by Peter Beinart Info
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, is now available from HarperCollins. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
Enter your email address:
Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:
Message:
Enter your email address:
Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:
Message:
People in New York protest the proposed construction of a mosque near the World Trade Center site Sunday, June 6, 2010. (Photo: Swoan Parker / AP Photo) The Anti-Defamation League's opposition to building a mosque at the site of the 9/11 attacks betrays its own founding principles. Peter Beinart on the Jewish group's Muslim double standard.
The other day, when the Anti-Defamation League came out against building a mosque near Ground Zero, I think I heard a sound—the sound of chickens coming home to roost.
The ADL calls itself “the nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency.” Coming from an explicitly Jewish organization, that’s an audacious claim. But it’s an inspiring one, too. The ADL was born in 1913, after a Georgia jury falsely convicted a Jewish factory owner named Leo Frank of murdering a Christian employee. The men who defamed, and later lynched, Frank were anti-Semites. But they were not only anti-Semites. Three months after Frank’s murder, some of his tormenters met on Georgia’s Stone Mountain to refound the Ku Klux Klan, an organization that would now dedicate itself not merely to terrorizing African-Americans, but to terrorizing Catholics and Jews as well.
What if white victims of African-American crime protested the building of a black church in their neighborhood? Or gentile victims of Bernie Madoff protested the building of a synagogue?
Against this backdrop, the founders of the ADL made their organization a kind of mirror image of the Klan. If the Klan saw anti-Semitism as one component of the struggle to maintain white, Protestant supremacy, the ADL would make its opposition to anti-Semitism one component of the struggle against white, Protestant supremacy. If bigotry was indivisible, anti-bigotry would be indivisible too. “The immediate object of the League is to stop, by appeals to reason and conscience and, if necessary, by appeals to law, the defamation of the Jewish people,” declared the ADL’s charter. “Its ultimate purpose is to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike and to put an end forever to unjust and unfair discrimination against and ridicule of any sect or body of citizens.”
For much of the 20th century, the ADL lived this mission well. It opposed Joe McCarthy, lobbied for civil rights, and denounced the anti-Catholic bigots who insinuated that John F. Kennedy would take orders from Rome. Then came the creation of the state of Israel. For the ADL, Israel posed a conundrum: the conundrum of Jewish power. In the United States, it was relatively easy to oppose all forms of discrimination while still serving particular Jewish interests, since Jews—by virtue of their place in society—were bigotry’s victims but rarely its main perpetrators. But Israel was different. While Israel’s Jews certainly suffered from Arab bigotry and violence, the Jewish state also perpetrated a great deal of bigotry and violence itself, especially after 1967, when it made itself occupier of millions of Palestinians to whom it denied the vote.
Had the ADL genuinely tried to apply its universalistic mandate to the Jewish state, it would have become something like the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) or B’Tselem (full disclosure: I’m on B’Tselem’s American board): Israeli human rights organizations that struggle against all forms of bigotry, and thus end up spending a lot of time defending Muslims and Christian Palestinians against discrimination by Jews. But the ADL hasn’t done that. Instead it has become, in essence, two organizations. In the United States, it still links the struggle against anti-Semitism to the struggle against bigotry against non-Jews. In Israel, by contrast, it largely pretends that government-sponsored bigotry against non-Jews does not exist. When Arizona passes a law that encourages police to harass Latinos, the ADL expresses outrage. But when Israel builds 170 kilometers of roads in the West Bank for the convenience of Jewish settlers, from which Palestinians are wholly or partially banned, the ADL takes out advertisements declaring, “The Problem Isn’t Settlements.”
12 August 2, 2010 | 6:42am Twitter Emails
Enter your email address:
Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:
Message:
The WTC was bombed in 1993 and again in 2001 by fanatical Muslims. The horrible slaughter of 3,000 innocent Americans on 9/11 should dictate some decorum. A Mosque near that site is not only offensive, it is dangerous. Muslim terrorists are non-discriminating in their murdering. They kill their own in Mosques all the time all over the world. This is a very bad idea.
Just a note on facts. The 3000 killed in the WTC attack were not all Americans and included Muslims. The racism and anti-American stance expressed and implied in these statements exacerbates an already tragic situation. Religious fanaticism in this country and the rest of the world continues to be a major contributor to hate and war.
yankee, there is no "religious fanaticism" either in this country or elsewhere in the world that rivals that of radical Islam and to say there is is lying. 9/11 was meant to strike at the heart of America; that others were included in the death toll is coincidence. It is not racism to state that all terrorism is carried out by Muslims, it is fact. And, spare me the McVeigh example as he was not illustrative of any movement.
