Please see how Jews in Europe switched from left leaning arties to right leaning parties as the anti-semitism grew. Jews in France and GB who have not yet left now tend to vote for the right parties. It turns out even traditionally leftist leaners learn from enough pain. Even the Reform Jews now seem to be willing to consider Trump. Classic joke- What is the difference between Reform Jews and Trump? Trump has Jewish grandchildren.
I think as written ("many Jews will stick with the Dems") this is true, but the mood affiliation (there won't be a major shift to the Republicans due to the People-of-Color coalition's anti-Zionism) is wrong. For instance, there's this poll (https://x.com/DougMackeyCase/status/1818698710995362294) showing Jews splitting 46/53 for Harris - a far cry from the typical 20/80 split. To me, it looks like Jews are following the same assimilative process various Catholic ethnics did, only on a one-generation lag (mass intermarriage in the 90s rather than the 60s, Republicanization in the 2020s rather than the 2000s).
In 1980, West Virginia was so reliable a source of votes for Democrats that it didn't even vote for Reagan, and the map shows it to be a blue island surrounded by a sea of red. Same in 1988 when it went for Dukakis - which not even New Jersey, Connecticut, or California did ("The past is a foreign country.") Now it is one of the reddest states.
The left tends to make temporary compromises to what is required by the ideological logic of progressives - what Lawrence Auster termed, "unprincipled exceptions" - in order to keep important groups within its coalition, whether that's because it needs the votes, money, or influence. These exceptions irritate progressive elites like thorns in their sides, and they will only tolerate such compromises for just as long as they absolutely have to, and repeatedly probe and test for whether political conditions make it safe enough to pluck them out. The minute it becomes clear that the Democrats either don't need a group anymore, or don't need to make these ideological compromises to maintain their support because of robustly self-adverse partisan loyalty, they immediately eliminate these exceptions, reconcile the party platform with the requirements of progressivism, and throw that group or their special interests under the bus. My impression (some political / social scientist should research this) is that it takes about a generation for a deeply-loyal blue group to figure out they've been downgraded and are now getting screwed over, and to flip to the Republicans, who have become a party increasingly defined by the preferences and interests of these castaways and refugees. My prediction is it will also take about a generation for Israel-supporting Jews to go the way of West Virginians and become reliable Republican voters and donors.
The Democrats' selection of MN Governor Walz over PA Governor Shapiro is striking evidence of the eclipse of Jewish influence in their party. PA has 19 electoral votes, MN only 10. PA is a must win for the Democrats, and Shapiro is a very popular moderate, yet they reject him as unacceptable to their pro-Hamas wing because he is a Jew. In his place, they designate Walz notwithstanding his record of hard Left extremism exemplified by his unwillingness to prevent Minneapolis from being set on fire in the "mostly peaceful" riots in the summer of 2020. President Trump's immediate response on Truth Social to the Walz announcement: "Thank You!"
The pro-BLM capitulation in 2020 isn't a bug, it's a feature. It signals that left activists and "grass-roots" organizations, which are the important footsoldiers of the party, will have their causes heard and needs attended to by a Harris/Walz executive branch. Similarly, Walz's own history as a teacher is a signal that the NEA, another important left interest group, will have its interests cared for.
Im not so convinced that Jews will be able to stick out the anti Zionist turn of the Democratic Party if it is coupled with a serious turn towards DEI. I think you could convince Jews of the illegitimacy of the Israeli state, but DEI will only become more anti-Jew as time goes on and I don’t see how that is going to keep Jewish voters in the People Like Us group in the long run.
I’m not so sure Jews will be allowed to stick around even if they agree with the overall ideology. Eventually, the DIE monster will come for them, and as a minority, will be completely pushed out of the party. We saw this in Communist Russia as well as in Fascist Italy. Once the anti-Jew bug is in, no one is safe.
Progressives will allow Jews in as long as they are anti-Zionist and essentially renounce their Judaism.
The Soviets had a similar purity test, with periodic purges of Jews from leadership positions. (Leftists eat their own, and even "Good Jews" are at risk of being accused of disloyalty and expunged).
While this made me laugh, I still don’t think it will be comparable in any way. These white dudes for Harris guys are doing this all voluntarily. It’s akin to going to a dominatrix dungeon. What will happen to Jews will not be voluntary and in a controlled setting.
If Jews are allowed to be counted (not currently the case) then they might be subject to the same AA penalty as Asians. But Asians remain Democrats in spite of this.
The issue is not simply about AA; it's a question of to what degree does the Democratic Party become "Corbynized" over the next 5-10 years, to borrow Glenn Reynolds' term. IE, does it become an alliance of leftists and Islamists, like the Labour party in Britain? You also have to consider that a lot of American blacks don't like Jews, either, identifying them as "hyper white" and thus targets of racial resentment. With that in mind, only the most secular, universalist Jews may be inclined (or permitted!) to remain in the coalition. Certainly, some people would rather just chuck anything that smacks of Judaism rather than risk the opprobrium of their fellow party members. How big that group might be is hard to guess at.
"How big that group might be is hard to guess at."
On merits it should be 0%, but the reality is that it doesn't seem to be that hard to get huge chunks based on ideology. 60% of Asians vote Dem despite being actively discriminated against by them. 38% of white men still vote Dem.
