish) moderates and the silly wingnuts. The only question is which one is more visible while they are trying to get elected because once they are elected the nutjob fringe seem to take over.
-
Both the Republican and Democrat parties have been hijacked by radical extremists with opposing agendas, and both are equally out of touch with the average citizen. Choosing between constipation and diarrhea isn't much of a choice.
-
Both the Republican and Democrat parties have been hijacked by radical extremists with opposing agendas, and both are equally out of touch with the average citizen. Choosing between constipation and diarrhea isn't much of a choice.
You’ve never been in the woods without toilet paper, have you???
😳
-
Of my associates who are Jewish, not one will vote Republican, even even if their discourse seems to favor the right. Something I've often found frustrating as a lifelong conservative (until 2014).
I've been a steadfast Republican voter for as long as I've voted. And I'm out. This is not conservatism, this is good old fashioned Jew hatred. If the current trajectory continues, I expect Republicans to get rocked in the midterms. And I'm fine with that. If Vance is the 2028 nominee I may even consider voting Democrat. This is the party you want? Appeasing the lunatic and racist fringe? Then deal with the consequences.
Serious question, not wishing to push one party or the other.
Since it's pretty well known you are a Jew it's entirely understandable that you wouldn't vote for a party led by someone hostile to Jews. My question would be whether the other party is inherently any less hostile to Jews - are they genuinely less hostile or are they simply less vocal about it right at the moment? My observations have been that most of the pro-Palestinian sentiments are expressed by the political left.
On that basis would you actively vote for a party that might not express specific disdain for Jews but is openly supportive of nations that seek to annihilate Israel, or simply refrain from voting at all?
-
Both the Republican and Democrat parties have been hijacked by radical extremists with opposing agendas, and both are equally out of touch with the average citizen. Choosing between constipation and diarrhea isn't much of a choice.
You’ve never been in the woods without toilet paper, have you???
😳
Being in the woods isn't necessarily a problem when there's lots of space and privacy on the basis of not having another human within a mile in any direction (although you may need to watch for trali cams). Being in a suburban area (lots of houses, no public bathrooms) is an entirely different situation.
-
It would seem impossible that any aspiring representative government harboring antisemitism could even stand a chance in our constitutional democracy when the electorate is informed but my confidence has been shakened these past few years.
-
I’ve never had any confidence in any government so I’m never disappointed
The key to satisfaction with government is lowered expectations
Too many people on either side of the aisle look to government as a solution rather than accepting government as a problem to be contained
Thus you end up with Marxist liberation theology on one side and so called Christian nationalism on the other. Both of which are authoritarian, against personal liberty, and against God
-
It would seem impossible that any aspiring representative government harboring antisemitism could even stand a chance in our constitutional democracy when the electorate is informed but my confidence has been shakened these past few years.
This illustrates the problem very well.
-
both sides have the pretty(ish) moderates and the silly wingnuts. The only question is which one is more visible while they are trying to get elected because once they are elected the nutjob fringe seem to take over.
What's happening now is somewhat different and much more dangerous, I think. It's normal politics to run as a moderate even though that's now how one intends to govern. But what happens when candidates don't even bother running as a moderate? This is going to lead to much more fringe governance, real fringe, like socialism and outright racism.
-
please don’t be obtuse. It’s unbecoming of a man with your intellect and character. That’s not what I wrote and you know it.
Then why don't you explain what you meant by "For some reason, I doubt God is wringing His hands over any of it…"
Because I'm doing a fair amount of hand wringing here, and it's not due to my lack of faith.
-
Serious question, not wishing to push one party or the other.
Since it's pretty well known you are a Jew it's entirely understandable that you wouldn't vote for a party led by someone hostile to Jews. My question would be whether the other party is inherently any less hostile to Jews - are they genuinely less hostile or are they simply less vocal about it right at the moment? My observations have been that most of the pro-Palestinian sentiments are expressed by the political left.
On that basis would you actively vote for a party that might not express specific disdain for Jews but is openly supportive of nations that seek to annihilate Israel, or simply refrain from voting at all?
