I think that the editors of the Wall Street Journal strike about the right note in their remarks on the murders in Pittsburgh over the weekend:
Robert Bowers simply hated Jews.
This irrational hatred is one of humanity’s oldest and manifests itself in murder almost daily in the Middle East. Jews are killed simply because they are Jews, as they have been throughout history. This is why millions have sought refuge in a Jewish state, Israel, and also in the religious protections embedded in the Constitution of the United States.
The outpouring of support and grief for the victims of the Pittsburgh massacre is a reminder of America’s unique role as a refuge for the world’s religious. Muslim states often persecute non-Muslims as well as Muslims who do not share their brand of Islam. China persecutes people of all faiths. America protects them.
The U.S. has seen an increase in anti-Semitic acts in recent years, according to the Anti-Defamation League. But there are still fewer in America than in most of the rest of world, and the sources of anti-Semitism range across the political spectrum, including some on the right like Robert Bowers but also from the pro-Palestinian left, especially on university campuses.
I understand that people are shocked and in grief but the notion that Jews are not safer here than in any European country and even safer here than in Israel is simply without basis. Based on the FBI’s hate crimes statistics and European anti-Semitic hate crimes statistics the incidence of such crimes is an order of magnitude greater in France and the United Kingdom than it is here and five times as great in Germany or Sweden than here. And anti-Semitism is considerably stronger in Eastern Europe than in Western Europe.
Hatred of Jews didn’t start last year or the year before—it’s been around for millennia. The temperature is rising in the U. S. and Jews are the canaries in the coal mine to mix metaphors. While I agree that President Trump needs to moderate his rhetoric, the notion that Trump is the only problem is cynical political opportunism.
There is a tight historical relationship between economic insecurity and violent bigotry. We’ve seen it over and again in Germany, Italy, Sweden, Poland, Austria and also the United States. Trump and anti-semitism spring from the same source, but Trump cannot be called the root cause. He is making the situation worse with his routine praise of violence.
I agree with every word of that comment.
Good comment Ben.
I’d also point out that the “Trump phenomenon” (ie. nationalist populism) is global. Brazil is the latest example in a long line.
It does annoy me that so many Americans how no idea what racism is like in other countries. The United States, for all our problems, is a multicultural paradise compared to 95% of the world.
Bowers hated Jews, but his hatred was nurtured by the social media that fans that hatred. He found people, and they found him, that egged him on. This sounds an awful lot like what goes on in the jihadist world where they look for the disaffected (losers) and help build up their anger and hatred. Add in our gun culture in the US, and you have the recipe for killings.
Totally agree that Trump is not the cause and the only reason, but as I said before, if he doesn’t change not much else will. If our elected leader, the guy who gets more media coverage than anyone in the world, the guy other politicians emulate, continues to fan the fires, it is incredibly unlikely the heat gets toned down.
Steve
Andy, that’s a critical point. If Trump is the problem, then why are radicals making advances all over the planet? Blaming Trump or calling him an anomaly doesn’t explain nearly enough.
Steve: Bowers hated a caricature of Jews, I’ll bet he never met one. I’d even bet he met that caricature online. Is that cause for censure? My vote is no, the internet and free speech are too valuable to toss aside, even after an evil act such as this. As a free nation, we move forward to a better future, not a censured past.
Does anyone really think Trump egging on lock her up chants or chastising the press can incite violence? If it’s that easy then there would have been open warfare in the streets the past two years. Any number of politicians have serially engaged in worse.
Does anyone believe if Trump magically became a statesman that Dem pols, pundits and media would tone down their rhetoric, and accurately report. In politics, is being a punching bag allowing the opposition to set the narrative a good strategy?
Does anyone believe that the immediate and grotesque blaming of Trump for Sayoc or the synagogue shooter is analytical and heartfelt, rather than anything more than cheap political opportunism perpetrated by the lowest of character? This one is an IQ test.
Rather than answering your questions I’ll put it this way. Trump is what happens when the media and Democratic politicians savage McCain and Romney. The torrent of attacks on Romney was particularly unfair and savage.
What I don’t think that many get about Trump is that he’s a counter-puncher and it’s something his supporters like about him. If people want him to stop punching back, they should stop punching. That won’t stop him from being combative but it may reduce his sense of urgency.
Contrariwise, if they continue punching that’s a tacit statement of agreement with his punching back.