Speaking of facts, for two millenia one of the greatest official perpetrators of anti-semitism, genocide, violence, repression of women and minorities and spreading of superstition was the Catholic church, which may have finally renounced the "Christ killer" libel but continues to have, shall we say, some issues that it needs to address within its ranks. Does that mean you picket if someone tries to build a church in your neighborhood? Go ahead, I'll wait.
So the terrorists win - not only did they get what they wanted by motivating a massive, bankrupting military response from our country, they have also won by convincing us that our own principles aren't really principles, just convenient beliefs for the weak-willed among us. I believe in our religious freedom. Build the fucking mosque, and let's stop pretending that a peaceful Muslim presence is more of a victory for terrorists than for our own principles of freedom.
Are we to infer that the muslims killed were not Americans?Racism??
wareagle:"It is not racism to state that all terrorism is carried out by Muslims..." is correct. But it is "racism" to penalize all (1.57 billion worldwide) Muslims for terrorism.It would also be "racism" for Muslims to say that all Christians are terrorists because over one million or so Muslims died as a result of the attack on Iraq.
@Wareagle82: ....actually pointing to the actions of people who live in underdeveloped nations whose foundations of human rights and "democracy" are tenuous if not nonexistent is really a lame argument. And Timothy McVeigh is a perfect example. By and large numbers of tea party members and numerous rightwing libertarians consider McVeigh a hero. To say that he wasn't illustrative of any movement is to ignore the numerous attempts by rightwingers wound up by Glen Beck and Sarah Palin's (target blog) to try to kill as many liberals as possible...or shoot up Holocause museums, Unitarian churces or bomb abortion clinics, Federal Buildings (with a plane or anything else) Recently the Courage Campaign managed to document NOM (National Organisation for Marriage) rallies where organisers held signs that exhorted others to murder homosexuals citing biblical scripture...there were christian militia members that only a couple of months ago arrested for planning an ambush against local law enforcement. In various places in the US some tea party politicians and political hopefuls have campaigned urging a christian form of sharia law be imposed on the US and a form of theocracy replace our constitutional republic. And these are all numerous deeds committed by people living in a modern industrial nation. These are christians. But these are extremists... christian extremists. And all religions have them. The Iraq War had nothing to do with 9/11 and there were no WMD's.Nearly a million iraqis killed, maimed and a millions displaced...one could argue that our invasion was an act of terrorism on a muslim population.
HELP! I just dragged out a copy of my Constitution. The one that I keep in my desk. The First Amendment is gone. Hey, wait a minute. Maybe that's not so bad. Who needs freedom of religion anyway? Just think. No more religious shelter for pedophiles. No more days off for religious holidays. We can call Christmas what it is - Great Retail Salesmas. Life is about Santas and Easter Bunnies and Tooth Fairies, not these mean gods who gonna roast you forever for liking sex and stuff. And that damned church that rings those bells every Sunday. Hello "disturbing the peace". No more tax deductions for sin forgiveness. You gonna get hammered with a gen-u-wine sin tax.Maybe we really ought to look this who thing over. If we don't need a first amendment, MAYBE we don't need a second amendment.
Reply to deweydecible;Our Constitution is not a recipe for suicide as Jefferson warned, but it will be if enough Americans, like you, continue to deny the nature of Islamic terrorism. This enemy bombs civilians and beheads American captives while our Commander in Chief is afraid to call the Fort Hood murderer a terrorist for fear of offending Muslims. Permitting a mosque on the site of 9/11 might be a triumph of religious freedom for you. For millions of Muslims who regard freedom of religion as evil, it signifies another victory of Islam over America. Wake up.
"Permitting a mosque on the site of 9/11 might be a triumph of religious freedom for you. For millions of Muslims who regard freedom of religion as evil, it signifies another victory of Islam over America."WTF does that even mean? America loses because we stand by our founding principles? Because we do what is right and not what would be done somewhere else? Ignorance. Pure Ignorance.
bottomline..................i was in NY last june. i talked to people at a wedding reception were people had let their hair down a bit. those who lived and worked on manhattan assured me there will be a revolt the minute anyone actually starts to build such a mosque.
wareagle82 - Zionims is a 'reglious fanatacism' that is at the heart of the violence in the middel east.General Patreaus himself said publicly that Americas unilateral support for Israel is the #1 issue that puts our own soldiers at risk.
Read Full Article »