Normal Political Activity Sinister When Jews Do It

Activity congruent with Israeli interests earns portrayal not as standard political behavior but as dangerous, seditious manipulation of the US government.

Washington, August 3 – Lobbying, fundraising, campaigning, letter-writing, advertising, and diplomatic protocol, and related behaviors constitute healthy, proper courses of action if  the parties engaging the activity involve anyone from the vast majority of humanity, but once people of Hebraic persuasion feature in them, those behaviors change character automatically and become threatening, subversive, and dark, according to observers.

Analysis of media reports and analysis indicates that attempting to sway elected officials and decision-makers in favor of one’s position forms the lifeblood of democratic and international political communication – unless Jews are the ones doing it, in which case it menaces the very fabric of free society and represents borderline, if not outright, treason.

The phenomenon emerged, for example, earlier this year when The New York Times attributed Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s change of her “nay” position, on funding for Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense systems to a “present” vote, to “influential rabbis and lobbyists,” while similar language appeared nowhere to describe any other legislators’ activities or voting considerations. The episode represents but the latest in which standard political activity by Jews, or activity congruent with Israeli interests, earns portrayal not as standard political behavior but as dangerous, seditious manipulation of the government.

Thus, the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the US, even though it consists entirely of US citizens who see the two countries’ interests as congruent, garners descriptions as an “arm of a foreign government.” No such descriptions appear in the nation’s media regarding lobbying activities on behalf of other nations or governments, many of which spend much more than AIPAC, or even than the Israeli government itself does on such persuasion efforts – and whose connection to their lobbyists takes a more direct and specific form than the general “pro-Israel” orientation of AIPAC’s bipartisan domestic constituency.

A similar trend appears in the funding sources of various political groups. Progressive activists rush to paint criticism of philanthropist George Soros and his global political agenda as antisemitic, while Soros himself evinces little to no attachment to his Jewish heritage or identity; at the same time, the late casino magnate Sheldon Adelson’s support for causes and groups more aligned with a robust Israel automatically classified him in mainstream media eyes as corrupting American politics and priorities with his money.

Experts note that the phenomenon goes beyond US politics or even western politics in general, in that when Israel performs ordinary actions that any other state can perform without generating a whisper of diplomatic or political protest, a wave of condemnation results, as pundits feel compelled to explain why such a seemingly mundane, quotidian, heretofore unobjectionable activity or policy now obviously represents a threat once Israel does it.

Please support our work through Patreon.