Mediaboss Marketing

Satire is ridicule of the powerful, or at least it should be. Clown is another form of comedy, but in the hands of Sacha Baron Cohen it is also a way of puncturing the pomposity of the mighty and self-important.

In his early Ali G interviews with the foolishly famous, Donald Trump included,they nearly all fell for it, too vain to realise the ruse being played on them. There were rare exceptions like the late Tony Benn, who immediately challenged Ali Gs use of crude sexist language, his dignity shining through.

Baron Cohen has now returned in a sequel to his hit Borat, the Kazakh clownwho exposed the prejudice and hypocrisy of George WBushs America back in 2006. No one can doubt the English actor's bravery - in that first film he stood in front of a stadium full of foaming red-faced Republicans and made them boo him in fury, causing a horse to collapse amid the mayhem.

In his reprise of Borat, he returns to his fictive version of the central Asian nation, with Borat in prison and given a second chance by the countrys thuggish president, who wants Donald Trump (now US president) to include him among his friends, sending Borat back to America to deliver a gift to the orange one.

The Kazakhstan of Borat is a post-Soviet backwater where there are no mobile phones, people live in shacksand young wives are kept in cages, while the national festival is the running of the Jew".In other words, its a gruesome conjuring of Muslim central Asia, where people cheerfully live under a veil of hatred, misogyny and incest.

This may all be a cosmic joke that allows Borat to go to the US and expose the prejudices and ignorance of evangelical America and Trumps Republicans, which he does brilliantly. On the other hand, as satire it is a very uneasy mix - punching up at right-wing America, while punching down against a developing country and a whole swathe of humanity -Asian Muslims.

The comedian fatally undermines himself - or worse, is smuggling prejudice beneath a liberal facade

In Borat Subsequent Moviefilm, Baron Cohen forms a double act with Bulgarian actor Maria Bakalova. She steals the show as his plucky, wildly unschooled daughter, who comes with him to America and makes each set-up zing with a tone-perfect mix of innocence and sass.

In the most gobsmacking scene of the film, and there are a few of these, she honey traps former New York mayor and Trumps liar in chief, Rudy Giuliani,in an interview at a hotelwhich, after some queasy flirtation, ends up in the bedroom. Only thelast-minute entry of Borat in underwear halts proceedings. Even as Rudyfiddles with his flies, Bakalova remains unflappable.

These moments of undeniable genius, though, cant get us away from the fundamental flaw in Baron Cohens comedic ouvre. For someone whose Jewishness is so evidently part of his motive in exposing the prejudice of his victims, the comedian fatally undermines himself - or worse, is smuggling prejudice beneath a liberal facade. Baron Cohen is the king of wince-making bad taste. We love his irreverence, but it comes with a hefty dose of bigotry.

In probably the most outrageous bit of historical revisionism, the Kazakhs are proud of their purported role in hosting the Holocaust death camps. In the US, Bakalova is shocked when she discovers a far-right Facebook page denying the Holocaust, believing it to be true, and her genocidal national pride now shattered.

This little joke of Baron Cohens can hardly be an accident, and presumably someone so sharply intelligent cannot have missed that this is the reverse of the historical truth. Kazakhstan was a refuge for thousands of Jews during the Second World War, as they fled eastwards from the invading Nazi forces, who massacred Jews in the wake of Hitlers Operation Barbarossa. Its one thing to make village idiot jokes, its another to falsely accuse a nation of hosting the Holocaust.

Its one thing to make village idiot jokes, its another to falsely accuse a nation of hosting the Holocaust

So we have a real lie, wrapped up in the filmmakers lie. To reverse the history of the Second World War, and accuse a former Soviet state of participating in the Holocaust, when in reality it was the Soviets who fought the Nazis at the cost of 26 million dead, and liberated Auschwitz, cannot be dismissed as mere comedic licence. It is the kind of historical revisionism that only the far right, and the Trumps of this world, would engage in. Baron Cohen is doing what hes sending up.

The actor-comedian has made a career in playing fools who are inescapably Muslim, from Ali G to Borat to The Dictator, a little disguised Muammar Gaddafi. To be fair to him, hes also sent up others, from an Austrian fashion designer to an Israeli martial arts instructor inWho is America?

With his tremendous success he has also showed up many a wealthy celebrity with his generous donations to Syrian refugees, and he is peerless in exposing the bigotry of Americas politics, gun culture and religious extremism.

