<div dir="ltr">Many good points, and lots to unpack. Nevertheless, I've been disappointed with both JVP and SJP in the Trump era, as they both seem to have been folded into the Identity Politics approach of the "progressive" wing of the DP. And even after all of this progress in expanding the limits of allowable debate within the Jewish community, there still isn't a decent place that I know of for critical Jewish students to go on this campus, unless it's SJP. Since I'm out of the loop, I don't know how this has been playing out. But my sense is that any focused activism is lacking, regardless of the kerfuffle with Robert Jones.<div><br></div><div>In any event, it still remains to be proven whether the ruling class of this country can be persuaded by "the Jews" when Israel remains so central to their geopolitical calculations, and they have the support of the Christian Right in this regard. But a good discussion to have.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 7:46 AM Robert Naiman via Peace <<a href="mailto:peace@lists.chambana.net">peace@lists.chambana.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><span> </span><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158778178582656" style="color:rgb(5,99,193);text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158778178582656</a><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
On the Importance of Being _<i>Important</i>_<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">I once met with Dick Durbin at a fundraising party in
Champaign at a time when President Obama was facing harsh pushback from pro-Netanyahu
American Jews for his attempts to negotiate the Iran nuclear deal. Like, “Obama
is leading Jews to the gas chambers,” this kind of thing was appearing
regularly in the Jewish press. The question I asked Durbin was: “How come
Democrats in Congress are being so quiet when Obama is getting pummeled for
doing the thing that Democratic voters asked him to do?” Pursuing diplomacy
with Iran was a major issue in the 2008 Democratic primary and general
election. For a lot of Democratic voters the thing that distinguished Obama was
not just his early opposition to the Iraq war, running against Hillary Clinton and
John McCain who had supported it, but his promise to pursue diplomacy with Iran
to avoid another war like the Iraq war. It is why I supported Obama: why I
voted for him, why I gave his campaign money, why I knocked on doors for him in
Indiana, why I organized MoveOn calling parties for him in Champaign-Urbana. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Durbin answered at first with something mealy-mouthed, like “I
can see why a lot of my colleagues are concerned…” I challenged him: “Dianne
Feinstein is speaking up for diplomacy. How come you’re not speaking up for
diplomacy?” At the time it seemed that Dianne Feinstein was the only Democrat
in Congress saying anything against the anti-diplomacy onslaught. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Durbin leaned in and lowered his voice. “Dianne Feinstein is
a very _<i>important</i>_ voice,” Durbin said. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">At the time I interpreted this to mean: “This anti-diplomacy
onslaught is coming from pro-Netanyahu Jews. Dianne Feinstein is Jewish. So we’ve
all agreed that Dianne Feinstein is going to take the incoming fire on this and
the rest of us are going to hide behind Dianne Feinstein.” <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Sometime after that, I was at a party in Champaign where I
met a woman who worked for the Champaign-Urbana Jewish Federation. In the
course of describing my relationship to Jewish things, I said: “I’m a member of
J Street and Jewish Voice for Peace and I read the <i>Forward</i>.” She said: “J
Street and the <i>Forward</i> are _<i>important_ </i>institutions.” She said
the word _<i>important</i>_ exactly the same way Durbin had said it. This
showed that the word _<i>important</i>_ wasn’t just a Jewish code word for “Jewish.”
It referred to Jewish people and institutions seen as existing inside a
perceived perimeter of Jewish respectability. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The perceived perimeter of Jewish respectability in the
United States is a major determinant of how much peace we’re allowed to have in
U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. The perceived perimeter of Jewish
respectability in the United States is not determined by a democratic vote of
Jews, any more than the perceived position of gun owners on gun regulation is
determined by a democratic vote of gun owners. Moneyed interests and the
institutions they fund play a huge role. U.S. policy in the Middle East would
never survive a referendum of American Jews, any more than U.S. policy on gun
regulation would survive a referendum of gun owners. There’s nothing natural
about this hegemony. This hegemony has been constructed by moneyed interests
and their surrogates to try to bring about certain outcomes. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Although the perimeter of Jewish respectability is not
determined democratically, democratic organizing can move it, because who gets
elected to the presidency and Congress dramatically shapes what the perceived perimeter
is. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">In 2000, Joe Lieberman was Al Gore’s running mate. In 2006, Joe
Lieberman was defeated in a Democratic Senate primary in Connecticut over Joe
Lieberman’s support for the Iraq war. Jews who opposed the Iraq war had a lot
to do with Joe Lieberman’s defeat. I know this because I knocked on doors for
Ned Lamont. And I saw a bunch of Jews there doing the same thing I was. “We
need to get rid of this guy who is claiming that he is representing Jews when
he advocates for war in the public square.” <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">At the beginning of the Obama Administration, AIPAC was perceived
as all-powerful and J Street was perceived as a 90 pound weakling. This dynamic
changed significantly during the Obama Administration, in part because of the
relationship between J Street and Obama. Today AIPAC is still perceived as more
powerful than J Street. But the margin isn’t nearly as great as it was in 2008.