This is a good question. In truth I am politically homeless at the moment. The antisemitic far right and far left are both ascendant and close to the wheels of power. It's not a good moment for America.
-
It would seem impossible that any aspiring representative government harboring antisemitism could even stand a chance in our constitutional democracy when the electorate is informed but my confidence has been shakened these past few years.
And what happens if all the candidates running express such views? How about an AOC vs Vance race? They're both appealing to enough of the base that they could win their respective primaries, so it's certainly within the realm of possibility.
-
It would seem impossible that any aspiring representative government harboring antisemitism could even stand a chance in our constitutional democracy when the electorate is informed but my confidence has been shakened these past few years.
And what happens if all the candidates running express such views? How about an AOC vs Vance race? They're both appealing to enough of the base that they could win their respective primaries, so it's certainly within the realm of possibility.
Not good.
-
The key to satisfaction with government is lowered expectations
If only that would assuage what's bothering me. If only.
-
please don’t be obtuse. It’s unbecoming of a man with your intellect and character. That’s not what I wrote and you know it.
Then why don't you explain what you meant by "For some reason, I doubt God is wringing His hands over any of it…"
Because I'm doing a fair amount of hand wringing here, and it's not due to my lack of faith.
God is concerned, of course. He is more heartbroken than we mere mortals are. But He knows the future and doesn’t have our angst and worry.
I personally get in the most trouble in my head when I start telling God how He is supposed to act according to my desires.
-
I personally get in the most trouble in my head when I start telling God how He is supposed to act according to my desires.
This is not about me wishing for something personal or material or frivolous. I am concerned for the safety and well-being of my people. History is a guide of what happens when societies turn against the Jews.
-
both sides have the pretty(ish) moderates and the silly wingnuts. The only question is which one is more visible while they are trying to get elected because once they are elected the nutjob fringe seem to take over.
What's happening now is somewhat different and much more dangerous, I think. It's normal politics to run as a moderate even though that's now how one intends to govern. But what happens when candidates don't even bother running as a moderate? This is going to lead to much more fringe governance, real fringe, like socialism and outright racism.
I read an article a while ago that sounded plausible, although if it's wrong perhaps someone more familiar with the machinations of US politics can offer correction.
The gist of the article is that the primaries are the process whereby a party shakes out a lot of candidates to a small number of candidates, and the process works by appealing to the party faithful. So the moderate is likely to be overlooked because the most vocal fringes want someone who is more of a firebrand, even though the moderate candidate would be appealing to a much broader swathe of the population, including floating voters and moderates on the other side. At the same time the other side is looking for a firebrand, regardless of cross-party appeal. In the middle are the moderates, the independents, and the floating voters who get overlooked and the end result is a right wing nutjob with a red rosette and a left wing nutjob with a blue rosette. The party faithful rally behind the appropriate colored rosette, potentially not even knowing or caring what the person stands for as long as the rosette is the right color, while the growing center ground has to choose between the lesser of two evils with no idea of what will actually happen when whichever one of them gets elected takes office.
-
The gist of the article is that the primaries are the process whereby a party shakes out a lot of candidates to a small number of candidates, and the process works by appealing to the party faithful. So the moderate is likely to be overlooked because the most vocal fringes want someone who is more of a firebrand, even though the moderate candidate would be appealing to a much broader swathe of the population, including floating voters and moderates on the other side.
I mean it depends. Primary voters should be wiser, and pick someone who can win in the general election. I wouldn't like Vance even if he wasn't hanging out with racists and crazies, because he's also not very appealing to moderates, and crossover voters, and minorities... his speeches at TPUSA just threw out the entire Trunp coalition. Trump won by 1% and Vance needs every one of those voters, but he'd rather appeal to the crazies on the fringe of the base.
-
On a similar note, believers identifying with any such political movement can lend voice to seriously evil ideologies, organized antisemitism among them.
And while I'll vote my conscience, right, left, centrist or not at all, my Christian message is the Gospel, not politics or party affiliation. While the Gospel and my Christian faith must inform my political choices, Christian nationalism is false doctrine. The Church is God's nation, inhabiting many nations, and Christ is the head of that spiritual body.
