fbpx

December 15, 2024

The Ivy League of Extraordinary Antisemites

So much for tuxedos, tails and glamorous evening gowns—and those bollocks British accents. What a curious spectacle when posh people descend to the mosh pits.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the Oxford Union, the famed debating society that for two centuries has hosted an international jet set of debaters in their best finery and eloquent oratory. Yet wouldn’t you just know it. When it came to the question of whether Israel is an “apartheid state responsible for genocide,” with an audience overrun with overeducated devotees of the death cult called Hamas, it was impossible for Oxford to put on airs amid the coarsened chaos the event caused.

The motion was overwhelmingly carried, 278 to 59. It gets worse: More than 75 percent of those in attendance voted that they would not have warned the proper authorities what Hamas had planned to do on October 7, 2023.

All very shocking, but not unpredictable. What was more revealing and disconcerting was the atmosphere of the debate itself. Decorum went from black tie to black eye. There was no greater evidence of the alarming decline of Western civilization. And at Oxford, of all places, which imagines itself as its cradle.

Despite all that pretentious Edwardian refinement and Harry Potter pedigree, we now know you can get Oxford all dressed up, but when it comes to the hatred of Jews, you can’t take it anywhere.

The Ivy League in America is not alone. Apparently, all the once great universities no longer teach the world’s oldest prejudice —they simply practice it, comprising their own League of Extraordinary Antisemites.

The chairman of the Oxford Union, an Egyptian, demonstrated his impartiality by openly declaring Israel to be an apartheid state. So much for commencing the debate on an equal footing. At the speech of one of the pro-Israel advocates, Mosab Hassan Yousef, who happens to be the son of one of Hamas’ founders and a fierce critic of his father’s handiwork (he has called Palestinians themselves “a false identity”), the crowd erupted in cries calling him a “traitor” and “prostitute.”

Another one of the pro-Israel speakers, a British journalist, challenged the accusation that Israel was deliberately causing mass starvation in Gaza. He read statistics to show that “Israel has provided 700,000 tons of food to Gaza during this war. That is a daily average of 3,200 calories per person.” One audience member screamed from her seat: “Sick motherfucker!” and called him a “genocidal maniac.”

Wow, cursing in the Queen’s English is as comfortable as a pair of Oxford shoes.

A shameless pro-Hamas team member said: “What happened on October 7 was not terrorism—these were acts of heroism of a people who were oppressed.” He promptly demanded, to a rousing ovation, a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea.”

In the United Kingdom, which does not guarantee the same free speech protections as are granted in the United States, calling Hamas heroes might actually constitute a hate crime. But apparently not at Oxford. Afterwards, some members of the audience were seen shoving Jews and stomping on flags.

Outside the hall was no more dignified. Members of Oxford Action for Palestine, a radical student group, protested that “Zionists are not welcome in Oxford!” The group later celebrated their disruption by stating it “demonstrated our unwavering refusal to platform Zionists.”

This Oxford Union antisemitic spectacle cum WrestleMania has been staged in the past. In 1962, they debated the topic “The Creation of the State of Israel Is One of the Mistakes of the Century.” In 2008, they debated, “This house believes that the State of Israel has a right to exist.”

But this year’s rendition was far more raucous and threatening. Most Jewish students stayed away. One posted on X: “I was amazed at how many keffiyehs and hijabs there were and how hostile and toxic the atmosphere was.”

All this British boorishness was not confined to Oxford’s debating society. Just one day earlier, the same pro-Hamas activists poisoned another event. The President of Ben-Gurion University delivered a lecture about Israel’s favorable experience with diversity and inclusion. The students who attended weren’t having any of it, heckling and shouting him down. Oxford’s Jewish community, and more elderly members of the audience, were reportedly “shellshocked.”

Something similar happened at the now infamous Oxford Union debate. An Israeli Arab arguing in favor of the Jewish state showed photographs of Muslims who owned banks in Israel, served as Israeli judges and as members of parliament, and played on Israel’s national soccer team. He himself gave orders to Jewish soldiers as an officer in the IDF. This, too, did not match the script the audience was conditioned to hear. He was repeatedly jeered.

Yes, that’s surely what apartheid looks like in the minds of today’s antisemitic “human rights” activists. Indeed, the pro-Hamas speakers featured at the Oxford Union in the past called Jews “spawns of Satan,” claimed that they “aren’t human,” smeared Jewish immigrants to the Middle East as “garbage,” and proclaimed that “‘the Jews’ as a united single nation or people is fiction.”

Another one of the Islamist debaters relied on that oldie but goodie blood libel with a more Middle Eastern twist: Israel has “an unquenchable thirst for Palestinian blood” and harvests and eats their organs.

These people were invited to speak at Oxford, where Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan and Robert Kennedy all once appeared?

The end of the old order of civility and mutual respect has arrived—even in hallowed Gothic buildings with palatial libraries. Western civilization in these days of anti-colonial, anti-racist, antisemitic idolatries doesn’t stand a chance.

Those great debaters Lincoln and Douglas would be lost in London these days. The land of Shakespeare has been overtaken by foul-mouthed groundlings muddied in multicultural hogwash.

