A blog about politics.

More on Khalidi and Antisemitism

My friend Jeff Goldberg, author of Prisoners, which is one of the very best books I've read about the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, takes me to task, rightly, for some wordplay I engaged in yesterday while  excoriating the vile McCain spokesman, Michael Goldfarb for calling Khalid Rashidi an antisemite. And while the term, antisemitism, will always retain its traditional meaning--anti-Jewishness--it does conflate certain categories: there are those who just hate Jews, and then there are those who merely disapprove of zionism...and a third category, those who accept the idea of a Jewish state, but disapprove of Israeli expansion into the West Bank and Gaza. People like Goldfarb--and far too many other Jewish neoconservatives--go around calling people like Rashidi antisemites when, in fact, they're merely opposed to the more egregious expansionist schemes favored by the some of the more extreme members of the Likud Party. Indeed, Goldberg defends Khalidi:

But about Khalidi -- he's a fierce partisan of the Palestinian cause, of course, and in my conversations with him, and in his writing, I see that his sympathies frequently cause him to distort Middle East history. But an anti-Semite? I don't think so. In fact, Rashid Khalidi is one of the rare Palestinian advocates who argues, as he has with me, that Arabs must study Jewish history, including and especially the history of Jew-hatred, in order to better understand Israel, and to reach a compromise with it.

Jeff, however, goes on to make a truly foolish argument about my efforts to call out a small group of Jewish neoconservatives for their disgraceful, bullying behavior and their dangerous influence on John McCain's and the Bush Administration's foreign policy:

I know that Joe derives great pleasure from criticizing Jewish supporters of the Iraq War -- the Wolfowitzes, Perles and Feiths --in specifically Jewish terms, while never seeming to use the Christianity of other supporters of the war, including Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, and other such marginal figures, against them. I don't like the double-standard, but it's part of the rough and tumble.

No, Jeff, I don't derive great pleasure from it. I'm pretty anguished about it. As a Jew, I'm embarrassed by these extremists and outraged by their assumption that they represent mainstream Jewish opinion in this country. Furthermore, I don't use the Christianity of Bush et al against them because their Christianity had nothing to do with their support for the war. For people like Doug Feith et al, their Jewish identity--their ethnic nationalism, not the religious part of it--had an awful lot to do with their plumping for war with Iraq and, more recently, Iran. Feith et al advised Binyamin Netanyahu, in a paper called "A Clean Break," to go to war with Iraq when he was Prime Minister in order to protect Israel. I find the conflation, by some Jewish neoconservatives, of Israel's interests and America's--and their truly dangerous misreading of both--to be appalling. But much worse is their rush to pin the tag of antisemitism on anyone who disagrees with them, including me.

And even worse than that is the McCain campaign's tendency, driven by thugs like Goldfarb, to imply that Barack Obama is soft on Islamic terrorism--and perhaps even a closet Muslim himself--by linking his name with people who have Arab names like Rashid Khalidi. This is the vilest form of anti-Americanism. And, happily, it appears not to be working this year.

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (47)
Post a Comment »
  1. Jeffrey Golberg may be the world's most intrepid reporter, and certainly our most intrepid Zionist pundit, but clearly he stole his argument from a certain commenter. http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/10/30/and-lower/#comment-13704 . And Klein, I think you know better. Give commenters their due! Digital democracy! Naw just kidding. You guys are all right.

  2. Glenn, has a column today noting the heat you've been taking and also noting how the standard neocon playbook seems to be backfiring;

    Here's my comment from his thread:

    Count me among those who, quite independent of my concern over who wins on Tuedsay and quite independent of my concern over what would happen if Randy Scheunemann was allowed withing 1/2 mile of the Oval office, is nevertheless quite gratified to see that the old Rove playbook is failing to work.

    People remember when McCain said he was going to run an honorable campaign and the fact that he has reneged on that promise is the number one reason why he's behind. The Number two reason is that the Palin pick revealed to the world that he doesn't actually care about the health of our country and that he's willing to sacrifice the nation's well-being in exchange for his own.

    The fact that these tactics are failing provides me with significant hope and renews my faith in the American electorate. Let's hope that my faith is not misdirected!

    I'll go on to mention that I do seem to remember an instance of you noting the basic hypocrisy behind being a war-cheerleading Christian. It was a number of weeks ago, but its worth recalling because it does negate the entire of the paragraph you quoted.

  3. This is a very worthwhile conversation, if bloody. Let everyone affix the labels on their presumed opponents openly that they have been doing in private. Everyone will then peel them off screeching, and what's left will be a more open discussion of what to do going forward in the region. It will be more possible to do it in the light of an Obama administration than the dark of Cheney's vault.

  4. .
    And even more on Khalidi, from Harper's Scott Horton and Juan Cole.

  5. Joe Klein,
    .
    People are just taking shots at you to help raise their profile. You were technically right that Khalidi is in fact a semite. And bigger than that the fact that you pointed it out will actually elevate the conversation in this country to see what words actually mean. Goldberg asserts that because some Jew-Hater "created" the term to only mean Jews that you and everybody else should just allow the term to stand that way. But in the same breath he himself says he prefers to say "jew-hater" so as to not confuse the term. If semites are not exclusively jews then people who spew hatred toward's jews should not be labeled anti-semetic. They should be called anti-jewish or racist. Goldberg tries to compare you to an anti semite by saying that the only people he has ever heard explain that palestinians are also semites are people who hate Jews. Funny how he justifies smearing you by saying you told the truth. WOW. But the best part was the quote that he tries to use to hang the term of anti semitism around your neck. He quotes someone as saying palestinians are the "only true semites". Now even a fool can see that the statement has nothing to do with your post from yesterday. You never said palestinians were the ONLY semites. Goldberg is just grasping at straws because you had the nerve to stand up for a palestinian. Notice that for as long as his post is he gives maybe two lines to defending Khalidi in the most lukewarm of fashions. Again I don't think you should be apolgizing to this guy for telling the truth simply because he wants to make the case that because the term has been historically used incorrectly then you must be wrong. Thats bunk and I hope you change your post to reflect that.