That’s a good point, but I don’t feel like that will last long term. I also don’t think that it is comparable to what will happen (and is happening) to Jews. With Asians it’s not an attack on their “whiteness” and all the DEI ridiculousness that goes along with it. With Jews, it’s about their perceived whiteness and participation in colonialism. In the end, a small amount of Asians suffering because of AA isn’t going to be comparable to the humiliating struggle sessions that all Jews will have to go through to stay in the party.
The anti Israel policies are the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. Israel isn't just hated (and it is, not disliked but hated) just because it is Jewish but also because it is very Western and compared with the non oil Islamic stated around it very successful. Cant' have that! The Antisemitism is the crowbar the anti-western\anti-capitalism is the fulcrum.
In the way back when, Hitler had Jewish supporters. They thought his antisemitism was partly a pose to appeal to the masses and partly directed at the lower class Jews, which the upper and middle class Jews didn't like for giving them a "bad" name. Those Jews, not us Jews. Not at the middle class or upper class ones like they were. By the time they figured out that it wasn't a pose and he really really did mean them they were on the train and in the box cars.
The old joke about Jews is that there are the most religious people in the US. Unfortunately their religion is liberalism.
As for the stages. Note the following: The US broke every treaty it ever signed with the American Indians. The US betrayed its' agreements with the South Vietnamese, Afghanistan, and Libya. The R's made the agreements, the D's broke them at the first opportunity. The world in not a better place for it. The State Department has always been very pro Arab and very anti Israel. They did not want Truman to recognize Israel. They haven't changed on iota. The R's have never tried to change it, just ignore it. They think of it as the anti Jew Flu. It's not. It's cancer. You can more or less ignore the flu. Doesn't work very well with cancer
Harris just rejected Josh Shapiro, governor of a critical state for her to win with 19 electoral votes that has gone Trump in the past, in favor of an almost literal non-entity Tim Walz, governor of a reliably blue state with 10 electoral votes, for VP. I'd say the Democrats are in your Stage 3 right now.
Same thought here. It is also a strange year. Trump picked a senator from a safe state instead of strategically picking a moderate governor or senator from a swing state like Youngkin of VA, or a female to help correct his obstacle with female voters. Josh Shapiro was one of the brightest up and coming Democratic figures and governor of a large centrist lean blue swing state with high approvals even among its conservative voters. I'd now conclude that Harris' pick of Walz cancels out any negativities surrounding Trump's Vance pick. He also reminds me of Kaine in 2016, someone who added nothing to HRC's ticket.
I also do wonder if Harris picked Walz over Shapiro because she was afraid Shapiro was too smart for her and would overshadow her. A real possibility.
Trump was picking a successor, not someone meant to help a point or two in a state. They did after all just try to kill him, and if they succeeded the RINOs would have chosen Nikki Haley or some other traitor at the convention.
Vance's appeal is to the Scotts Irish, not Ohio specifically. He's meant to appeal to a lot of people in the neighboring swing states (PA, MI).
I disagree a bit with your characterization of Vance. Ohio might be relatively safe but I believe he has demographic appeal that could influence white working class voters in a number of Midwest states, and he adds a potentially interesting young tech-bro dynamic as well. Other than being ‘pale, male, and stale’ as the saying goes, Walz adds nothing interesting to complement Harris.
Harris is said to have picked Walz because he has an everyman midwest vibe to offset her California background. Does Shapiro in PA give off everyman vibes?
My gut feel is that secular Jews, while holding on to their tradition, will abandon Israel when push comes to shove. They have their family roots, but their religion is Democratic Progressivism. Currently supporting a two-state answer as they pass through the stages outlined by Kling, they know deep down that the Palestinians will not accept such a solution no matter how favorable the conditions. Palestinians want Israel wiped off the map, nothing less. Their intransigence in pursuit of the goal is sparked by their implicit understanding of ultimate secular Jewish irresoluteness.
Russ Roberts had a great Econtalk episode after 10/7 that discussed the significant differences between the experiences of the Jews who settled Israel (largely but not completely survivors from Europe and the Middle East and American Jews, who had both different philosophical and lived experiences.
There are at least four econtalk podcasts since October 7 getting into these and other differences. A very recent difference also gets into differences between European and Arab Jews.
It is not merely that the Democratic Party is becoming anti-Zionist, they are becoming openly anti-Semitic in keeping with the Left's "oppressor/oppressed" ideology. This is very different from the older, less malign pre-WW II casual anti-Semitism. The Left - Islamist Democratic constituency is not interested in drawing any distinction between Zionism and Jewishness. For them, Jews belong among those they hate. It is hard to see how Jews will stick with that, though no doubt some ethno-masochists will.
I think, as in Soviet times, Jews will be allowed in progressive circles as long as they are vocally anti-Zionist and are disconnected from - or reject - Judaism.
For many secular Jews, their primary tribal identity is progressivism, not Judaism.
It seems paradoxical to have fealty to an ethnic group (even if it is one’s own) that undermines its own welfare (assuming that Israel is good for the Jews) due to its deranged anti-white (gentile) stance. The Jews have contributed mightily to the cultural socialist agenda and may end up its victims, just like in the USSR. Personally, I would just become white. Many Jews already marry out.
When you say that Jews are anti white (gentile), are you referring to Israeli Jews or American leftist ones?
On the point of assimilation, many Jews will argue that the 20th century proved that assimilation was a failure. Germany had the most successful and assimilated Jews and look how that turned out.