In this newfilm, he meets an old Jewish lady while absurdly disguised as a Jew with a ridiculous prosthetic nose. She responds with love and understanding to the Jew-phobic Kazakh. But his lesson in antisemitism is wrapped up in Islamophobia (Borat believes the Jew will suck his blood).

No group can be immune from comedy, but in a world in which actual history is being falsified in order to mainstream far right ideas, blaming central Asian Muslims for the Holocaust is up there with the worst that any Trump alt-right revisionism has to offer. And its not even very funny.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Read the original here:
Borat is brilliant, but its Holocaust jokes are beyond the pale - Middle East Eye

Peter Jukes looks at the rise and fall of the dark money and online culture war strategies that put Donald Trump in the White House and pushed Britain out of the EUExporting Polarisation

For most of the last 40 years, British domestic politics has been out of synch with the United States. Though Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher composed a formidable Cold War alliance and promoted the Anglo Saxon model of privatisation and deregulation, the reality of every day cultural life around politics in the US was very different from the UK at the time.

I lived in Boston as an exchange student at an American high school in the early 80s and, compared to the Punk-era Britain I had left behind, the political scene was much more consensual and polite. My teachers were a mix of small c conservatives and former Vietnam War protestors, but discussions were fluid and, unpredictably, likely to arrive at an agreement. Among the pupils, few would think of not dating someone because of political allegiance. This was echoed in the broader political culture. In Congress at that time, politicians would cross the floor and vote across party lines. There was still a belief in bipartisanship in contrast to the grim, grey UK I returned to.

Under the cosh of Thatcherism, nuclear re-armament and radical industrial restructuring, there was no way you could snog someone for long as a British student in the 80s without ending up asking the question: whose side are you on?The dirty war in Northern Ireland, the miners strike, the Conservative Party Brighton bombing, Murdochs Wapping dispute, CND women at Greenham Common, City of Londons Big Bang, Harry Enfields Loadsamoney, Yuppies, Sloane Rangers and the Looney Left during that decade it was almost impossible to chat with a London cabbie or have a family Sunday lunch without an unpalatable political argument.

Twenty years later, all that had reversed. When I returned to live and work in the United States again in the early noughties, the polarisation of Britains Thatcher years seemed to have been exported there.

Issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control, religion they were intractable discussions for Americans, which you avoided raising at the diner or a bar, for fear of ostracism and permanent estrangement. American political culture had polarised and cocooned, with Democrats telling me theyd never date a Republican, and vice versa.

Meanwhile, in Britain, under the premierships of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and even heir to Blair David Cameron, the idea of a culture war over matters of sexual orientation, religious observance, or the role of socialised healthcare and gun control seemed unlikely and vaguely absurd. Even the right-wing tabloid the Sun used a Barack Obama lookalike poster for David Camerons 2010 election campaign with the slogan Yes, we Cam!

I remember remarking to an American friend around that time that I was glad our Conservative Party wasnt infected by the atavistic, vote-suppressing extreme politics of the American Conservative right.

How blind I was about what was to happen.

The key moment for the unleashing of hard-right US Conservatism into UK politics was the US Supreme Court Ruling: Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission in 2010.

Citizens United was an activist group chaired by David Bossie, who went on to be Donald Trumps deputy campaign manager in 2016 (hes still working for him now trying to overturn the recent election result). In 2010, Bossie managed to revise a law which prohibited for-profit and not-for-profit corporations from advertising or broadcasting political messages during elections or primaries. The legal judgment was based on the constitutional first amendment right of free speech and the Supreme Court effectively ruled that these corporations were people and had the same rights to political self-expression as individuals.

Whatever the metaphysical import of this ruling, the practical effect was to unleash unlimited spending on political campaigns by American corporations and rich individuals in vehicles such as SuperPacs and that wave of money soon hit the UK and jolted British politics to the right.

The networks to receive this influx of cash were already in place. Sir Anthony Fisher, an Eton-educated businessman, having made his money from US-style intensive chicken farming and the founder of the Institute of Economic Affairs in London in 1955, set up the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in the US in 1981. Funded by the oil industry giants, big tobacco, and other right-wing not-for-profits like the Koch Brothers Foundation, it acted as a transatlantic umbrella for a range of libertarian and free-market think tanks.

