PrintDemocrats and anti-Semites
We are not alone. Other thinkers are joining Richard Baehr in noting that the Democrats are sliding down the slippery slope toward becoming the party of anti—Semites. This is a tragedy not just for American Jews and Israel, but for the Democrats and for all Americans.
Writing in The American Digest, Gerard Van der Leun states:
Ever since the election of 2000, the previously controllable dementia of the Democratic Party has metastasized. That loss, coupled with the subsequent Republican victories in local, state, and now national elections in 2004, has driven the Democratic Party not so much as towards its left as towards its loonies.
The Democratic Party today is nothing so much as a living demonstration of a kind of Gresham's Law of Politics: "Bad ideology drives good ideology out of politics." The more hate drives any party, the less appealing that party is to decent people and the more appealing it becomes to people who hold degenerate political and social ideas. As those party members increase, the more moderate and moral members either shift parties or take themselves to the sidelines. This increases the power of the decadent Democrats which drives out more of the decent ones. And so it goes.
As that inexorable demographic shift continues, the sources of funding become more and more Sorosified and the small donor base more and more resembles MoveOn.org on steroids. What you are left with is a party that makes a lot of noise and huffs and puffs a lot, but takes on a real political struggle at its peril, lest it be seen to be, as it is, losing power to an alarming degree.
These changes are not lost on political creatures such as Durbin, who has been in the game since 1982. All these Washington lifers know is that staying in the game is the most important thing. Retaining power is far more important than decency, honesty, or the demonstration that you do indeed know something about history. That sort of thing is for, well, political suckers who don't know how to get re—elected and how to keep the reduced fountains of Democratic funding flowing their way.
Some might say that Durbin's statement, therefore, represents the cynical thoughts of a cynical manipulative politician. And they do, but that is not all they represent. In a very real and concrete way, Durbin's comments represent the current attitudes and beliefs of the party he represents. He is, after all, a "representative." As that party shrinks in ideals and beliefs into an increasingly insignificant role in American life, Durbin is there, as whip, to ensure that the surviving representatives of the Party toe the Party line.
Meanwhile, at Newsmax, John L. Perry writes:
What's been almost—entirely overlooked in all this is the sinister stain of anti—Semitism that Durbin's outburst made manifest.
When Durbin was saying what happened to Gitmo detainees was like what happened to those 11 million Nazi victims — more than half of them Jews — he was also, by definition, saying what happened during the Holocaust was no worse than what happened at Gitmo.
It has long been a party line of Nazi apologists and history revisionists that what went on in those Nazi camps — the brutal torture, the slave labor, the gas ovens, the soap factories, the lamp—shade artifacts, the mass graves — either never took place, or has been almost—laughably over—exaggerated.
More than that, the legend of a mythical Holocaust has been the central lynchpin of post—World War II anti—Semitism. Jews and other survivors and families of survivors of the Holocaust have been having for more than half a century to fight off such lies and slander.
How to Un—say the Unspeakable?
And now along comes a United States senator from, of all places, Abraham Lincoln's hometown, one Dick Durbin, trivializing all those monstrous horrors — and, when confronted with his mass slander, refusing even to apologize.
Apologize? Durbin is probably right. How could he possibly atone for such an outrage with a mere apology?
This canard that Durbin inflicted upon the Holocaust victims, dead or alive, was no mere politician's stunt, a tawdry bid for public notice, as the Chicago Tribune sought to shrug it off in an editorial: Just ignore him.
Durbin is no intellectual giant, but he's not altogether stupid. He had to have known what he was doing. He's been around the Senate long enough to have found his way to the men's room and back by now.
Speaking in Code
This was the worst sort of anti—Semitism. Lacking the candidness of an outright anti—Semitic slanderer, Durbin slithered around and used the rhetorical device of invidious comparison.
This long has been a part — alas, a growing part — of European culture, especially in France, where anti—Semitism thrives. Of late, it has gained ground in the United States.
The most—recent sneaky version of anti—Semitism is the nudge—nudge, wink—wink vendetta against foreign—policy "new—conservatives" (neo—cons) in the Bush administrations who favor survival of Israel over terrorism by Palestinians.
The Durbin ploy is cast from the same, sick mold.
What has been the reaction of Durbin's Democratic colleagues? Mostly silence, not a common trait among those who jump at each little chance to blister Republicans.