This is a massive oversimplification of the past 100ish years but I get your point. I think a lot of it has to do with the holocaust becoming the religion of the average secular Jew.
When did it become a 'thing' that American Ashkenazi Jews (from Eastern Europe and the Russian Empire's 'pale of the settlement') aren't white? I've heard Bari Weiss and her ilk claiming not to be white, and found it puzzling and amusing. When I was growing up, I always checked the box next to Caucasian, and didn't think twice about it. I inherited my mother's pale coloring, but my father's family were relatively dark-skinned Jews with kinky hair, and still it never crossed my mind that I wasn't white. When I was dealing with a basal cell carcinoma on my face, I sat in the waiting rooms of medical offices surrounded by pasty-faced WASPs with bandages on their noses. I think that shared experience entitles me to identify as white.
Jews have never been white hence why they are Jews. Do you really think the 14th generation English immigrant in Boston identifies as English over white?
In the classic three race model, everyone from the Sahara north and the Himalayas west was Caucasian. The only Jewish people who didn't fit in there were Sudanese.
In America's traditional racial model, if you weren't black and you weren't Oriental, you were white.
On the second part, not at all hence the KKK targeting Slavs, no Irish, etc. White in the US always meant the Scotland/Switzerland/Sweden triangle with the occasional French, Italian, Spaniard included as long as their grandmum wasn't a Berber "sympathizer". Jews in America were always an outsider and remain so once they are identified, just like crypto-colored high yellows that can pass for white until they get caught.
Jesus was Jew, who would claim otherwise outside obvious fringe non-canon groups. It's a settled matter of canon, has been for 2024 years. Christianity isn't tied to racial nor ethnic supremacy, you seem to be confusing it with Judism.
Both but mainly US. I would argue that Jews were integrated but not fully assimilated into German society. Strong ethnocentrism remained. It has declined significantly in the US, as intermarriage is 70+% among non-religious Jews. But religious Jews remain ethnocentric and cloistered.
I think he's referring to the very religion itself and hence the majority of the ethnic group as well. Can't be a good Jew if you don't think you are the chosen people and everyone else inferior to you.
Interesting. Most Jews don’t practice Judaism and are in the process of complete assimilation due to high rates of intermarriage so I’m not sure why you would think this.
Jews have been beating that horse for thousands of years, the same concern was expressed in Babylon about Jews going native and yet here they are. They ain't going anywhere.
The republican suport for Israel is a poisoned pill as long as they are isolationist. Israel only makes sense in the American Hegemony framework.
Narrow pro Israel politics is useless. For the sustainability of Israel you need a pro Israel Hegemonist America. The only possible way is Democratic moderates in America, Left wing israelies building a vasal state of Palestine with less settlers.
Israel is dramatically stronger than its rivals. It has zero difficulty kicking the Arabs around without our help. It's perfectly compatible being "pro-Israel" and being an isolationist.
If it's not possible to be both, I will abandon my pro-Israel stance before my pro-isolationist stance. "We are fighting wars for Jewish interests" is supposed to be a wild conspiracy theory, not someones foreign policy.
News flash, it's not possible to be both. The Likudniks clearly expect the US to join them if they fight Iran, and all indications are that we will obey.
(At least, you can't be pro Israel by Israeli standards unless you support an offensive military alliance.)
Israel is struggling in Gaza. It absolutely needs access to the western world, and without American hegemony, the regional chaos will ensure its destruction. Either alone or with the complete Middle East.
The access to Europe and the Mediterranean for the US is a function of its role in Europe. Israel and Europe are the same geopolitical bundle.
How? Last I looked they were fighting in enemy territory from like 24 hours into the war with total force dominance. They can level any part of Gaza they want anytime they want and Hamas can do nothing.
Their "struggles" are self imposed, whatever they are.
"It absolutely needs access to the western world"
If they want to buy things from America they are as free to do that as they wish, just like anyone else. They are not entitled to foreign aid.
"and without American hegemony, the regional chaos will ensure its destruction."
The Israeli armed forces are very good at "killing people and breaking things". But that is not the objective in any war. It is (potentially) the means, not the end.
Like the US armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, they can't get the locals to do what they want them to do.
Yup. When you have such power to "kill people and break things", it is so tempting to think you thereby have the power to bend people to your will. Some times you do (Germany and Japan after WW II) and some times you don't (Iraq and Afghanistan most of the 21st Century).
It is obvious that Israel needs free navigation from their suppliers in Europe and the US. Free navigation in such long distance, for a non naval power surrounded by enemies is an American gift. The rest of subsidies are symbolic.
For an America interested in Europe’s hegemony, Israel is not a burden, but a modest over extension. For an America uninterested is Europe, Israel is too expensive and beyond reach.
Which Naval Powers do you believe are going to blockade Israel?
I'm looking at a list of Naval and Air assets for Israel versus its neighbors, it seems to me Israel could hold its own.
And even if the assets were equal, Jews are high IQ and Arabs are retarded cousin fuckers. Every time they fight the Jews clean their clocks. The Egyptians had a bunch of planes in '67 and they all got destroyed easily. You can give some retard some weapon made by someone else, but you can't make them smart enough to use it.
Look, this isn't '48 when Israel was barely a country, and you still won then.
On the Red Sea, Israel is already blockaded (Persians are not “cousin fuckers” perhaps). On the Mediterranean, once the American Hegemony dissapears, there are three things that happen: the Europeans throw Israel under the bus, the Turkish go nuclear, Egypt arms to the teeth, so Israel has to match two countries with a combined population beyond 150 million.