The Atlas networks role in pushing for Britain to leave the EU was apparent when leading Brexiter and former MEP Daniel Hannan delivered its Toast to Freedom in New York in 2018 and celebrated the factory-farmed broiler chicken as a symbol of liberty. The lowering of food hygiene and factory farming standards to US levels has been touted as one of the main benefits of Brexit at least to those in the food industry.

But the Citizens United overspill, and its emphasis on free speech, went much further than these obvious commercial and lobbying networks in the UK, and had a toxic effect on the culture of British politics.

One hidden channel for right-wing US thinking and practice was the Young Britons Foundation (YBF), a self-described Conservative madrasa and a UK offshoot of the Young Americas Foundation (YAF), which was funded by the hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer.

For 12 years, until it was closed down over allegations of bullying after the suicide of a young Conservative activist in 2015, the YBF hosted some of the key figures who led Britain to Brexit.

Hannan was the YBF president. Matt Richardson, who went on to be the secretary of Nigel Farages UKIP, was the executive director. Matthew Elliot, of the TaxPayers Alliance at 55 Tufton Street and destined to become executive director of Boris Johnsons Vote Leave campaign, hosted talks and panels.

Apart from the potential channels for US dark money, the striking thing is the change of tone ushered into Conservative politics through the Young Britons Foundation.

A key moment was its 10th anniversary conference at Churchill College, Cambridge in 2013. Steve Bannon, who was then the managing director of the Alt-right website Breitbart, was a major presence, discussing the role of online campaigning with the Guido Fawkes political editor Harry Cole, and recruiting their fellow panellist Raheem Kassam to run his London branch.

Bannon had also just co-founded the notorious digital campaigning company Cambridge Analytica which would target individuals based on their fears and paranoias. Bannon called this combination of news and psychometric targeting his weapons which he would use, in the UK too it would seem, to flood the zone with sh*t.

Also billed to appear that weekend was Douglas Murray, associate director the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), to talk about Jihad, Islamism, Israel, the War on Terror and Neo-Conservatism. The founder of the HJS, Dr Alan Mendoza, was also a regular attendee.

According to a founding director and former associate director of the HJS, it began to become around this time a far-right, deeply anti-Muslim racist organisation. As Nafeez Ahmed has reported in Byline Times, the HJS was also a recipient of dark money from key donors in the US who began to back Donald Trump.

If youre wondering why British political discourse began to degrade, look no further than the arrival of American right-wing conservatism via both the funding of activists and new media outlets which propagated their message.

It is no accident that the UKs culture wars were also triggered by a US Supreme Court ruling over free speech. Free speech was the wedge by which formerly marginal expressions of xenophobic nationalism, racism, and Islamophobia could become central in Britains public debate.

It didnt matter if many of the voices expressing these opinions online were paid for by multiple accounts, boosted by dark digital analytics, or indeed often outright replicants run by troll farms hosted and funded by hostile foreign countries. If the Supreme Court had ruled that corporations were people, why not networks of bots and troll armies?

And we fell for it. Millions of Brits and Americans read and believed opinions and facts effectively generated by robots. The pioneer of computing, Alan Turing, once suggested that artificial intelligence would arrive when, during a conversation, we failed to spot the difference between a computer and a person. We failed the Turing test, politically, in 2016.

The media of the 20th Century was once described by the philosopher Noam Chomsky as manufacturing consent. By the time of Britains EU Referendum and Donald Trumps election in 2016, with most people receiving their news and opinions through algorithms devised by social media giants like Facebook and YouTube, this was effectively replaced by the automation of consent.

Some people seek to minimise this, pointing to the existing racial and economic fissures in British and American society that made them both ripe for populism, particularly after the financial crash of 2008. But just one in 50 of the votes cast in the EU Referendum, or 70,000 votes in the US Rust Belt states in the 2016 Presidential Election, won the twin shock victories either side of the Atlantic.Did the intervention of these dark-money-funded culture war interventions make enough of a difference to tip things over the edge?

The protagonists certainly thought so. Nigel Farage raised a pint after the EU Referendum victory to thank Bannon and Breitbart we couldnt have done it without you while Trump declared: Im Mr Brexit plus plus plus.

The failure of Donald Trump to secure a second term is a severe setback to that transatlantic Alt-right alliance of libertarians and neo-nationalists.

The prospect of a US/UK trade deal with Joe Biden as President, though it was never going to be that favourable to Britain, is even more problematic given different priorities in the White House, and Congresss demonstrable objection to anything that would undermine the internationally-binding Good Friday Agreement.

