RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-radicalism-of-intersectionality

For years, left-wing intellectuals have treated “intersectionality” as an inevitability. The social theory, which holds that all oppressed peoples must join together to overthrow their common oppressor, has been an essential strategy of the Left.

There is some truth to this theory. When the fortunes of the Left are rising, intersectionality seems like a juggernaut: identity groups get aggregated into the mass, internal conflicts are subordinated to the cause of liberation, and a policy of “no enemies to the left” shifts political life in favor of the radicals. But the aura of inevitability surrounding the intersectional coalition is an illusion; moments of crisis can bring suppressed contradictions to the surface and begin a process of fragmentation.

The recent Hamas terror campaign against Israel might become such a crisis. Following the attack, the foot soldiers of intersectionality—most notably, Black Lives Matter (BLM), the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the academic “decolonization” movement—celebrated the militants who murdered civilians, raped women, and butchered babies. BLM’s Chicago chapter published a graphic lionizing the Hamas paraglider terrorists who killed innocents. The DSA blamed Israel for the terror attack against it, arguing that it was the “direct result of Israel’s apartheid regime.” Ivy League professors with expertise in “decolonization” called it a “stunning victory” and said that “Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle.”

For years, these academics and groups had been able to hide their ideological commitments and operate with an air of respectability. But after last week’s statements, they have encountered a well-deserved backlash. Jewish groups, including the generally left-wing Anti-Defamation League, have condemned BLM’s anti-Semitism. A Democratic congressman quit the DSA in protest. Major donors have rebuked Ivy League universities for failing to condemn Hamas forcefully. The Financial Times warned that the “left’s take on Hamas” could lead to a “Democratic party split.”

While the backlash against the radical Left’s support of terror is welcome, that support should not have come as a surprise. All of the groups have long promoted the violent “decolonization” of not just Israel but also the United States.

BLM has promoted this ideological line since its inception. In 2015, BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors led a delegation to the Palestinian territories, so that the group’s activists could learn from the “Palestinian struggle.” She condemned Israel as an “apartheid state,” and the running theme of the trip was revolution, “from Ferguson to Palestine.” The same year, Cullors signed a statement drawing parallels between the Palestinian fight against Israel and the black one against America. During a speech at Harvard Law School, Cullors went further, telling the audience: “If we don’t step up boldly and courageously to end the imperialist project called Israel, we’re doomed.”

https://themessenger.com/opinion/hamas-attack-israel-critics-palestinians-middle-east-myths

With 1,300 Israeli Jews slaughtered and nearly 200 taken hostage, what’s more infuriating: that critics presume to tell Jerusalem how to conduct a war and run its government or that their views are shaped by blind ignorance and naïve hope?

To its critics in America, Israel’s next steps are straightforward. Yes, hunt down Hamas, but don’t let innocent Palestinians die, shelve a judicial reform plan that offends us, and make peace with the Palestinians.

The right path must seem obvious to those who don’t recall (or weren’t alive) when 3,000 deaths on 9/11 shook us to our core, uniting us amid calls across the political spectrum that Washington do whatever it must (with no caveats attached) to prevent another attack. And that call to action came after just one attack from afar — and not, as in Israel, after relentless attacks across the border since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and Hamas seized control of it from the Palestinian Authority in a violent coup in 2007.

The right path must seem even more obvious now that we Americans no longer fear another 9/11 — and that, unlike Israel, we don’t live with genocidal terrorist groups on two borders; a nearby regime (in Tehran) that funds, arms, and directs them; other nations in a turbulent region that remain at war with us; and a global community that focuses undue attention on our imperfections.

Critics concede that “Israel has a right to defend itself” (words that demean the Jewish state because they’re simply assumed about other countries rather than having to be voiced), but they also say in defending itself, Israel should take only “proportionate” action, lest it ignite another “cycle of violence” — i.e., anti-Israeli terror for which critics will later blame Jerusalem for responding.

Do Israel’s knee-jerk critics have open minds? Are they willing to view the slaughter of October 7 and Jerusalem’s response in the context of larger realities? If so, here are three myths for them to revisit:

https://www.thefp.com/p/tgif-guilty-until-proven-innocent?utm_campaign=email-post&r=8t06w&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

The blood libel heard ’round the world: So let us get this straight: terrorists burst across the border of Israel, slaughtered innocents, raped women, took captives—including toddlers who remain in their hands—then accidentally exploded a rocket in their own Gaza hospital parking lot, and somehow, in all of this, Israel is still the bad guy. 

Let’s start with the rocket. As soon as it went off, Hamas blamed Israel, which in turn said it needed a minute to verify what happened. Do you know who doesn’t need a minute? The mainstream American press. Reuters, The Washington Post, and The New York Times blindly ran with the Hamas account: an Israeli strike, a hospital, hundreds of deaths—500, according to the Times. (A great collection of those headlines can be found here.) The Times even ran an image of a blown-up building—but it wasn’t the hospital. The news ricocheted around the world, leading to attacks on synagogues and marches on embassies. It is the dominant narrative now and likely forever. Even though it is a lie. In the information war, this was a spectacular win for Hamas. 

After Biden announced that U.S. intelligence confirmed the Israeli government account—it was a failed rocket from within Gaza—there were no apologies, no corrections, just subtle headline changes to make it slightly factual-ish. (Just compare this to the uproar after Tom Cotton’s op-ed, which led to the firing of the paper’s opinion editor.) And so it was a bit of an awakening for me. This is the week I realized that the adults I thought were flawed but trying are actually on meth and don’t care. Or maybe it’s even worse: they know it’s a lie.

Of note: one of the NYT reporters doing the liveblog on the Israel-Hamas war was an intern for Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib. And Rashida? Even after the facts came out and her own government said the bomb was Hamas’s, Rashida was leading a rally, citing the much too useful blood libel: “I continue to watch people think it’s okay to bomb a hospital with children.”