As long as the US is willing to sell Israel weapons and provide diplomatic cover at the UN Security Council, Israel can survive militarily.
Obviously foes like Iran and the Houthis would be much easier to fight with a US-led coalition, but an isolationist America isn't an existential threat to Israel as long as the Americans don't restrain Israel's freedom of action. (As is currently the case).
I think people don’t understand what a post American Hegemony world means. In such a world, probably America could be denied commercial access to the Mediterranean and Turkey would go nuclear, and CampDavid accords would be de facto void. Probably the EU would yield to Islamic pressure to have no economic relations with Israel.
I check off all the boxes for AK's stereotypical mindlessly donkey-lever pulling American Jew, as well as other boxes typically associated with this mindset: secular, single, female and childless. I don't have any cats, however (I'm allergic to cat dander, not that it would make any difference otherwise). Nevertheless, I parted company with the party of 'people like us' ages ago, long before it became the party that 'does not like Jews' (I confess to having voted for Carter, who also did not like Jews, but I was young then). An acquaintance of mine, who ticks off the same boxes, was very enthusiastic for Kamala during the 2020 Democratic primaries. Perhaps there was a feminist angle to this, but my suspicion was that she found it reassuring that Harris's husband is a Jew, as if that by itself would ensure protection from the anti-Jewish wing of the Party. I suspect the same is true for many American Jews. It's as if they have never heard of a 'kapo,' or can't imagine it applying to the American political context. Unlike AK, I don't hesitate to 'out myself,' and if that loses me Jewish friends, so be it.
On Israel, I recall that Netanyahu was Prime Minister during the Obama administration, when it became clear that the Democratic Party was turning against Israel, but still Netanyahu didn't read the writing on the wall, and if anything, Israel became more closely intertwined with, and dependent on, the US with respect to military equipment and defense policy during that period. So although I don't share the stereotypical American Jew's knee-jerk dislike of Netanyahu, it annoys me that he didn't take the opportunity to pursue a more independent path for Israel when he had the chance. On the other hand, as I have said before, I believe the timing of the October 7th attack was dictated by the failure of the NATO-supported counteroffensive against Russia. When NATO huffed and puffed, but it didn't blow the Russian house down, Iran and its proxies rightly saw it as a sign of weakness and pounced. Those on the right who supported the Ukraine fiasco don't want to acknowledge that the October 7th attack and the ensuing conflict in the Middle East are unanticipated secondary blowback from their stupidity, while the anti-Israel left doesn't want to acknowledge it either because it detracts from the narrative that Israel is at fault for oppressing the Palestinians and failing to implement the 2-state solution. So despite my misgivings about the Israeli government's stupidity, it irks me that Israel is paying the price for what I view as 'the blob's' irrational and moronic overreach in Ukraine.
This is all made more complex by preference falsification. Christopher Caldwell, reporting from Israel for the Claremont Review of Books in the recent issue, wrote about preference falsification within Israel by liberal Jews with respect to supporting Bibi (https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/is-israel-defensible/). So, according to him, a lot of liberals are happy with Bibi's conduct of the war, but are nervous about articulating it in public.
With respect to Israel, if the US wasn't its patron, China/Russia would be its patron. Israel has a long history of playing powers against one another. It was not firmly an American client until recently. Going to China will make a lot of sense both from a material perspective and from a fundamental interests perspective as the relevance of the American lobby withers.
The Communists did the same thing to the Jews in the early 20th century.
My longer term prediction is that Jews vanish in the West altogether as they give up their religion in order to live peacefully. They might even convert to Islam in the process if they don't escape the cities.
I don't think the Democrats will become an anti-Zionist party. Just a divided one. Also I think the most anti-Israel cohorts in the US are probably already born. There is now a left-right fertility differential, and it's stronger among educated people. Certainly within the next couple decades, young people will become more right-wing again. So a majority of the US public will always support Israel, and the Dems will never go too far left. Someone like AOC would just lose. Anyway, Israel is too important to the US (economically, strategically etc) and to the world for that matter.
American Jews lose either way. If Harris loses, the Jews will be blamed (for not voting Dem) and Israel will be blamed for losing Harris the Muslim vote. If Harris wins, Jews will get the most anti-Israel president in decades.
Please see how Jews in Europe switched from left leaning arties to right leaning parties as the anti-semitism grew. Jews in France and GB who have not yet left now tend to vote for the right parties. It turns out even traditionally leftist leaners learn from enough pain. Even the Reform Jews now seem to be willing to consider Trump. Classic joke- What is the difference between Reform Jews and Trump? Trump has Jewish grandchildren.
I think as written ("many Jews will stick with the Dems") this is true, but the mood affiliation (there won't be a major shift to the Republicans due to the People-of-Color coalition's anti-Zionism) is wrong. For instance, there's this poll (https://x.com/DougMackeyCase/status/1818698710995362294) showing Jews splitting 46/53 for Harris - a far cry from the typical 20/80 split. To me, it looks like Jews are following the same assimilative process various Catholic ethnics did, only on a one-generation lag (mass intermarriage in the 90s rather than the 60s, Republicanization in the 2020s rather than the 2000s).
In 1980, West Virginia was so reliable a source of votes for Democrats that it didn't even vote for Reagan, and the map shows it to be a blue island surrounded by a sea of red. Same in 1988 when it went for Dukakis - which not even New Jersey, Connecticut, or California did ("The past is a foreign country.") Now it is one of the reddest states.
