Dem
47
GOP
53
If today were not Friday, the headline of this item would have been "Who is the next Jew up?"
What could be the meaning of such a headline? Well, for our purposes, the current Jew up is George Soros. He is at the center of a million right-wing conspiracy theories, primarily as the funder of pretty much every protest big enough to make the news. This line of thinking channels centuries-old antisemitic tropes about how everything in the world is secretly run by Jewish puppetmasters. From where we sit, it's hard for us to accept that someone can indulge in that particular conspiratorial tradition without revealing something instructive about themselves.
The wee problem, for the conspiracists, is that Soros is 95. He's already handed off control of his business empire, and he can't be too far removed from shuffling off this mortal coil. So, when he's gone, who will become the new focus of the conspiratorial thinking? The right-wingers who want to deny the legitimacy of any and all protests NEED someone to play the role of puppetmaster. And again, thanks to centuries of antisemitic propaganda, the pump is primed for that person to be Jewish. Hence the question: Who is the next Jew up? Our guess is Soros' son Alexander, who is only 40 and who now manages his father's financial interests. Our dark horse guess is Steven Spielberg, who is wealthy, liberal, Jewish and very recognizable.
The larger point here is that there is a substantial undercurrent of antisemitism in many modern right-wing movements, and in nearly all far-right-wing and right-wing populist movements. And there is certainly such an undercurrent in Trumpism. Beyond the conspiratorial thinking that could practically have come out of the pages of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, there are also plenty of out-and-out antisemites who don't even bother cloaking their views in encoded language. That list includes Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Nick Fuentes and several others who have rubbed elbows with Donald Trump on more than one occasion. The people who actually work for the administration tend to be more cautious, most of the time, but not always. For example, before he got canned, ICE Obergruppenführer Greg Bovino indulged in antisemitic remarks at the expense of U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Daniel Rosen on more than one occasion. It's true, Bovino did eventually lose his job, but he didn't lose it because of what he said about Rosen.
We don't believe, for a moment, that Trump or his underlings actually care about antisemitism, per se. And we've heard from many readers who feel the same way. For example, reader M.R. in San Diego wrote in to comment on Trump's effort to exclude Gov. Jared Polis (D-CO) from the annual meeting with the 55 state and territorial governors: "Also worth mentioning is that Polis is Jewish. The 'least antisemitic president' actually hates Jews unless they are: (1) in his family, (2) helping him personally, or (3) Roy Cohn. Add that Polis is a gay Jew in a state Trump feels he should have won, and his snub makes more sense."
We think it is not controversial to say that Trump's pretensions, when it comes to Jews, are fueled entirely by self-interest. The faux Zionism that the President and his underlings perform has little to nothing to do with Jewish self-determination or creating a safe space for those victimized by antisemitism elsewhere. It is driven by two things: (1) that support for Israel pleases evangelicals, who see Jewish control of that area as a precondition for the commencement of end times, and (2) that support for Israel is a poke in the eye of Islamic nations, most obviously Iran.
Trump's "concern" about antisemitism, specifically, is also motivated by self-interest. Specifically, he and his underlings have figured out that if they claim that [UNIVERSITY X] is antisemitic, then that gives cover for the administration's war against higher education. In just the last week, Trump used Harvard's alleged antisemitism as pretext for demanding $1 billion from the school. A few weeks before that, the administration sued the University of Pennsylvania because it did not comply with demands to hand over a list of all Jewish students and faculty. We don't exactly know what purpose such information would be used for, but anyone who has any sensitivity whatsoever when it comes to antisemitism would surely appreciate the unpleasant historical overtones of such a demand.
We think the two previous paragraphs cover about 95% of what fuels the Trump White House when it comes to Jews. And if this faux Zionism and faux concern about antisemitism also peel off some conservative/conservative-leaning Jewish voters, then that's just a bonus.
But again, the problem, politically speaking, is that there's a lot of antisemitism interwoven with Trumpism. And while the antisemites have largely played along for the first year or so of Trump v2.0, things are definitely fraying at the seams. That brings us to Carrie Prejean Boller, who is (or maybe was) a member of the White House's Religious Liberty Commission. Her qualification for that post is that... she was once a contestant in one of the beauty pageants that Trump owned. She's also a far-right, pro-Catholic activist and a good friend of Owens.
There is, of course, zero chance that the White House's Religious Liberty Commission is actually intended to promote religious liberty. It's meant to promote the notion that the White House cares about the religious liberty of people who follow the "correct" religions. This week's meeting was specifically tailored to communicate that the administration really and truly cares about antisemitism. As long as they were talking about left-wing antisemitism (on college campuses), then everyone was happy as a clam. But then Prejean Boller decided to wade into the question of whether it's antisemitic to oppose Israel, and things quickly went off the rails. And once the meeting was adjourned, the squabble continued on eX-Twitter. We'd say that if you want to understand where Prejean Boller is coming from, her re-tweet of an Owens tweet pretty much tells the tale: "Zionists are naturally hostile to Catholics because we refuse to bend the knee to revisionist history and support the mass slaughter and rape of innocent children for occult Baal worshipers."
In response to all of this, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R-TX), who is also chair of the Religious Liberty Commission, told Prejean Boller that she's no longer a member. She is refusing to abide by that, and says she will only accept removal if the order comes from Trump himself. So, the President is theoretically going to have to pick a side, after having spent a year-plus trying to be Switzerland in this particular dispute.
Will he actually take a side? And will this drive a wedge between members of his base? We have no idea. But we do know that this is one of several uncomfortable alliances that has made Trumpism possible. And the more time that goes on, and the more he fails to deliver after having promised everything to everyone, and the closer he gets to being out of power, the harder it is going to be for these uncomfortable alliances to hold together. (Z)