Boris Johnsons Internal Market Bill, currently being debated in Parliament, threatens to break more international treaties and, if not directly punished, will undermine the prestige and reliability of Britain in any other future negotiations.

On a personal level, Johnson has many fences to mend with the President-elect, because of his perceived proximity to Bannon and Trump, and his frankly racist remarks about Barack Obamas attitude about Brexit stemming from his antipathy to Britain because of his part-Kenyan ancestry. Biden has called Johnson the physical and emotional clone of Donald Trump.

More profoundly, the media and lobbying networks around MAGA and Brexit are going to have much less influence in Washington, where they matter. Steve Bannon is currently indicted for fraud and, with a Biden nominee leading the Department of Justice, an unredacted version ofSpecial Counsel Robert Muellers report on Russian interference could reveal more transatlantic connections with Vladimir Putins Russia.

Other ongoing FBI investigations into campaign finance and counter-intelligence will expose more about Trumps various business dealings with hostile foreign powers and those could entrammel some key Brexiters.

Many on the UK right, and not just Farage and his Brexit Party outriders, were heavily invested in a Trump second term. We could soon discover why.

But beyond any criminal or intelligence liability, the simultaneous arrival of Biden and Brexit in January next year will make the UK even more irrelevant to the global considerations of a new US Government.

As a result, British think tanks will be of less interest to US for-profit and not-for-profit corporations. With no place at the EU table and with a declining economy, hit by the dual shock of leaving the Single Market and the worst Coronavirus impact of the G7 nations, were just not in crude financial terms such a key asset. And right-wing British activists will receive fewer remittances of dark money as a result.

The US culture wars were always designed to create wedge issues around guns, religion, education, race and class to get working-class Americans, particularly in the South, to vote against their economic interests and for tax cuts for a wealthy elite because, at least, they shared the same nominal values.

This Southern Strategy was echoed by Johnson and Dominic Cummings in the 2019 General Election and the apparent collapse of the Labour Red Wall in north-eastern constituencies. It led to a stunning tactical victory, but the long-term strategic consequences are still moot. Trumps Rust Belt defence collapsed after one term. This does not bode well for the Conservative Partys current rhetoric pitting working-class voters against metropolitan elites.

When it comes to Britains role in American culture wars, as Steve Bannon identified early on, the UK was a bridgehead in the battle for the populist right. With its reputation (at least in the US) for prudence, propriety and stiff upper lip sobriety as Bannon told his head of research at Cambridge Analytica Chris Wylie in 2014 Britain is an exemplar. If the UK fell for Bannons brand of nationalist populism, the US would be likely to follow and the EU collapse: Brexit would be a lesson to everyone.

Well, Brexit was a lesson to everyone a bad one dont, whatever you do, follow. The countrys reputation for transparency and reasonableness is permanently tarnished: both its economy and soft power influence are badly trashed. The disparate nations of the United Kingdom are more in danger of breaking up than they have been for decades and their people are restive, divided and destined to continue the Alt-right battles about wokeness and cultural Marxism long after they have lost any wider resonance.

In that way, the transatlantic alliance of dark money and polarisation is over. We are on our own. Britain served its role as part of a larger offensive but it is now abandoned like a rusting aircraft carrier waiting to be sold for scrap. We may remain as a rump Trumpocracy, and our think tanks will still receive dribbles of cash from the US Conservative right. But we will be increasingly irrelevant and rapidly ignored, and then will finally have to confront our own demons without blaming or relying on monsters from abroad.

View original post here:
Citizens Disunited: The End of the Transatlantic Trumpist Alliance - Byline Times

This weekend, the Denier Roundup had a rare chance to observe a concentrated group of people steadfastly refusing to acknowledge reality in the real world, instead of online. We didnt go looking for the circus, but when some thousands of them decided to come to DC, during another surge of the pandemic many of them refuse to even really acknowledge, with the express purpose of claiming their candidate won an election he very much lost we couldnt resist the call of duty.

By Climate Denier Roundup

The impetus for this somewhat impromptu gathering were the celebrations around the world as people spontaneously hit the streets to revel in Trumps loss and President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harriss win. In response, a smattering of publicity-seekers glommed on to an existing event permit in DC. It brought in the likes of racist Trump-orbiting speakers like Sebastian I swore a lifelong oath to the Nazi-collaborating Hungarian nationalist group Vitzi Rend, as indicated by my taking of v. as a middle initialandwearing its medal to Trumps Inauguration L v. Gorka. There was also a speaker who led the crowd in a chant of a Q-Anon slogan, and presumably some very fine (mostly) white people and of course Trump flags.