The left tends to make temporary compromises to what is required by the ideological logic of progressives - what Lawrence Auster termed, "unprincipled exceptions" - in order to keep important groups within its coalition, whether that's because it needs the votes, money, or influence. These exceptions irritate progressive elites like thorns in their sides, and they will only tolerate such compromises for just as long as they absolutely have to, and repeatedly probe and test for whether political conditions make it safe enough to pluck them out. The minute it becomes clear that the Democrats either don't need a group anymore, or don't need to make these ideological compromises to maintain their support because of robustly self-adverse partisan loyalty, they immediately eliminate these exceptions, reconcile the party platform with the requirements of progressivism, and throw that group or their special interests under the bus. My impression (some political / social scientist should research this) is that it takes about a generation for a deeply-loyal blue group to figure out they've been downgraded and are now getting screwed over, and to flip to the Republicans, who have become a party increasingly defined by the preferences and interests of these castaways and refugees. My prediction is it will also take about a generation for Israel-supporting Jews to go the way of West Virginians and become reliable Republican voters and donors.
The Democrats' selection of MN Governor Walz over PA Governor Shapiro is striking evidence of the eclipse of Jewish influence in their party. PA has 19 electoral votes, MN only 10. PA is a must win for the Democrats, and Shapiro is a very popular moderate, yet they reject him as unacceptable to their pro-Hamas wing because he is a Jew. In his place, they designate Walz notwithstanding his record of hard Left extremism exemplified by his unwillingness to prevent Minneapolis from being set on fire in the "mostly peaceful" riots in the summer of 2020. President Trump's immediate response on Truth Social to the Walz announcement: "Thank You!"
The pro-BLM capitulation in 2020 isn't a bug, it's a feature. It signals that left activists and "grass-roots" organizations, which are the important footsoldiers of the party, will have their causes heard and needs attended to by a Harris/Walz executive branch. Similarly, Walz's own history as a teacher is a signal that the NEA, another important left interest group, will have its interests cared for.
Agree, it is unforgivable for Dems that Shapiro might be mildly pro-Israel like 80% of Congress.
Also, a 2nd theory: Shapiro completely outshines Harris. I saw a clip of Shapiro speaking and immediately thought, "This guy should be President."
Correct on both counts. Shapiro would definitely have upstaged KH.
Reversion to the mean: A players hire B players who hire C players. It takes a real leader to hire someone better than the "leader."
Im not so convinced that Jews will be able to stick out the anti Zionist turn of the Democratic Party if it is coupled with a serious turn towards DEI. I think you could convince Jews of the illegitimacy of the Israeli state, but DEI will only become more anti-Jew as time goes on and I don’t see how that is going to keep Jewish voters in the People Like Us group in the long run.
If you can have white dudes for Harris, you can have Jews for Hitler.
I'm constantly surprised by how powerful ideology is.
I’m not so sure Jews will be allowed to stick around even if they agree with the overall ideology. Eventually, the DIE monster will come for them, and as a minority, will be completely pushed out of the party. We saw this in Communist Russia as well as in Fascist Italy. Once the anti-Jew bug is in, no one is safe.
Progressives will allow Jews in as long as they are anti-Zionist and essentially renounce their Judaism.
The Soviets had a similar purity test, with periodic purges of Jews from leadership positions. (Leftists eat their own, and even "Good Jews" are at risk of being accused of disloyalty and expunged).
While this made me laugh, I still don’t think it will be comparable in any way. These white dudes for Harris guys are doing this all voluntarily. It’s akin to going to a dominatrix dungeon. What will happen to Jews will not be voluntary and in a controlled setting.
If Jews are allowed to be counted (not currently the case) then they might be subject to the same AA penalty as Asians. But Asians remain Democrats in spite of this.
The issue is not simply about AA; it's a question of to what degree does the Democratic Party become "Corbynized" over the next 5-10 years, to borrow Glenn Reynolds' term. IE, does it become an alliance of leftists and Islamists, like the Labour party in Britain? You also have to consider that a lot of American blacks don't like Jews, either, identifying them as "hyper white" and thus targets of racial resentment. With that in mind, only the most secular, universalist Jews may be inclined (or permitted!) to remain in the coalition. Certainly, some people would rather just chuck anything that smacks of Judaism rather than risk the opprobrium of their fellow party members. How big that group might be is hard to guess at.
"How big that group might be is hard to guess at."
On merits it should be 0%, but the reality is that it doesn't seem to be that hard to get huge chunks based on ideology. 60% of Asians vote Dem despite being actively discriminated against by them. 38% of white men still vote Dem.
That’s a good point, but I don’t feel like that will last long term. I also don’t think that it is comparable to what will happen (and is happening) to Jews. With Asians it’s not an attack on their “whiteness” and all the DEI ridiculousness that goes along with it. With Jews, it’s about their perceived whiteness and participation in colonialism. In the end, a small amount of Asians suffering because of AA isn’t going to be comparable to the humiliating struggle sessions that all Jews will have to go through to stay in the party.
Have you seen "White Dudes for Harris". When your a sado-masochist, and struggle sessions are the highlight.
I don’t think Harris is planning a genocide of white men anytime soon, so the analogy is certainly way over the top. But anyway, there was Jews for Hitler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_German_National_Jews
Oh, and they were anti-Zionist. Because of course.
