Gag Reflex

When HBO aired a documentary version of Lawrence Wright's damning Scientology expose Going Clear a few years ago, the Hollywood Reporter published a 5-page response to the documentary from the Church.

Here’s a sample of the caliber of the response (links and footnotes mine):

Lastly, Lawrence Wright is obviously suffering from an acute case of jealousy of Mr. Hubbard and thus has tried to slander him out of spite. ... Mr. Hubbard was a writer—one of the giants of the Golden Age of pulp fiction, during the Great Depression. He was also the author of 13 New York Times bestsellers in the 1980s. Indeed, his works are published to this day in 50 languages and have sold hundreds of millions of copies, something Wright could only wish to accomplish. ... Mr. Hubbard was also a man who traveled the world and into the Far East, in the 1920s, studying and learning Eastern religions. And this at a time when most young men had never ventured beyond the boundaries of their own town. He was also a member of the famed Explorers Club and was awarded three expedition flags. He was also the youngest Eagle Scout in America at the age of 13, a licensed pilot at the advent of aviation, and a master mariner, licensed to captain any vessel on any ocean. In addition to all this, his greatest contributions to Mankind are his discoveries on the mind and spirit that form the Scientology religion. Millions of people around the world consider him their greatest friend for the help he has provided. ... He was recently named one of the most influential Americans* of all times in the Smithsonian Spring 2015 edition. 

One thing you have to give the Scientologists is that when they feel an official response from the Church is called for they are utterly guileless in their attacks.  They could put on a face of reasoned and measured but basically mild disagreement with their critics and confuse the hell out of everybody, but instead they come out in full lunatic mode. Are they so blind that they have no clue how this comes off?  Yes they are!

I was reminded of this by the response of AIPAC and establishment politicians and journalists to comments and tweets about the lobby's influence made recently by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.  For background (or a refresher) on what prompted Rep. Omar's comments go here.  For a reminder of why it is important to condemn Benjamin Netanyahu's right wing government and its deadly policy toward Palestinians in Israel go here.   As to the relevance of money to this topic, New York Op-Ed columnist Thomas Friedman (himself no Islamic Militant) has made much the same point as Rep. Omar about AIPAC's undue influence in American politics.

The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement arose largely on college campuses in protest of the injustice and deadly enforcement of apartheid policies toward Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza by the Israeli government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu's far-right Likud party.  It was only in the context of Omar's tweets about it that I learned that 26 US states have already passed or decreed anti-BDS laws making support of BDS grounds for dismissal or termination of government contracts, a move which has already had consequences for dissenting individuals, notably in Texas  where it includes those receiving aid for the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey.  In the United States of America!   Who let this happen?   This account of the successful stealth passage of legislation in California gives a flavor (apologies for the length, but it's instructive):

“We’re now at the point where, sad to say, the BDS movement has saturated the country to the extent that it is no longer so predictable—you can no longer focus on a discrete number of campuses,” LDB President Kenneth L. Marcus said at the StandWithUs conference.

Part of the idea behind moving the battleground to state legislatures is to find more favorable turf for the anti-BDS message, said pro-Israel activist Noah Pollak, executive director of the Emergency Committee for Israel, who has supported the nationwide legislative effort.

“You don’t want to fight on your enemy’s terrain,” Pollak said, speaking alongside Assemblyman Allen at the conference. The “enemy,” he said, “picked out campuses for a reason.”

Victories in state legislatures could subsequently spread to college campuses, said Pollak.

According to Pollak, legislating against BDS tells its proponents, “While you were doing your campus antics, the grown-ups were in the state legislatures passing laws that make your cause improbable.” The laws are meant to dent the morale of BDS advocates, who enjoy a number of advantages on campus, he said.

Among those advantages, the Palestinian narrative of Israeli “oppression” and “racism” holds a certain intrinsic pull for some minority communities, allowing groups like Students for Justice in Palestine to build diverse coalitions around their cause.

Roz Rothstein, the CEO of StandWithUs, admitted that when it comes to building diverse coalitions, “we’re very bad at that.”

“The other side is doing it to a fault—that’s all they do,” she said.

In essence, recognizing that anti-BDS laws are things that only an AIPAC funded legislator could love, organizations such as the Emergency Committee for Israel have worked aggressively with legislatures, lawmakers and governors to get these laws on the books, in essence giving cover to fundees for putting the screws to contractors and individuals doing business (or, apparently, needing assistance from the government!) who either support BDS or would balk at waiving their right to support it.  What would formerly be widely condemned to failure as a clear violation of first amendment rights, is now all but assured thanks to years of  stealth appropriation of legislatures and courts by anti-democratic libertarian forces funded by the likes of the Koch Brothers, the NRA and AIPAC among others, whose common cause is purchasing victories for their singular causes that  would be defeated if they were voted on in democratic elections.

In light of their massive success without public support or consultation, it no longer behooves the victors of these sorts of battles to put a pleasant face on their accomplishments.  But with the recent return of the House to Democrats in November, in the wave that brought Ilhan Omar, Alexandia Ocasio Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and others to Washington, there is change in the air and dissension in the ranks.  Hence both the novelty of a Congresswoman bluntly critiquing the anti-BDS movement and the lobby that made it possible and the reflexive over-reaction from the predictable quarters.  When Rep Omar lampoons the motivation of politicians in doing the bidding of AIPAC in exchange for political contributions, or questions aloud the ethics of requiring lawmakers such as herself to place the interests of Benjamin Netanyahu's government over those of her constituents as anti-BDS legislation explicitly does, it's important to listen to her words and not be lulled by the comfortably reflexive charges of anti-semitism that are blatantly obvious attempts to shut down conversation.

While anti-Semitism must be called out wherever it appears (as in neo-Nazi marches with Tiki torches, defacements of and mass shootings in synagogues, the expression of prejudice, hatred, discrimination and slander against the Jewish people), as Bernie Sanders has pointed out, good faith criticism of the government of Israel is not anti-Semitic and should be protected.  When the pro-Netanyahu lobby goes behind closed doors to take freedom of speech away from Americans without their knowledge or consent, rather than reflexively hurl disingenuous slurs against its critics to stifle the ensuing outrage, it should brace itself for what happens when those coalitions that the opposition have been building to a fault (an opposition that includes and is led in part by Jews) mobilize.  What happens is not anti-Semitism.  It's democracy.

~~~~~

*  Technically he was on the Smithsonian's listicle of the top 10 most significant Religious leaders in American History-- a list that also included  Ellen G. White.  (I know, who?) The list was one of 10 counterpart lists of ten names in ten arbitrarily chosen areas compiled to be sold at supermarket checkout stands, and to give an indication of the scholarly rigor with which the lists were compiled, it also included Mary Pickford (Pop Icons), George W. Bush (Presidents), William M. "Boss" Tweed (Outlaws), Sarah Palin (Women), and Hulk Hogan (Athletes).