And thats the problem with this loser festival. Theyre not just pathetically incapable of accepting that Trump lost the 2020 election by both the popular vote and the electoral college; theyre also actively trying to delegitimize President-elect Biden, force their way into a second Trump term, and dismantle the entire notion of democracy.

Gorka, for example, was actively encouraging the assembled crowd of a few thousand maskless faces in front of the Supreme Court to lobby their local electoral college electors to disregard the legitimate election results, which they are told was rigged and manipulated by Democrats (despite key portions of multiple swing states election infrastructure being controlled by Republicans) and instead cast electoral ballots for Trump so that he could remain in power.

This wasnt just one last hit of the ol Trump Rally high, it was an incitement to overthrow the election, to ignore its results, and keep fighting for Trump. And while that may mean, for many of the attendees, simply continuing to feed his email marketing machine their social security checks, for some it was a much more literal message, and the mixing of those groups is what mainstreams fascism.

Because, along with the families and the alt-right media personalities that consider Fox News part of the lamestream media (because even Fox wont have them on), were groups like the Proud Boys, for whom political violence is aprerequisite for advancementwithin their organization. And they werent there to be nice, and celebrate four great years of owning the libs, they were there to intimidate the predominantly Black residents of DC, and to then pick fights with their perceived enemies: people who oppose fascism. This is not exaggeration or hyperbole. One Proud Boy leader, Kyle Chapman,actually resigned last weekbecause he thought the group that embraces western chauvanism as a euphemism for its age-old bigotry wasnt sufficientlyhomophobic, racist, and anti-semitic. Chapman is known by followers asBased Stickmanbecause of a picture that went viral of him attacking a Trump protestor with a leaded stick in 2017.

So, this wasnt just a bunch of Fox-fried Boomers throwing a politically impotent meme-fest, (though it was also definitely that). It was an attempt to radicalize the audience to do anything they could to overthrow the election an audience that included people for whom political violence is a proud rite of passage.

This was plain from the very start. The rallys visitors to DC, a (farfromperfect) liberal, multicultural, multiracial city, made forBlack Lives Matter Plazaas soon as they arrived on

Friday night. Their first order of business? Ripping down the memorial posters for Breonna Taylor and other victims of racist policing that had been adorned to the fence Trump had erected around the White House.

Nevertheless, many called for the people of DC to stay home, ignore the influx of fascists into the streets of our nations capital, to humor their little show and let them rally in peace. We should cede the public square, they implicitly advised their millions of Twitter followers, to let these fascists lick their wounds in peace, in public, by dominating the streets of DC.

But on Saturday morning, local organizations put out the call for those who could to show up, so that the people who fought for Black lives to matter could at least hold on to that space. Otherwise it would be bastardized by the very politically-cultivated racism and hatred that required the words BLACK LIVES MATTER to be written in 35-foot letters down 16th Street, as a reminder to the man currentlyoccupying the Peoples House, in the first place.

Ceding public spaces to election-denying fascists would do nothing to dissuade them from coming back, and preemptive surrender would only embolden them further to believe their violence is condoned by those who dont actively oppose it.

This big, white, cis-straight, able-bodied, right-down-the-street, masculine-presenting, Denier Roundup writer, got that call for help protecting BLM Plaza, so he masked up, and headed out

Tune in tomorrow for the thrilling conclusion!

(Originally appeared at DailyKos.)

Link:
Deniers In The Wild: A roundup from Saturday's racist-right rally denying Trump's loss - Red, Green, and Blue

Out of the blue

Hungarys sponsorship of the Geneva declaration put the country at the helm of a motley coalition of pro-life hardliners that reject any international obligation on the part of states to finance or facilitate abortion, the document reads.

Most of its 30-odd signatories make up the 20 worst countries around the world for women to live in, according to the Women, Peace and Security Index compiled by Georgetown University. Hungary, ranked 49th, is the third worst among all EU countries and ranks even below the likes of Mongolia and Kazakhstan.

None of the people on the list could care less about women, Gillian Kane from Ipas, an international safe access to abortion advocacy group, summed up for The Guardian newspaper.