The anti Israel policies are the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. Israel isn't just hated (and it is, not disliked but hated) just because it is Jewish but also because it is very Western and compared with the non oil Islamic stated around it very successful. Cant' have that! The Antisemitism is the crowbar the anti-western\anti-capitalism is the fulcrum.
In the way back when, Hitler had Jewish supporters. They thought his antisemitism was partly a pose to appeal to the masses and partly directed at the lower class Jews, which the upper and middle class Jews didn't like for giving them a "bad" name. Those Jews, not us Jews. Not at the middle class or upper class ones like they were. By the time they figured out that it wasn't a pose and he really really did mean them they were on the train and in the box cars.
The old joke about Jews is that there are the most religious people in the US. Unfortunately their religion is liberalism.
As for the stages. Note the following: The US broke every treaty it ever signed with the American Indians. The US betrayed its' agreements with the South Vietnamese, Afghanistan, and Libya. The R's made the agreements, the D's broke them at the first opportunity. The world in not a better place for it. The State Department has always been very pro Arab and very anti Israel. They did not want Truman to recognize Israel. They haven't changed on iota. The R's have never tried to change it, just ignore it. They think of it as the anti Jew Flu. It's not. It's cancer. You can more or less ignore the flu. Doesn't work very well with cancer
Harris just rejected Josh Shapiro, governor of a critical state for her to win with 19 electoral votes that has gone Trump in the past, in favor of an almost literal non-entity Tim Walz, governor of a reliably blue state with 10 electoral votes, for VP. I'd say the Democrats are in your Stage 3 right now.
Same thought here. It is also a strange year. Trump picked a senator from a safe state instead of strategically picking a moderate governor or senator from a swing state like Youngkin of VA, or a female to help correct his obstacle with female voters. Josh Shapiro was one of the brightest up and coming Democratic figures and governor of a large centrist lean blue swing state with high approvals even among its conservative voters. I'd now conclude that Harris' pick of Walz cancels out any negativities surrounding Trump's Vance pick. He also reminds me of Kaine in 2016, someone who added nothing to HRC's ticket.
I also do wonder if Harris picked Walz over Shapiro because she was afraid Shapiro was too smart for her and would overshadow her. A real possibility.
Trump was picking a successor, not someone meant to help a point or two in a state. They did after all just try to kill him, and if they succeeded the RINOs would have chosen Nikki Haley or some other traitor at the convention.
Vance's appeal is to the Scotts Irish, not Ohio specifically. He's meant to appeal to a lot of people in the neighboring swing states (PA, MI).
I disagree a bit with your characterization of Vance. Ohio might be relatively safe but I believe he has demographic appeal that could influence white working class voters in a number of Midwest states, and he adds a potentially interesting young tech-bro dynamic as well. Other than being ‘pale, male, and stale’ as the saying goes, Walz adds nothing interesting to complement Harris.
He's also a radical liberal tied to all the worst aspects of the Harris candidacy (trans, BLM riots, etc).
Harris is said to have picked Walz because he has an everyman midwest vibe to offset her California background. Does Shapiro in PA give off everyman vibes?
I have family in Minneapolis and grew up just south of the IA-MN border. Minneapolis wants to be LA when it grows up.
My gut feel is that secular Jews, while holding on to their tradition, will abandon Israel when push comes to shove. They have their family roots, but their religion is Democratic Progressivism. Currently supporting a two-state answer as they pass through the stages outlined by Kling, they know deep down that the Palestinians will not accept such a solution no matter how favorable the conditions. Palestinians want Israel wiped off the map, nothing less. Their intransigence in pursuit of the goal is sparked by their implicit understanding of ultimate secular Jewish irresoluteness.
Russ Roberts had a great Econtalk episode after 10/7 that discussed the significant differences between the experiences of the Jews who settled Israel (largely but not completely survivors from Europe and the Middle East and American Jews, who had both different philosophical and lived experiences.
There are at least four econtalk podcasts since October 7 getting into these and other differences. A very recent difference also gets into differences between European and Arab Jews.
I think of it as tribal identity. Secular Jews' tribe is progressivism, not Judaism.
It is not merely that the Democratic Party is becoming anti-Zionist, they are becoming openly anti-Semitic in keeping with the Left's "oppressor/oppressed" ideology. This is very different from the older, less malign pre-WW II casual anti-Semitism. The Left - Islamist Democratic constituency is not interested in drawing any distinction between Zionism and Jewishness. For them, Jews belong among those they hate. It is hard to see how Jews will stick with that, though no doubt some ethno-masochists will.
I think, as in Soviet times, Jews will be allowed in progressive circles as long as they are vocally anti-Zionist and are disconnected from - or reject - Judaism.
For many secular Jews, their primary tribal identity is progressivism, not Judaism.
Feeling greater sympathy for the people of Gaza than the Israelis does not entail thinking that Israel has no moral right to exist.
This inaccurate heightened language is unproductive, just like it's unproductive when activists say that the war is a genocide.
Ah, but emotionally it does.
It seems paradoxical to have fealty to an ethnic group (even if it is one’s own) that undermines its own welfare (assuming that Israel is good for the Jews) due to its deranged anti-white (gentile) stance. The Jews have contributed mightily to the cultural socialist agenda and may end up its victims, just like in the USSR. Personally, I would just become white. Many Jews already marry out.
