Discover more from Lev's Lens
Musk VS ADL: The Bigger Picture
There is no winning with Jew haters and leftists alike. Victory can only be sought in pursuit of the truth.
Uniting against destructive ideas today will make all the difference when it comes to the kind of world we will find ourselves in tomorrow, but such is not currently the case with the Anti Defamation League and its detractors, as well as those unwilling to speak out on both.
Much like with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the ever-increasing tribal opposition means that whatever makes sense to one camp will be opposed or ignored by the other. The ADL's platforming of left-wing social justice initiatives in recent times has similarly triggered this kind of backlash, conflating legitimate concerns about antisemitism with what Elon Musk has termed “the woke mind virus”.
Musk himself has pointed out this problem with the organization as have conservative Jewish outlets like the Jewish News Syndicate, but in his particular case there have been less than stellar actions like amplifying the unabashed anti-Semite Keith Woods and not calling out the blood libel comparison between Judaism and Adrenochrome in a post Musk drew attention towards.
That being said, standing against the aforementioned people and ideas does not mean they should be banned from the platform like the ADL would prefer, but at the same time Musk’s influence has the “noblesse oblige” to set a good example by choosing who to amplify for their audience from their personal loudspeaker.
While Musk did say that he was “pro free speech, but against anti-Semitism of any kind” in a recent post, it would be nice if there were other people for him to elevate that are both against the banning of people like Woods while at the same time not hating people based on their genetic profile. But because organizations like the ADL now consider conservative values on immigration, gender, and culture to be bigoted, it creates a false impression in the minds of those unfamiliar with the diversity of Jewish people that there’s a monolith with some long standing grudge against Western civilization. This in turn attracts them to actual bigotry when the standards for such a definition have been blurred.
But how did this mess we’re in come to be in the first place, and what can we do to change it?
The Sin Chicken Scapegoat
It goes without saying that such hatred existed long before the ADL, though for most Christian nations it was based on a difference of religion as opposed to what the Nazis considered to be genetic determinism. Regardless of motive, however, the recurring practice of those discriminating against the Jews has been to treat them like some orthodox Jews treat chickens in the barbaric Kapparot ritual practiced on the day before Yom Kippur… the Day of Atonement ironically enough.
While Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel David Lau urged “to refrain from causing suffering to animals” during this ritual as well as history’s great rabbis like Nachmanides, Shlomo ben Aderet, and Joseph ben Ephraim Karo opposed it outright, the dreadful thing continues to this day. Such practice is to be found neither in the Torah or Talmud, where chickens that are often kept in poor cramped conditions are spun around one’s head while praying for atonement and then given to the hungry. But this latter part is no excuse for the undue suffering of the animal especially when the same ritual can be performed with money instead.
In the way that Jews who observe the ritual bring about additional cruelty by pretending to offset their sins into the poor animal, otherwise seemingly decent people descend into barbarism when offsetting the negative aspects of life onto those who they have power over in numbers and might.
It was not that long ago when Jews could not own land in Europe and were only allowed to mostly profit from the kinds of jobs that were deemed sinful such as those involving the practice of usury. Thus European Jews had to don the Sin Chicken costume on top of their Yarmulke while those who persecuted them for it never had to get their own feathers ruffled.
The barrier to integration was religion, which was a serious matter for both sides. Despite this, those Jews who integrated through conversion and subsequent marriages with gentiles eventually faced far less suspicion. By the time Hitler came to power, the number of Christians with Jewish ancestry was almost equal to the total population of Jews within Germany, though obviously by that time things were very different.
Some prominent reasons for converting had to do with removing the heavy shackles of religious tribalism altogether. In this way, Protestantism as the civic national religion within Germany served as a lighter weight allowing the Sin Chicken to spread its wings and fly like the proud German Eagle.
From Faith to Ideology
So within Germany as was the case in many parts of a secularizing Europe, Jews were eventually able to integrate without having to profess serious belief other than in the patriotism to the nation they call home. The downside of this trend, however, was that a lack of religious conviction opened an existential gap for Jews and non Jews alike that would be filled up by a rising revolutionary sentiment.
This was especially the case within the Russian Empire, as being an absolute monarchy during a time of great technological and political change meant tensions were already high among those who wanted to take Russia into a newer more progressive direction. It did not help that one of the four left-wing terrorists who assassinated Czar Alexander II in 1881 was Jewish, as this prompted a further backlash by the inflamed Christian masses.
To make matters worse, while Alexander II was a sweeping reformer who finally allowed for a merit based way for a certain number of Jews to leave the Pale of Settlement and enter polite society, his son was the opposite. Upon ascending to the throne after his father’s death, Alexander III undid many of these reforms under the guise of the “May Laws”, as well as reversing steps toward a Constitutional Monarchy, .
One could only imagine that if these revolutionaries concentrated on gradual reform which was already taking place or if Alexander III was not an atavistic anti-Semitic reactionary, we would not have had the USSR as well as the worldwide spread of communism. But there is enough historical insight for us to watch out for certain trends.
One example is extreme over-reactions on mutually opposing sides which eventually lead to destruction and tyranny as was the case with Russia. Another equally important and evident fact was that regardless of ethnos, the dissenters against Russia’s monarchy were a part of a part of the nobility, wealthy businessmen, and intelligentsia which had been fighting against “the system” long before Jews were allowed in polite society.
And while the barbaric Bolshevism was carried out by a leadership around half of which were Jewish by birth, what united them was not some love of Judaism (as most were stubborn atheists) but the combination of two important elements. One was a reaction to the actually existing idiocy and reactionism of Russia’s absolute monarchy maintaining class segregation. The other was being intelligent and willful enough for that role in the same way that Jews excel in physics, math, music, chess, and Nobel Prizes to name a few.