The Church thrived in the age of Nero, et al.
"Radical Centrist" for 11 yrs now, starting around the time of the false accusations and conspiracy notions fluent in 2014 politics.
"Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good." 1Tm 1:3:
(A conspiracy theory is false accusation).
Radical Centrism: Wikipedia https://share.google/RiKpGKHDyWlud3r24 (https://share.google/RiKpGKHDyWlud3r24)
".Some observers see radical centrism as primarily a process of catalyzing dialogue and fresh thinking among polarized people and groups."
-
On a similar note, believers identifying with any such political movement can lend voice to seriously evil ideologies, organized antisemitism among them.
This is indeed a problem. On the other hand, believers not identifying with any political movement leaves them open to be defined by other believers. I don't think you want that.
If you choose not to participate in the world, you have to live in that world that your lack of action created. And so do I.
-
On a similar note, believers identifying with any such political movement can lend voice to seriously evil ideologies, organized antisemitism among them.
A large part of the problem is what looks like a growing tendency to figure that if I vote for Party A it's because I've considered the two parties and concluded that A more closely represents my views even if I disagree with them on some matters. At the same time your vote for Party B means you must fully approve of every single aspect of Party B, including the most extreme nutjobs within the party, and therefore you are an extremist because if you weren't you wouldn't support such extremists. Needless to say my support for Party A doesn't imply any such support of the extremists within my own party because, well, obviously.
-
Yet we then go one step further with the gaslighting and slut shaming with the playground chant of “Tango has cooties because he doesn’t vocally and loudly denounce the people I denounce,” then we back that up by questioning the loyalty of our friends.
Tango has cooties
Shibboleth
Eliot’s “The Hollow Men” comes to mind
-
Tango has cooties
They're responding well to treatment
-
Personally can't see this current administration going much further, so this all becomes very concerning. Maybe only a giddy perception, but not just my own. And mid-terms are a ways off.
-
What does that mean?
“Not going much further”? In what way?
-
Health issues.
-
Speaking of conspiracy theories…
-
Vance told USA Today in August. “And if, God forbid, there’s a terrible tragedy, I can’t think of better on-the-job training than what I’ve gotten over the last 200 days.”
:)
-
That’s a completely truthful statement and says nothing of POTUS’ health
-
Will see.
-
Not a fan of conspiracy theories.
Reality is terrifying enough.
-
But to reiterate an earlier observation concerning, paticularly believers: identifying with a political movement that could brand one as being complicit with policies that misrepresent the faith entirely.
Took less than two days for NY Mayor Mamdami to toss out, by exective actiion, standing orders against antisemitism or it's definition, established by outgoing Mayor Davis.
Mamdami does not believe Israel has a right to exist as a state and his policies will (and do) reflect that sentiment.
The Democratic Socialist party of this obviously popular new Mayor, can be rightfully identified as a "movement" as opposed to merely a party.
"Identity" can bring indelible, tangible consequenses
Whelp! It's been a lot of fun but back out to the wilderness for me.
Be well friends and have a great new year :)
-
People are free to believe in and hold to any political position they choose. However, those who oppose Israel's right to exist will find themselves in opposition to not only Israelis, but God Himself. Anyone who believes in the truth of biblical prophecy (such as Psalms 2) knows how that will turn out.
-
Both the Republican and Democrat parties have been hijacked by radical extremists with opposing agendas, and both are equally out of touch with the average citizen. Choosing between constipation and diarrhea isn't much of a choice.
Ever hear of AIPAC? They are the largest lobbying institution that refuses to register under the foreign agents registration act ( FARA). They financially contribute to 99% of Congress. Republican, Democrat, does not matter. U.S. policices are heavily influenced by another country!
-
Ever hear of AIPAC? They are the largest lobbying institution that refuses to register under the foreign agents registration act ( FARA).
AIPAC doesn't have to register as a foreign agent. Its members are all US citizens using their First Amendment right to organize and give their concerns to the US government.