The #antisemitism of #OWS

Antisemitism in connection with OWS was a no-brainer.  The Left is antisemitic.  It has been since Marx.  Hitler institutionalized it to deadly effect.  Stalin was less methodical than Hitler, but he made Judaism illegal and instituted various pogroms within his own party to drive out, imprison or kill Jews.

No matter how many Jews are on the Left (and Jews are, unforgivably, still drawn there), the Left understands that Judaism in the abstract stands for individualism and justice, two notions antithetical to collectivism.  The Left has also historically conflated Jews with capitalism.  Jews, of course, aren’t the only capitalists (statistically, they’re only a small percentage of capitalists); they’re just visible capitalists if you’re a Jew hater.

In the coming days and weeks, you’re going to see an increasing number of articles and videos in the conservative media about the increasing antisemitism connected with the Occupy this city and that city.  Today, we’ll start with just two:  a photo essay from L.A. and a video, which you can see below:

My questions for you:  How long do you think it will be before the MSM pays attention?  Or, an even better question, do you think the MSM will ever pay attention?  Same question[s] regarding leading Democrat politicians, such as Obama, Pelosi and Reid….

Be Sociable, Share!
  • David Foster

    I think we are in a very dangerous situation. Barack Obama has created a climate in which focus on problem-solving is minimized, and focus on blame-casting is maximized. And whenever widespread blaming is done, anti-Semitism thrives like a vile fungus under the influence of a black-magic spell.

    That said, most of the OWS are surely not anti-Semitic, and quite a few of them may have some good but misdirected instincts. Our objective ought to be to educate and detach as many of them as possible. My Chicago Boyz colleage Lexington Green, who recently visited the “occupy Chicago” protest and talked with some of the people, has some thoughts.

    I just read a 2009 biography of the anti-Nazi resistant Sophie Scholl, and was struck by something said by her father Robert Scholl sometime in the 1930s:

    Once people lose their bare subsistence, once the future looks like nothing but a grey wall to them, they will listen all the more to promises without wondering who makes them.

    Few Americans today are losing “bare subsistence” in the sense of Germans in Scholl’s time, but OTOH expectations have been much higher here, and the sense of the future as “nothing but a grey wall” has become very common.


  • Charles Martel

    If/when the whore media are forced to address the OWS anti-Semitism, they will simply say that the OWSers, true to their do-your-own-thing principles, suffer the Jew-hating fools among them but don’t really agree with them. This example of tolerance and forbearance will be shouted to the rooftops, the same way that the presence of LaRouchite crazies at Tea Party gatherings has always been painstakingly explained for the aberration it is.


  • jj

    I’m still trying to come to terms with useless – as opposed to useful – idiot  Diane Sawyer’s witless cheer leading that the OWS movement has spread to more than “250 cities and over a thousand countries (sic).”   Over a thousand countries?  Apparently this “movement” has spread to other planets while we weren’t looking.
    I hauled myself into town yesterday, (Seattle,) for a variety of purposes, and stopped off in Westlake Center (Seattle’s version of Times Square) since I was passing through to listen to a speech, of sorts, given by a guy who was not a kid, but was clearly a union bozo.  (Obama’s thug arm, the SEIU, is prominent in the movement, kind of like a bowel movement, up here.)  It was interesting, in the way that watching a train wreck is interesting.  The guy combined incoherence with ignorance to an extraordinary degree, not even being certain what year it is, as he blathered about “next year’s election, the vote of 2011″ and the importance thereof.  It was an amusing collection of slogans, slapped together in no particular order – very much a union speech – and building to no particular conclusion.  I could not tell you what his point might might have been, his understanding of economics was as ludicrous as most children’s, and then they all marched off to harass Mitt Romney’s hotel.  Mitt himself wasn’t there, he was in Redmond at Microsoft, b ut Redmond’s too far to march, or straggle, to.
    It was entertaining.  Like a very long Monty Python sketch: moments of humor – in this case unintentional – and much boredom. 
    These people aren’t bright enough to be anti-Senitic – which does not mean, particularly with union involvement, that they aren’t potentially dangerous.  But they are the clear result of several generations of American union education” their economic understanding of the world around them is excruciatingly close to nil.  May you live in interesting times.