Those great debaters Lincoln and Douglas would be lost in London these days. The land of Shakespeare has been overtaken by foul-mouthed groundlings muddied in multicultural hogwash. As for Oxford, it peaked as the setting for Harry Potter’s Hogwarts, having now lost its capacity for intellectual wizardry.


Thane Rosenbaum is a novelist, essayist, law professor and Distinguished University Professor at Touro University, where he directs the Forum on Life, Culture & Society. He is the legal analyst for CBS News Radio. His most recent book is titled “Saving Free Speech … From Itself,” and his forthcoming book is titled, “Beyond Proportionality: Is Israel Fighting a Just War in Gaza?”

The Ivy League of Extraordinary Antisemites Read More »

The Year Conservatives Became Cool

In a 2002 essay in the Claremont Review of Books titled, “To Be Young, Conservative, and Cool,” New York Times columnist Ross Douthat reminisced about how his college culture was mired not just in a war of ideas but in “a war of attitudes, in which conservative-bashing is the last acceptable form of bigotry.” He argued that becoming “cool,” however difficult that might be, should be a top conservative priority.

Twenty-two years later, his wish may be coming true.

Remember when conservatives were the stodgy ones who represented the establishment and Democrats were the cool ones who cared for minorities and the underdogs?

How did Democrats suddenly become the party of the status quo while their conservative rivals have become the party of change and innovation? How did Dems come to represent the snobbish coastal elites who look with disdain at Trump voters while conservatives represent the working class that aspires to their share of the American Dream?

People vote for rational reasons like food prices, but also for emotional reasons like whether they think you’re cool and care about them. If they think you’re preachy and condescending, that’s one sure way to lose votes. 

Maybe the Dems assumed that because they own the culture, they also own the country. But the problem with “owning the culture” is that you’re no longer the counterculture. As painful as this is for Democrats to hear, it is conservatives today who represent the counterculture.

“Democrats have historically had these really close relationships with institutional media, institutional culture — Hollywood and the traditional press,” admitted Rob Flaherty, Vice President Kamala Harris’ deputy campaign manager, in a recent interview. In the era of Trump, those “close relationships” have become so cozy and hardwired as to become banal.

During the turbulent 1960s, banal was not a word one would use to describe Democrats. With the March on Washington, the Free Speech movement in Berkeley, anti-war demonstrations and the “free love” hippies at Woodstock, it became a law of nature that if you wanted to be cool, you had to be on the left. Politically, that meant you voted Democrat.

Voting Democrat wasn’t just an affiliation; it was an attitude. It meant you cared. It meant you weren’t straight and rigid. If you got hit by lightning and voted Republican, that meant you went over to the “dark side.”

This was, and in many ways still is, especially true in Jewish circles. Voting Democrat is your permission slip to enter polite society.

The results of the last election have shaken these assumptions. When Bernie Sanders, the eminence grise of the progressive left, accused his party of being controlled by “big money interests” and “well-paid consultants,” he was essentially telling his brethren they were now part of the dark side.

“It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them,” he famously wrote after Nov. 5. “Will [Democrats] understand the pain and political alienation that tens of millions of Americans are experiencing? Do they have any ideas as to how we can take on the increasingly powerful Oligarchy, which has so much economic power?”

Accuse Democrats of caring more about the powerful than the powerless and you might as well strip their identity. It’s acceptable to have too much compassion, but not enough? For a Democrat that is a spear to the soul.

This is why so many Dems were shell-shocked after Nov. 5. They felt rejected by the very people they claim to serve. They couldn’t fathom how so many Latinos, Asians, Blacks and urban voters who are usually hard-core Democrats moved to the other side. This is not 2016, when they could blame their loss on Trump’s white racist followers and still retain their mantle of “coolness.”

Once you lose minorities and urbanites, you’ve given up cool. You’ve given up your edge.

This also applies to Israel. Because Democrats are associated with the establishment — from the media to Hollywood to academia, where anti-Zionism rules– they’ve become predictable followers. Supporting Palestinians today is the conformist and safe choice. The real rebels, the ones who push back against the establishment, are the Zionists. They are the minority. They are the insurrectionists. They are the ones with the cojones to speak truth to power. They are the cool ones.

Even when Dems have tried to fight for minorities, as they did with Black Lives Matter, it’s been more virtue signaling than actually helping Black communities. They make lots of noise in support of the homeless, migrants and disadvantaged criminals, but that noise stops when those urban ills come too close to their neighborhoods. Voters sense that phoniness– and they don’t find it cool.

One visible sign of these new times is how Trump voters are no longer hiding like they used to. It is the other side that is on the defensive. Trump may be as crass and bombastic as ever, but he now has a net-positive favorability rating for the first time since he entered politics. His followers are showing the chutzpah of rebels who just conquered the bourgeoisie and are taking back their country. And yes, they might as well say it: It’s cool again to love America.

Conservatives, of course, shouldn’t get too cocky or celebrate too early. There are enough unattractive aspects of their movement– things like authoritarian instincts, an impulsive leader and big-money interests– that can unravel that edifice. Staying cool is as hard as becoming cool.

Democrats, meanwhile, will continue their conservative-bashing on college campuses and elsewhere. It just won’t look as cool as it used to.

The Year Conservatives Became Cool Read More »