Was former secretary of labor and assistant attorney general Tom Perez’s victory over Cong. Keith Ellison over the weekend in the race to serve as the new chairman of the Democratic National Committee a victory of centrist Democrats over radical leftists in the party?
That is how the mainstream media is portraying Perez’s victory.
Along these lines, Prof. Alan Dershowitz, a lifelong Democrat who promised to quit the party if Ellison was elected due to his documented history of anti-Semitism and hostility towards Israel, hailed Perez’s election.
Speaking to Fox News, Dershowitz said that Perez’s election over Ellison, “is a victory in the war against bigotry, anti-Semitism, the anti-Israel push of the hard left within the Democratic party.”
There are two problems with Dershowitz’s view. First, Perez barely won. Ellison received nearly half the votes in two rounds of voting.
Tipping his hat to Ellison’s massive popularity among the party’s leadership and grassroots, Perez appointed the former Nation of Islam spokesman to serve as deputy DNC chairman as soon as his own victory was announced.
There is a good reason that Perez is so willing to cooperate with Ellison in running the DNC. And this points to the second problem with the claim that Perez’s election signals a move toward the center by Democratic leaders.
Perez is ready to cooperate with Ellison because the two men have the same ideological worldview and the same vision for the Democratic Party. As Mother Jones explained, “There’s truly not much ideological distance between the two.”
Far from being a victory for the centrist forces in the party, Perez’s win marks the solidification of the far Left’s control over the party of Harry Truman. Only hard leftists participated in a meaningful way in the race for leadership of the second largest party in America — a party that less than a decade ago controlled the White House and both houses of Congress.
The implications of this state of affairs are disastrous for the US generally. It is inherently destabilizing for a nation when one of the parties in a two-party political system is taken over by people who have a negative view of the country.
While America as a whole will suffer from the radicalization of the Democratic Party, perhaps no group will suffer more from the far Left’s takeover of the party than the American Jewish community. The vast majority of American Jews give their partisan allegiance to the Democratic Party and their ideological allegiance to the Left.
While Perez made a name for himself by fighting the enforcement of US immigration and naturalization laws against illegal immigrants, and Ellison rose to prominence for his activism in radical African American and Islamic circles, thanks to the so-called intersectionality of the far Left, that makes the cause of one faction the cause of all factions, today Perez is as much an apologist for Israel bashers as Ellison.
Perhaps in response to the danger that the far Left’s takeover of the Democratic Party represents, Sunday Malcolm Hoenlein, the long-serving professional head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations called for the convening of a global conference on anti-Semitism. In a meeting with the Jerusalem Post’s editorial board, Hoenlein said that one of the goals of the proposed conference would be to reach a universally accepted definition of anti-Semitism.
At the same meeting at the Post, Hoenlein insisted that “We can’t afford a split” on Israel among the Republicans and the Democrats.
On the surface, Hoenlein’s position makes sense. Israel and the Jewish community in the US are both endangered by the partisan split. If a broad consensus can be reached on the definition of anti-Semitism, in theory, such a move could force the radical Left, which now controls the Democratic Party to eschew Jew hatred.
The problem with Hoenlein’s view is that to get everyone on board, it is necessary to pretend that even anti-Semites oppose anti-Semitism.
This sad state of affairs has been on prominent display in the wake of the recent spate of anti-Semitic attacks against Jewish cemeteries in the US. Muslim Americans with records of anti-Semitism have been quick to condemn the attacks.
On the face of it, statements by Ellison, Hamas supporter Linda Sarsour and others condemning the attacks on Jewish cemeteries are welcome. Sarsour’s support for Palestinian mass murderers of Jews and open calls for Israel’s destruction have been ongoing for more than a decade. It’s nice that she is suddenly raising money to repair broken Jewish graves in St. Louis.
The problem is if Sarsour and her Jew hating comrades are viewed as legitimate partners in fighting anti-Semitism, when they themselves are abetting and popularizing anti-Semitism, then the notion of fighting anti-Semitism is destroyed.
If Sarsour, who wrote in 2012 that “nothing is creepier than Zionism,” is a legitimate voice in the fight against anti-Jewish discrimination and violence, then the fight against anti-Jewish discrimination and violence is reduced to farce.
Sarsour, like Ellison is no fringe figure on the Left. She has become a major mover and shaker in the second party in America. Sarsour was one of the organizers of the anti-Trump women’s protests the day after the President was inaugurated.
Sarsour’s rising prominence in progressive and Democratic circles despite her open support for Hamas shows why it is important today to draw a line in the sand and reject the notion that anti-Semites can suddenly become defenders of Jews.
With each passing day, the Left becomes more open in its embrace of anti-Jewish voices. If Sarsour’s leadership role last month in the anti-Trump women’s protests constituted a new low in progressive politics, a month later the bar has dropped even lower. At the next round of women’s protests, Ramsea Odeh is one of the announced organizers.
Whereas Sarsour simply supports the terrorist murder of Jews, Odeh an actual terrorist murderer of Jews. Odeh participated in a PLO terrorist attack at a Jerusalem supermarket in 1970 in which two Jews were murdered.
According to Politico, the radical left’s takeover of the Democratic Party apparatus through Perez and Ellison isn’t enough to satisfy the party’s young activists. They also want for long-serving Democratic lawmakers in Congress to retire and clear the path for their takeover of the Democratic Congressional roster.
Following my column last week, where I harshly criticized Senator Robert Menendez for questioning the loyalty of David Friedman, Trump’s ambassador designate to Israel, a number of prominent American Jews insisted that in asking the question Menendez was not embracing the anti-Semitic dual loyalty slur. He was trying to protect Friedman from his more radical Democratic colleagues.
There is good reason to accept their argument. Menendez has a long record of standing up for Israel and he has paid a political price for that support.
The problem is that such justifications of Menendez’s actions indicate that American Jews have already lowered the bar on what constitutes anti-Semitism too far and made defending their own interests all but impossible.
The Democrats are in a dangerous place for themselves, for the US and for the American Jewish community. They will not move back to the center if standards for judging what it means to be anti-Semitic are lowered. The only chance that they will return to their senses is if they are made to choose between the Sarsours of the world and the Dershowitzes. And this cannot happen by looking for a consensus on what anti-Semitism means. It can only be done – if it can be done at all – by drawing a line and demanding that it be respected.