  • Michael Adams

    Somewhere, I have a little paperback, Early Writings of Karl Marx. In those early years, his villains were simply, The Jews. Later, he broadened his calumny to attack “Capitalists” in general. In Central Europe, Jews were the capitalists, who made the Industrial Revolution possible.  In France, trade was the purview of the Huguenots, until the revocation of the Edict of Nantes threw them out.  In England, the Quakers, Methodists, Scottish Presbyterians did various parts of the great work.
    The key, here, is that the religious minorities, who needed one another within their own circle, could also trust one another, in the days before commercial law had developed to the point that, for example, fraud would be punished by the courts.  Come home from Meeting, for Sunday dinner, or from shul, depending on where you were, you could talk business. Screw someone in the community, and you were out, for good. There would be no one to help you in times of trouble, no one to form partnerships, no one, even, to marry. When Silas Marner  was thought to have stolen a dying man’s savings, he lost his fiance, his trade, his membership in the group of fanatics to whom he had belonged, Methodists, although George Eliot never makes that explicit.
    I realize that there have been theological reasons offered to explain anti-semitism. but a theory ought to encompass all the data, or nearly all, and theological divergence can only cover a small part of anti-semitism, while financial resentment is nearly always a factor. The kings borrowed money from the Jews, by-passing the old landed gentry for an army of paid soldiers. Jews in Poland were often managers of latifundial estates. In Russia, of course, they sometimes served as the kulaks, village money lenders.
    I understand the notion that Jews were forced into lending, pawn brokerage, other cash money functions, by the restriction on land ownership that kept them out of farming.  However, Jews arrived as strangers in southern Gaul in the late Roman Republic. Strangers, with family contacts in other places, and literacy, enabling communication with those contacts, naturally gravitated into trade and commerce. (The Pirenne thesis describes a similar process among vagabond runaway serfs.)The past couple of millenia have had periods of Jew-hating, but also, there have been long periods in which the small local Jewish community was vital to the prosperity of the entire city. Anyway, not all capitalists are Jews, and certainly not all Jews are capitalists, but this is a movement about the destruction of the bourgeoisie, and bourgeois is Jewish, everywhere in the world but Israeli kibbutzim, and ever since the latter days of King Solomon’s reign. Marx wrote that one need not worry about the Jews, because, when the bourgeoisie is destroyed, there will be no more Jews, apparently, to him, a quite fraptious day.

  • Charles Martel

    Mike, sometimes you approach magisterial. Thank you for an excellent commentary.

    While I can understand the factors that lead to anti-Semitism, especially the left’s depraved love of envy, I will go to my grave wondering how so many American Jews have been so bamboozled by the one movement that detests them as much as the Nazis or Muslims ever did.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I concur, Mike…profoundly insightful and beautifully written.

    One explanation for the historical proclivity of Jews to enter the money industry (in Western Europe) was that money handling was viewed by medieval Europeans as “usury”. Hence, the Church dissuaded the Christians from entering into money-related fields, leaving a necessary economic vacuum to be filled by the Jews. As is the case with today’s Wall Street bankers, this made them the focus of envy and resentment because, in peoples’ eyes, that was where the money was even though it was other peoples’ monies that were being handled.

    Fortunately, finance also provided Jews the means and international networks whereby to quickly exit hostile environments. As one of my dear uncles explained to me, no good Jew ever goes to bed without two shoes and a roll of cash beside their bed for a quick exit.

    On a related, whimsical note, I wonder if Egypt’s Copts will be able to emulate the Jews of yesteryear and escape their bondage by migrating into and creating their own country in the Sinai. Israel could use a good neighbor. 

  • Mike Devx

    Yes, the frequency of OWS anti-Semitic signs is increasing.

    I wonder… in all these signs I’ve seen, and in the videos and in their “I am the 99%” handwritten messages, why haven’t I seen a single message asking “Why are college tuition costs suddenly skyrocketing?  Why have costs risen to this height so quickly?”

    (Just a word to you OWS protesters – If college administrators had contained costs to anything reasonably close to just inflation, you wouldn’t face having to pay off such *huge* loans.) 