Yet as Communism and other such ideologies show us, the pursuit of greatness has rarely gone only in the direction of “the good” when dealing with political matters.
Just as such in our world today, the easily recognizable but harder to address problems that both Jews and Non Jews have to deal with are created and maintained by whoever ends up being the most qualified. Any organized group within government, media, and academia that desires to brainwash and censor will unfortunately have a line of overeducated idiots going out the door who come from every part of the (mostly) upper social hierarchy.
Take away all the Jews and you will find just as many overproduced elites from WASPish families or other such groups who have been loyal members of the far left priesthood and would act no differently than current ADL president Jonathan Greenblatt when it comes to social justice. Take away the ADL and you’ll still have organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center, though it is understandably tempting to confuse their CEO Maragret Huang for a character right out of “Fiddler on the Roof”.
And even if Lenin did not have any Jews within the Bolshevik leadership, there would be plenty of revolutionaries willing to step up, including a certain Georgian named Joseph Stalin.
Less Intelligence and More Cowardice
When it comes to Stalinism, this was the stark reality that broke Communism's illusion for journalist Eugene Lyons who eventually went on to write “The Red Decade'' exposing Stalinist subversion within the US. Lyons identified most of the American intelligentsia during the thirties as ardent supporters of this mass murderer, being blind sided by talks of a utopia that America is far behind from achieving. Any voices to the contrary fell on deaf ears if not outright exclusion.
In the same way, our current “intelligentsia”, including a rising percentage of reform Jews who consider themselves to be within its ranks, fawn over stupid policies that a rising number of Americans oppose. Organizations like the ADL and SPLC help stoke this fire further by associating antisemitism or white supremacy with opposition to these policies, but the real problem lies in those who know better yet do nothing.
Eugene Lyons was smart enough to clearly see what Communism leads to when he was exposed to it first hand working for the Soviet Press, and afterwards made a 180 degree turn to oppose it with all his might. Yet there is doubt that the progressives today are smart enough to do the same even if they have access to all this historical knowledge, as they do not bother looking any of it up on youtube let alone read a book.
But it's easy to pick on brain fried zoomers making up most of the progressive wing who never had much of a chance to begin with. The target of derision should be placed on the backs of public intellectuals who know what the problems are yet refrain from engaging with the opposition. This applies not just to engaging with those who support the more woke policies of the ADL but even more so with anti-Semites on the fringes of both the left as well right.
While the far right has been more associated with antisemitism in our culture, it would be a rookie mistake to overlook the extreme hatred towards Jews from the so-called “Progressive” Movement. Like their long lost reactionary brothers, leftists have traditionally seen Jews as inherent capitalist exploiters or in the case of Israel, as Darth Vader tier imperialists that deserve to be taken down by the “rebel alliance” of the plucky Palestinians. Just as leftists and rightists can agree on not supporting Ukraine, the horseshoe theory, which posits that extremes can resemble each other, proves true once again in this case.
Time is now moving quickly while animosity is heating up, yet the promotion of actual liberal values is wasted on preaching to the choir. In this sense these classically liberal priests do not deserve such a name, and are no different from the extremists who prefer to be within their zone of influence. At least reactionaries put their reputation on the line for what they believe in, even if it ends in them spinning the Sin Chicken around once again.
But this should not be a sign of any kind of Dead End. Eugene Lyons knew he would turn many of his former friends against him for doing the right thing, but he was able to find a community of mutual support through such venues as National Review, Radio Free Europe and The American Jewish League Against Communism.
Let this example show what needs to be done from here. There need to be better suited candidates for Musk to promote who are not far right or anti-Semites ( so long as Musk is not an anti-Semite himself), and they must be able to engage with all the criticisms from such reactionary circles, including everything brought forth against the ADL.
But why should those with liberal perspectives engage in dialogue with avowed Nazis instead of deplatforming and disregarding them? Historically, especially since 2016, mainstream social media platforms have marginalized such groups, though were largely influenced by ideologies akin to the "woke" ADL when it comes to the broad brush applied to what’s considered “hateful”.
This has understandably driven more individuals towards intolerance when they see views on immigration, family, gender, and not hating white people being equated to that of wanting a Fourth Reich.
Lo and behold, Musk acquires Twitter and now those people who would have been fine with civic liberal values see their leftist opposition as such an existential threat to Western civilization, that pussyfooting around with things like “human rights” doesn’t cut it anymore. And they are not wrong to fear such a threat from the far left as should all of us who fear the same from the far right.
Their desire for a right wing dictatorship or indeed a Fourth Reich are no longer exclusive to the murkier corners of the internet thanks to Musk, so deplatforming or ignoring is no longer an option. Even if it was possible to clamp down on such ideas, it would have only grow their echochamber when most of those doing the “clamping down” have been the aforementioned leftists that equate conservatism, populism, and Nazism as one. The only way forward in this case is through closer dialogue not to change the minds of these far right ideologists, but to work with their young and ignorant disciples who often don’t know better.
Yet the problem today is that classical liberals have not shown sufficient strength in addressing these issues through dialogue, nor do many have the desire to do so. This is why to most far right extremists, liberalism is a weak and cowardly old horse who would rather live in its stable decorated like the 1990s than wake up to the current reality. Until liberals defend the values they claim to uphold in as passionate a way as those who see them as too weak, then they truly deserve to lose.
In conclusion, a line in the sand should be drawn between individuals who can bravely engage with people at the fringes and those who prefer to play around with only those they consider “safe”. The former should be promoted by a greater network of influential free thinkers as much as possible while the latter ignored.
To do otherwise means that taboo subjects gain power over people’s emotions who are sick and tired of the ADL conflating ideas which were far more reasonable with evil. Then the real evil comes out like a thief in the night and those who postpone confronting it before such a time is reached will not be spared.