When you say that Jews are anti white (gentile), are you referring to Israeli Jews or American leftist ones?
On the point of assimilation, many Jews will argue that the 20th century proved that assimilation was a failure. Germany had the most successful and assimilated Jews and look how that turned out.
We literally rescued you from the camps, gave you a country, and let you become a huge portion of our own elite.
Response: you are all one bad day away from Hitler and we must keep you down.
Alright, good luck in the coming Caliphate because you can't trust white.
This is a massive oversimplification of the past 100ish years but I get your point. I think a lot of it has to do with the holocaust becoming the religion of the average secular Jew.
They gave you the nuclear weapons in return. How many people in the Manhattan project were Jews?
They also gave nuclear weapons to the Soviets :P
We already won the war before nukes.
Had your security guys be as good as their physicists, the USSR had gotten the bomb in the 1960s!
When did it become a 'thing' that American Ashkenazi Jews (from Eastern Europe and the Russian Empire's 'pale of the settlement') aren't white? I've heard Bari Weiss and her ilk claiming not to be white, and found it puzzling and amusing. When I was growing up, I always checked the box next to Caucasian, and didn't think twice about it. I inherited my mother's pale coloring, but my father's family were relatively dark-skinned Jews with kinky hair, and still it never crossed my mind that I wasn't white. When I was dealing with a basal cell carcinoma on my face, I sat in the waiting rooms of medical offices surrounded by pasty-faced WASPs with bandages on their noses. I think that shared experience entitles me to identify as white.
Jews have never been white hence why they are Jews. Do you really think the 14th generation English immigrant in Boston identifies as English over white?
In the classic three race model, everyone from the Sahara north and the Himalayas west was Caucasian. The only Jewish people who didn't fit in there were Sudanese.
In America's traditional racial model, if you weren't black and you weren't Oriental, you were white.
On the second part, not at all hence the KKK targeting Slavs, no Irish, etc. White in the US always meant the Scotland/Switzerland/Sweden triangle with the occasional French, Italian, Spaniard included as long as their grandmum wasn't a Berber "sympathizer". Jews in America were always an outsider and remain so once they are identified, just like crypto-colored high yellows that can pass for white until they get caught.
Are you a Christian? If so, was Jesus Christ, whom you worship as your savior, white?
Jesus was Jew, who would claim otherwise outside obvious fringe non-canon groups. It's a settled matter of canon, has been for 2024 years. Christianity isn't tied to racial nor ethnic supremacy, you seem to be confusing it with Judism.
Both but mainly US. I would argue that Jews were integrated but not fully assimilated into German society. Strong ethnocentrism remained. It has declined significantly in the US, as intermarriage is 70+% among non-religious Jews. But religious Jews remain ethnocentric and cloistered.
I think he's referring to the very religion itself and hence the majority of the ethnic group as well. Can't be a good Jew if you don't think you are the chosen people and everyone else inferior to you.
Interesting. Most Jews don’t practice Judaism and are in the process of complete assimilation due to high rates of intermarriage so I’m not sure why you would think this.
Jews have been beating that horse for thousands of years, the same concern was expressed in Babylon about Jews going native and yet here they are. They ain't going anywhere.
The republican suport for Israel is a poisoned pill as long as they are isolationist. Israel only makes sense in the American Hegemony framework.
Narrow pro Israel politics is useless. For the sustainability of Israel you need a pro Israel Hegemonist America. The only possible way is Democratic moderates in America, Left wing israelies building a vasal state of Palestine with less settlers.
This is nonsense.
Israel is dramatically stronger than its rivals. It has zero difficulty kicking the Arabs around without our help. It's perfectly compatible being "pro-Israel" and being an isolationist.
If it's not possible to be both, I will abandon my pro-Israel stance before my pro-isolationist stance. "We are fighting wars for Jewish interests" is supposed to be a wild conspiracy theory, not someones foreign policy.
News flash, it's not possible to be both. The Likudniks clearly expect the US to join them if they fight Iran, and all indications are that we will obey.
(At least, you can't be pro Israel by Israeli standards unless you support an offensive military alliance.)
Israel is struggling in Gaza. It absolutely needs access to the western world, and without American hegemony, the regional chaos will ensure its destruction. Either alone or with the complete Middle East.
The access to Europe and the Mediterranean for the US is a function of its role in Europe. Israel and Europe are the same geopolitical bundle.
"Israel is struggling in Gaza."
How? Last I looked they were fighting in enemy territory from like 24 hours into the war with total force dominance. They can level any part of Gaza they want anytime they want and Hamas can do nothing.
Their "struggles" are self imposed, whatever they are.
"It absolutely needs access to the western world"
If they want to buy things from America they are as free to do that as they wish, just like anyone else. They are not entitled to foreign aid.
"and without American hegemony, the regional chaos will ensure its destruction."
Why?
The Israeli armed forces are very good at "killing people and breaking things". But that is not the objective in any war. It is (potentially) the means, not the end.
Like the US armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, they can't get the locals to do what they want them to do.
So their "struggle" is that they've chosen an impossible war objective from the start. That's self imposed.
Yup. When you have such power to "kill people and break things", it is so tempting to think you thereby have the power to bend people to your will. Some times you do (Germany and Japan after WW II) and some times you don't (Iraq and Afghanistan most of the 21st Century).