  • David Foster

    An interesting view of the financial crisis and the OWS movement at Seeking Alpha. Excerpt:

    “One of their messages is that large financial institutions control too great a portion of the nation’s wealth, and should therefore be broken up.
    Interestingly, Wall Street itself attempted to deliver this same message three years ago in the form of a financial crisis and stock market crash. But instead of allowing market forces to swing the sledgehammer, our political leaders enacted a rescue package which rendered the too-big-to-fail banks even bigger.”


    “The answer to the question of why the economy can’t get off the dime goes as follows: You don’t encourage risk-taking and economic activity by driving down returns. Growth happens when investors take risks justified by high prospective returns. Prospective returns are high when asset prices are low. Unfortunately for our economy, nearly every policy enacted since the fall of 2008 has discouraged risk taking by temporarily and artificially inflating asset prices.” 

  • suek

    >>The key, here, is that the religious minorities, who needed one another within their own circle, could also trust one another>>

    A very good point. The History Channel has had various shows questioning whether the Founders were members of the Masons – apparently a very unacceptable organization, bordering on some sort of world domination. I confess that I know virtually nothing about Masons, so I have no opinion about whether they’re good or bad. Neither have I any solid opinion about whether members of the Founders group belonged to such an association.


    When you think about it, the Revolutionary years were a time of difficult and slow communication. Travel was also slow and relatively arduous, and there wasn’t exactly the post office of today. Just how did the Founders join together to consider the possibilities of what was effectively treason? They were unlikely to have simply sent out invitations to join … so how? And I wonder if having an organization such as the Masons isn’t a logical explanation…if you violated the trust of a fellow member, you would be closed out of that society as Michael points out. So…although Masonry is not a religion, it _is_ apparently a tightknit closed society…maybe that allowed the bond and trust?

  • Pingback: Vocal Minority()

  • ericthered

    Excellent expose’, Bookworm. More on this OWS antisemitism here: 

  • bizcor

    Anyone seen a guy building a big, big boat and out gathering animals male and female?

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Is this the weasel way of saying “you smell bad and you scare me?”()

  • Michael Adams

    Danny and Hammer, y’all are too kind.
    Sue, my father was a  Mason. They  describe themselves as a PRIVATE society, rather than a secret one. All that mumbo jumbo about occultism, etc, is hogwash. They believed, and, I suppose, still do, a lot of European Enlightenment stuff, said in a grander way, but really boiling down to “Can’t we all just get along?”  Those COEXIST bumper stickers are a latter-day version of the same kind of thinking.  Knowing more about the world than people did in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, I can say with confidence that most of those other groups on the sticker do NOT get along, nor want to do so. You want to make a Hindu really angry?  Explain to him the unity of Christianity and Hinduism. Run fast, probably better in a broken field. Mind you, I have no complaints about Hindus believing whatever they like. I just have enough respect for them not to try to explain away their beliefs.

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()


    Meet Patricia McAllister. She is a math teacher in the LA School District.
    here is her fb profile:
    she is a math teacher, and a muslim member of the nation of islam
    here is one of her “likes:
    The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews is a book published in 1991 by the Nation of Islam. The book alleges that Jews dominated the Atlantic slave trade.
    The book has been labeled an Antisemitic canard by historians including Saul S. Friedman, who contends that Jews had a minimal role in New World slave trade. Henry Louis Gates Jr, head of the department of Afro-American studies at Harvard University, called the book “the Bible of new anti-Semitism” and added that “the book massively misinterprets the historical record, largely through a process of cunningly selective quotations of often reputable sources”

  • Mike Devx

    > Henry Louis Gates Jr[…] called the book “the Bible of new anti-Semitism” and added that “the book massively misinterprets the historical record, largely through a process of cunningly selective quotations of often reputable sources”

    I wonder if Ms. Patricia McAllister is *actively and consciously* evil, or if she is merely stupid and unwittingly evil?  Either way, she bears complete individual responsibility for this propagation of malicious lies that makes her evil.

    It’s also interesting how little you hear of the Muslim’s Great Slave Trail cutting all the way across Africa.



    “I wonder if ….evil.”
    Frankly, I don’t give a flyin’ f@%k if it’s evil, stupidity or choice. What I what to know is WHY she will still have her job on Monday.

  • Pingback: The Gospel According to Baraka | Angry White Dude()