The declaration is legally void and does not change any laws already in place. But Hungarys stamp on the family-touting document was still a rude awakening to many, even in the face of the governments years-long pursuit of a policy to spur procreation within predominantly middle-class families with the motif of jumpstarting population growth, Reka Safrany, who chairs the Hungarians Womens Lobby, told BIRN.

Though the governments mounting hostility toward reproduction rights was palpable, we didnt see [the Geneva Consensus Declaration] coming, Safrany added.

Since its return to power in 2010, Orbans government has introduced several obstacles to obtaining an abortion. It wasted no time in slotting language about protecting the foetus since its conception in the constitution, a first for Europe at the time.

Though abortion has remained legal, women can only request the procedure within a narrow set of circumstances, as in the case of grave damage to the foetus, when the mothers health is at risk or when the pregnancy is the result of a crime. Pregnancies can also be mandated by the womans precarious socio-economic situation, which provides a walkable trail for abortions within the public health system in spite of the laws limiting scope, Safrany explained.

The message is clear: if you choose abortion, the state wants you to have it the hard way.

Noa Nogradi, womens rights expert and political philosopher

Women are also subject to mandatory waiting periods and two counselling sessions that are deliberately intended to change minds and dissuade them from going ahead with an abortion. Yet according to research by the PATENT association, a reproductive rights watchdog, these counselling sessions only seem to add to the womens mental strain. Of the more than a hundred women we asked, not a single one came away from it dissuaded. But they all felt humiliated, expert Nogradi, who took part in the study, said.

And its getting harder to book an appointment, even though abortions are extremely time sensitive and you simply cant have the procedure without it, Nogradi added.

Permits for medical abortions that rely on pills have been revoked, leaving many women with surgery as their only option other than going abroad. Nogradi thinks this policy is tinged with ideology. The message is clear: if you choose abortion, the state wants you to have it the hard way.

The past two decades has seen a steady decline in the number of abortions carried out in Hungary. Last year, close to 26,000 pregnancies were surgically terminated in the country, half the tally from 15 years ago, according to the Central Statistical Office. Yet the governments anti-abortion tirade continues.

Minister of Human Resources Miklos Kasler famously blamed abortion for Hungarys population decline, brushing off data that showed the countrys death rate twice outstrips the number of abortions.

And Family Minister Novak has spoken out against abortion in an oft-cited interview with the alt-right website Breitbart. She branded the pro-choice movement as pro-killing and applauded Hungarys family-oriented mentality.

A state-sponsored schoolbook published at the outset of the past academic year reportedly contained several anti-abortion references.

This worldview is reflected in the governments family planning program that offers free in vitro fertilisation to couples in a bid to boost fertility rates. But the policy leaves many people behind, activist Safrany suggests, as its focused on middle-class families. Family planning is also about affordable contraception and adequate education. Why dont these programs have the same backing when many women lack the means to afford them?

The governments family-centric orientation is extreme, Judit Zeller from the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union told BIRN, and could lead to completely shutting out non-married couples or singles from fertilisation treatments.

Conscientious objections to abortions from doctors, often incentivised by government funding, are also on the rise. Yet even in the current legal framework, abortion is a right that should be upheld. After all, abortions are part of the specialists job, thats what they learn at university, Safrany said.

More:
Activists Fear Abortion at Risk in Hungary from Orban's Family-First Crusade - Balkan Insight

The 2020 U.S. presidential election brought into sharp relief the contrast between the American and Israeli Jewish communities, the two main centers of the Jewish world. According to post-election surveys, American Jewish support for the Democrats remains extremely high, at 77 percent (up from 70 percent in 2016). President Donald Trump was estimated to have received a mere 21 percent of the Jewish vote. In Israel, however, surveys have shown that Israeli Jews prefer Trump to Biden by 70 percent to 13 percent.

Much has been written on the growing gap between American Jews and Israel in terms of values and Jewish identity. In particular, the entrenchment of the occupation and the growing authoritarianism of the Benjamin Netanyahu regime has provoked growing disillusionment with Israel, especially among young Jewish progressives in North America. On the one hand is Israels unmistakable shift to the nationalist right; on the other, American Jews commitment to liberal, pluralistic, and progressive ideals, exemplified by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The liberal icon symbolized for many the role that Jewish Tikkun Olam can play in the struggle for universal social justice.