This year, MoveOn called for Dem POTUS 2020 candidates to boycott the AIPAC
policy conference. Nancy Pelosi went to AIPAC, where she was a keynote speaker,
but no major Dem candidates for President went. [Biden dodged this choice by
announcing later.] In contrast, a bunch of presidential candidates went to the
J Street conference this week. Biden and Warren didn’t go. But Bernie went.
Julian Castro went. PeteB went. Even Amy Klobuchar went. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">That’s a big change. When he was running for President,
Obama went to the AIPAC policy conference. Obama told the AIPAC conferees that
Jerusalem must be the united capital of Israel – exactly the policy that Trump later
implemented, just like Trump has said. Obama talked about doing it, Trump did
it. Obama wasn’t interested in peace in general. Obama was interested in
pivoting the U.S. relationship with Iran, like Nixon pivoted the U.S.
relationship with China. Every other peace concern in the Middle East, Obama
was willing to throw under the bus to appease the Saudi and Israeli governments.
Obama destroyed Libya, Obama destroyed Syria, Obama destroyed Yemen. That was
all collateral damage, claimed to be necessary to appease the Saudi and Israeli
governments. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">J Street was good on nuclear diplomacy with Iran primarily because
Obama was good on it. Nuclear diplomacy with Iran was Obama’s priority in the
Middle East. Nuclear diplomacy with Iran was the fight that Obama was willing
to have with AIPAC and Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia. Obama wasn’t willing to have
any other fights with AIPAC and Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia. J Street helped very
little on ending the catastrophic Saudi war in Yemen started by Obama. J Street
helped even less in preventing the U.S. from visiting the catastrophe on Syria
started by Obama. And during the Obama Administration, J Street didn’t move the
ball in DC on peace and justice in Israel-Palestine, mainly because Obama wasn’t
really interested in that, even though supposedly that was a key reason that J
Street was created, to move the ball in DC on peace and justice in Israel-Palestine.
<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The half-full of this is: the better the next Democratic
President is, the better J Street will be. If we could elect a Democratic
President who was seriously interested in peace in the Middle East, J Street
would improve dramatically, because they’d be blocking for a much better
Democratic President on peace than Obama. To get a better Democratic President
than Obama on peace in the Middle East, we have to beat Haim Saban and his surrogates
in the primary. That’s the most important thing we have to do. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The second most important thing we need to do is go after
AIPAC’s most extreme assets in Congress, like the Crown Prince of the
Warmongers. We could have a big impact just by picking off a few of them. The
defeat of Joe Lieberman in Connecticut in the Democratic primary in 2006 had a
big impact on how Democrats nationally thought about the Iraq war. If we picked
off a few of AIPAC’s most extreme assets in Congress, J Street would improve. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">I once went to a movie about Iran. I invited some Iranian-American
friends. The movie was made by a friend of the comedian Jon Stewart. So Jon
Stewart introduced the movie. When Jon Stewart’s face came on the screen, one
of my friends said, I’m tired of Jon Stewart, Jon Stewart is not that
progressive. I said: look, here’s why I love Jon Stewart. He’s the most famous
and popular Jew in America who doesn’t want to bomb Iran. They laughed. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The sentence I said to my Iranian-American friends is no
longer true. Jon Stewart is no longer the most famous and popular Jew in America
who doesn’t want to bomb Iran. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">If there’s another plausible path to defeating Haim Saban in
2020, I have no idea what it is. <span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
</div>
</div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Peace mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Peace@lists.chambana.net" target="_blank">Peace@lists.chambana.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace</a><br>
</blockquote></div>