George Mason University's
History News Network
HNN Teacher's Edition
Purposeful Anti-Semitism
By far most people who are anti-Semitic have nothing tangible to gain from their viewpoint except maybe fitting in and the base psychological comfort of feeling unearned superiority to fellow human beings. However, there is a small but powerful group that provides an exception to this rule, politicians. Certainly, anti-Semitism gave Hitler a very useful tool with which to build his totalitarian society. In a perceptive column Paul Greenberg reminds us that this vile instrument is still available and being widely employed today. He begins by writing that “it was the always observant Mary McCarthy who observed that anti-Semitism is the one form of intellectuality that appealed to stupid people. But she may have overlooked its appeal to ambitious politicians, too. They're always on the lookout for some mania they can use for their own purposes. Whether to seize power at the beginning of their rise or to hold onto it at the end. Or anytime in between.”

One modern use of anti-Semitism is to raise funds for National Public Radio (NPR). Much in the news today is a meeting between conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe and two NPR executives Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley. The NPR people mistakenly thought they were sitting down with two representatives of the Muslim Education Action Center (MEAC) a group fronting for the Muslim Brotherhood about to donate five million dollars. A video of this encounter is drawing attention for remarks by Schiller and Liley disparaging Tea Party members and Republicans as well as a statement of belief that in the long run NPR would be better off without federal funding. Less talked about is the fact that these NPR leaders were willing to make a deal that could not help but influence their content in an anti-Semitic direction. They sought funding from what they believed was a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization with strong historic ties to Nazism. Seldom has the media bias against the Jewish people in Israel been so clearly explained and blatantly put on display.

Cross posted on The Trebach Report.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by mbrady on Tue, 2011-03-15 23:52.
But they didn't! And follow the new link I've posted in the other thread.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by khalderman on Tue, 2011-03-15 22:29.
I say taking money from an organization rooted in Nazism and dedicated to the slaughter of the Jewish people living in Israel for the purpose of producing propaganda is an anti-Semitic act.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by mbrady on Tue, 2011-03-15 21:48.
I agree with you that antisemitism can be subtle and implicit, but Mr. Schiller isn't antisemitic in any shape or form.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by khalderman on Tue, 2011-03-15 17:09.
Something does not have to be blatant or explicit to be anti-Semitic. Also, your link does not go to the article you reference.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by mbrady on Tue, 2011-03-15 14:54.
Nonsense. See my other comment where Christopher Caldwell of The Weekly Standard, hardly a hotbed of antisemitism, defends Mr. Schiller from accusations of antisemitism.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by khalderman on Tue, 2011-03-15 12:44.
In order to take your criticisms seriously one has to believe that the Muslim Brotherhood is only anti-Zionist and not anti-Semitic, a ridiculous belief. Perhaps the NPR executives were planning on screwing over these donors and not putting forth their viewpoint but I doubt that because they would have wanted another 5 million dollars the following year. If this had been a actual donation next year we probably would have all been listening to a musical version of the Protocols of Zion. The essence of your argument is that nothing wrong was going on here is refuted by the second video released which makes it clear that the Muslim Brotherhood and NPR did not want the American government or the American people to know what was going on and if the encounter had been real we would not have.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by mbrady on Tue, 2011-03-15 02:50.
Of course, someone can be both antisemitic and anti-Zionist, but so what? You haven't addressed the substance of either of my posts.

And what's more

Submitted by mbrady on Sun, 2011-03-13 19:42.
In the weekend edition of the Financial Times, Christopher Caldwell, a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, writes:

"The two Project Veritas actors went to extraordinary lengths to goad Mr Schiller into saying – or assenting to – something anti-Semitic. He did not. It was an impressive refusal to give ground."

Re: And what's more

Submitted by mbrady on Tue, 2011-03-15 21:56.
If the link above doesn't work for you, try this.

Not persuaded

Submitted by mbrady on Fri, 2011-03-11 16:44.
I'm just not persuaded, and I wonder if anyone else is, that the video supports your assertions that:

(1) "One modern use of anti-Semitism is to raise funds for National Public Radio (NPR)."

(2) "Less talked about is the fact that these NPR leaders were willing to make a deal that could not help but influence their content in an anti-Semitic direction."

(3) "Seldom has the media bias against the Jewish people in Israel been so clearly explained and blatantly put on display."

Arguments against Zionism are not the same as antisemitism.

Re: Not persuaded

Submitted by khalderman on Mon, 2011-03-14 21:43.
The murder of those little children in Itamar was both an anti-Semitic and znti-Zionist act.