  6. Keep up the good work, Joe. The more you make clear that Jewish does not equal Neocon and Jewish does not equal Zionist, the better it will be for everyone involved. These Neocons insist on coining anyone who disagrees with far-right Likud policies an anti-Semite, and frankly I find it to be the last refuge of a coward.
    .
    Argue the merits of the case as best you can (neocons/ Zionists), but you simply will have to eventually acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to criticize Israel and doing so in and of itself does not represent anti-Semitism.

  7. Furthermore, I don't use the Christianity of Bush et al against them because their Christianity had nothing to do with their support for the war.

    Wow. You're kidding yourself there. Where, exactly, have you been through the Bush years? I don't know about "et al", but Bush has repeatedly described this war in religious terms, from his semi-comprehending use of the word "crusade" to his maudlin nattering about "freedom is our Creator's gift," and we are called upon to spread it. Then there's his reported, and to my mind only too credible declaration that "God told me to strike al Qaeda, and I did; then God told me to strike Saddam, and I did." His simple minded references to "the evil doers" and "the enemy", singular, a mass noun representing a metaphysical force, not a complex array of historical and geo-political forces.
    And as for "et al", I'll let others discuss Condi, Rummy, and Teh Dark Lord, but "Joe The Plumber", a Bush American if ever there was one--proudly, aggressively ignorant and absurdly confident in his righteousness--referred to the Iraq War in Xian terms last week. Jerry Boykin and "my god is stronger than your god"? To say nothing of the John Hagee types who see this war as only the first step in the coming Armageddon, a necessary part of which is the final elimination of the last Kingdom of Israel (didn't Joe Lieberman refer to Hagee as Moses? Fanaticism makes for strange bedfellows). I'm sure others could think of myriad examples that don't come to the top of my head before that first cup of coffee.
    And bring back preview.

  8. stuck in moderation yet again

  9. .
    Wrong link for the Juan Cole piece on Khalidi, sorry.

  10. Hey Joe,
    .
    Obama's got your back. He kicked the Washington Times NY Post and Dallas Morning news off his plane starting Sunday

  11. More chaos in Pakistan. And more misleading news coverage on CNN - Pakistan isn't complaining about missile strikes against the Taliban, it's complaining about missile strikes that kill civilians. Perhaps the strikes are necessary in spite of the civilian casualties, but it's not helpful to ignore why Pakistanis are so opposed to the attacks: they've just sustained a massive earthquake, and a series of retaliatory suicide bombs, so American missiles killing women and children are not going to be that popular right now.

  12. I'm stuck in moderation, because my post was full of "sad" words that guarantee moderation. This needs to change - it's been about a week already. Seriously, I do not want to write a post on the situation in Pakistan saying ki!l.

  13. Joe, you are going to lose your readership if you don't get your readers out of moderation and soon.
    .
    Just saying.

  14. sg, you got a linkie for that news?

  15. Ouch. From Kos:

    Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 10/28-30. Likely voters. MoE 4% (No trend lines)

    McCain (R) 48
    Obama (D) 47

    Early voters (17 percent of sample)

    McCain (R) 42
    Obama (D) 54

    I can't believe we may actually win Arizona. And I have a bonus treat for you guys:

    If the 2010 election for U.S. Senate were held today for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Janet Napolitano the Democrat and John McCain the Republican?

    McCain (R) 45
    Napolitano (D) 53

  16. You are correct to point to the fact that "mainstream Jewish opinion" is hardly on the extremes. It may be worth nothing that nowhere else is there a more animated and serious discourse on Israel and Palestine isssues than Israel itself. I have sat in on hot inter family discussions and come away very appreciatuve of the fact that many Israelis are torn about the way Palestinians are forced to live their lives separated by so many artificial barriers. etc, etc. The lousiest and most ignorant commentary is to be found from those who are furthest from the day to day issues facing Israelis, inhabiting think tanks where the last thing they do is serious and honest thinking.

  17. Wait, the link for the news about the WashTimes et al. being removed from the plane for space reasons is over at Politico.
    .
    Here's the punchline: There's only a total of 14 comments at Calderone's blog expressing angst at Obama's Stalinist oppression of the media.
    .
    Now, that's entertainment.

  18. Jeffrey Goldberg is guilty of writing the same dishonesty concerning the war in Iraq that Judy Miller wrote. Why the double standard?
    .
    Anyway, Joe Klein has criticized Christian extremists:

    The Jewish lobby does, sadly, have a profound impact on American foreign policy, especially upon the Bush Administration—but so do the evangelical Christians who see support for Israel as part of the bizarre end-game laid out in the Book of Revelations.

    .
    It would appear that, once again, Jeffrey Goldberg is wrong.

  19. Is this the NEW new format?

  20. Wow this is crazy

  21. actually it IS easier to read posts now lol

  22. Wow, this site is absolutely falling apart. What a letdown after this amazing campaign season.

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Swampland Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's Swampland in your inbox and never miss a day.

/wp-content/themes/vip/timebasic2/config/parameters/default/article_video.php