It is obvious that Israel needs free navigation from their suppliers in Europe and the US. Free navigation in such long distance, for a non naval power surrounded by enemies is an American gift. The rest of subsidies are symbolic.
For an America interested in Europe’s hegemony, Israel is not a burden, but a modest over extension. For an America uninterested is Europe, Israel is too expensive and beyond reach.
Which Naval Powers do you believe are going to blockade Israel?
I'm looking at a list of Naval and Air assets for Israel versus its neighbors, it seems to me Israel could hold its own.
And even if the assets were equal, Jews are high IQ and Arabs are retarded cousin fuckers. Every time they fight the Jews clean their clocks. The Egyptians had a bunch of planes in '67 and they all got destroyed easily. You can give some retard some weapon made by someone else, but you can't make them smart enough to use it.
Look, this isn't '48 when Israel was barely a country, and you still won then.
On the Red Sea, Israel is already blockaded (Persians are not “cousin fuckers” perhaps). On the Mediterranean, once the American Hegemony dissapears, there are three things that happen: the Europeans throw Israel under the bus, the Turkish go nuclear, Egypt arms to the teeth, so Israel has to match two countries with a combined population beyond 150 million.
Narrow, but possible. Let’s hope God exists and really is Moshe’s God.
As long as the US is willing to sell Israel weapons and provide diplomatic cover at the UN Security Council, Israel can survive militarily.
Obviously foes like Iran and the Houthis would be much easier to fight with a US-led coalition, but an isolationist America isn't an existential threat to Israel as long as the Americans don't restrain Israel's freedom of action. (As is currently the case).
I think people don’t understand what a post American Hegemony world means. In such a world, probably America could be denied commercial access to the Mediterranean and Turkey would go nuclear, and CampDavid accords would be de facto void. Probably the EU would yield to Islamic pressure to have no economic relations with Israel.
Fair point.
I check off all the boxes for AK's stereotypical mindlessly donkey-lever pulling American Jew, as well as other boxes typically associated with this mindset: secular, single, female and childless. I don't have any cats, however (I'm allergic to cat dander, not that it would make any difference otherwise). Nevertheless, I parted company with the party of 'people like us' ages ago, long before it became the party that 'does not like Jews' (I confess to having voted for Carter, who also did not like Jews, but I was young then). An acquaintance of mine, who ticks off the same boxes, was very enthusiastic for Kamala during the 2020 Democratic primaries. Perhaps there was a feminist angle to this, but my suspicion was that she found it reassuring that Harris's husband is a Jew, as if that by itself would ensure protection from the anti-Jewish wing of the Party. I suspect the same is true for many American Jews. It's as if they have never heard of a 'kapo,' or can't imagine it applying to the American political context. Unlike AK, I don't hesitate to 'out myself,' and if that loses me Jewish friends, so be it.
On Israel, I recall that Netanyahu was Prime Minister during the Obama administration, when it became clear that the Democratic Party was turning against Israel, but still Netanyahu didn't read the writing on the wall, and if anything, Israel became more closely intertwined with, and dependent on, the US with respect to military equipment and defense policy during that period. So although I don't share the stereotypical American Jew's knee-jerk dislike of Netanyahu, it annoys me that he didn't take the opportunity to pursue a more independent path for Israel when he had the chance. On the other hand, as I have said before, I believe the timing of the October 7th attack was dictated by the failure of the NATO-supported counteroffensive against Russia. When NATO huffed and puffed, but it didn't blow the Russian house down, Iran and its proxies rightly saw it as a sign of weakness and pounced. Those on the right who supported the Ukraine fiasco don't want to acknowledge that the October 7th attack and the ensuing conflict in the Middle East are unanticipated secondary blowback from their stupidity, while the anti-Israel left doesn't want to acknowledge it either because it detracts from the narrative that Israel is at fault for oppressing the Palestinians and failing to implement the 2-state solution. So despite my misgivings about the Israeli government's stupidity, it irks me that Israel is paying the price for what I view as 'the blob's' irrational and moronic overreach in Ukraine.
This is all made more complex by preference falsification. Christopher Caldwell, reporting from Israel for the Claremont Review of Books in the recent issue, wrote about preference falsification within Israel by liberal Jews with respect to supporting Bibi (https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/is-israel-defensible/). So, according to him, a lot of liberals are happy with Bibi's conduct of the war, but are nervous about articulating it in public.
With respect to Israel, if the US wasn't its patron, China/Russia would be its patron. Israel has a long history of playing powers against one another. It was not firmly an American client until recently. Going to China will make a lot of sense both from a material perspective and from a fundamental interests perspective as the relevance of the American lobby withers.
The Communists did the same thing to the Jews in the early 20th century.
My longer term prediction is that Jews vanish in the West altogether as they give up their religion in order to live peacefully. They might even convert to Islam in the process if they don't escape the cities.
I don't think the Democrats will become an anti-Zionist party. Just a divided one. Also I think the most anti-Israel cohorts in the US are probably already born. There is now a left-right fertility differential, and it's stronger among educated people. Certainly within the next couple decades, young people will become more right-wing again. So a majority of the US public will always support Israel, and the Dems will never go too far left. Someone like AOC would just lose. Anyway, Israel is too important to the US (economically, strategically etc) and to the world for that matter.
American Jews lose either way. If Harris loses, the Jews will be blamed (for not voting Dem) and Israel will be blamed for losing Harris the Muslim vote. If Harris wins, Jews will get the most anti-Israel president in decades.