Now, the two communities find themselves not only drifting apart, but also increasingly at loggerheads. Most American Jews see Trump as a clear threat, while most Israeli Jews view him as an ally who offers security and hope. This divergence has to do not only with the two communities different values, but also their structural positions.

For a relatively prosperous and largely white minority, the extent of American Jewish backing for the Democrats is striking. A 2015 study found that Jewish support for Democrats was 40 percent higher than that of non-Jews in similar socio-economic positions. And while some of it can be explained in Jewish levels of education and concentration in metropolitan areas, this is clearly far from the whole story.

The Democratic Partys model of inclusive citizenship fits American Jewish aspirations to cultivate a cultural and religious minority identity alongside civic participation. In such a model, Jewish particularism and universal American citizenship reinforce each other as two sides of the same coin. The Republican Partys overwhelmingly white Christian character, on the other hand, is far less accommodating in this regard. The GOPs strong Evangelical base, and its Christian-infused social conservatism, have dissuaded most Jews from considering it a political home.

In the last four years, Trumps connections with the extreme right have added an explicit antisemitic dimension to this equation. Trump has repeatedly refused to denounce white supremacist groups and the antisemitic QAnon conspiracy. GOP politicians routinely invoke conspiracies regarding the Hungarian Jewish financier George Soros, while using their support for Israel to deflect charges of antisemitism.

The Womens March on New York, January 21, 2017. (Gili Getz)

The shift in the GOPs rhetoric under Trump has revealed that the general assimilation of white Jews into whiteness has clear limits. Trumps comments to American Jews, in which he referred to Israel as your country and Benjamin Netanyahu as your prime minister, betrayed his understanding of U.S. Jews as not fully American, in keeping with his overall exclusivist notion of citizenship.

The 2018 deadly attack on the Pittsburgh synagogue by a white nationalist who subscribed to GOP-amplified conspiracy theories involving Soros and immigration, meanwhile, showed in the starkest terms the dangers of Trumps normalization of white supremacy. The place of Jews in a nativist America is far from secure, and it is clear why they reject overwhelmingly this political vision.

Israeli support for Trump is similarly rooted in structural realities, and is tied to the transformation of Israels political system in the last 20 years. The slow but sure demise of the two-state solution, and the effective incorporation of the occupied West Bank into Israel, mark the emergence of a one-state political system in which Jewish dominance is secured through the erosion of Israels democratic features. If American Jews are a minority, Israeli Jews are in the opposite position. They constitute a hegemonic group of about 50 percent of the population in Israel-Palestine.

As Raef Zreik recently wrote on +972 Magazine, the 2018 Jewish Nation-State Law spells out the new model of Jewish political dominance, with the downgrading of citizenship for Palestinians in Israel and commitment to Jewish settlement as a national value. As the permanence of the occupation becomes increasingly obvious, Israel can no longer maintain its democratic credentials and present itself as an island of liberalism in the Middle East.

Get Our Weekly Newsletter

This explains why Israel has sought in the last decade to position itself as a strategic ally of the rising global authoritarian, revanchist, and Islamophobic right, headed by Jair Bolsonaro, Narendra Modi, Viktor Orbn and, of course, Trump. For now, this alliance appears to be working in Israels interests, in an increasingly illiberal world. Israeli right-wing commentators supportive of Trump have adopted alt-right rhetoric, and have spoken in disparaging and even antisemitic terms about U.S. Jews support for liberal values. Key Netanyahu surrogates have described J Street as Jew boys, referred to American Jews as suburban rich people with private police, and routinely circulated Soros conspiracies.

Could this change under a Joe Biden presidency? It is almost certain that Bidens White House will try to revert, at least rhetorically, to previous patterns. No doubt the administration, very much like the EU, will try to revive the charade of the peace process and two-state solution. This will not change any of the existing dynamics, but it would enable international actors to continue ignoring the reality of effective Israeli annexation of the West Bank. Yet it is doubtful that this could work for much longer.

For Israel, the global hard right is now a natural and perhaps inevitable choice. Israels preference for a Trumpist GOP is therefore a logical conclusion, while for most American Jews, Trumpism is an anathema and a threat. Under these conditions, the rift between the communities could deepen and become about much more than values or disillusionment. It represents the clash of radically different alignments, rooted in the political trajectories and positions of both communities. This is no longer only about the future of Israel, but also about the future of Jews in the United States.

Read the rest here:
The global right is threat to US Jews but a natural home for Israelis - +972 Magazine