Thanks to identity politics, Omar is instead portrayed by the far left as a victimized hero rather than a perpetrator of racist bigotry.
By Daniel Krygier, World Israel News
By watering down its resolution condemning anti-Semitism to include all types of bigotry, the Democratic Party may have missed its best chance to stop the oldest hate from spreading throughout the party.
Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who was the catalyst behind the resolution, thanks to her constant use of classic anti-Semitic tropes, is not even mentioned in it. Though most fair-minded people would agree that she is the one most in need of condemnation.
Thanks to identity politics, Omar is instead portrayed by the far left as a victimized hero rather than a perpetrator of racist bigotry.
Identity politics views the world through the lens of religion and ethnicity, not documented facts. If the White Supremacist anti-Semite David Duke had tweeted the same bigotry as Omar, most liberals would have condemned him.
However, unlike Duke who is a far-right white male, Omar is a black Muslim immigrant woman. In the alternative universe of identity politics, this makes Omar a perpetual victim, incapable of harboring anti-Semitism or any other form of racist bigotry.
However, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition on anti-Semitism leaves no doubt as to the nature of Omar’s bigotry. It says, in part:
“Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.”
“Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
Congresswoman Omar is clearly guilty on both counts. However, her racist bigotry against Jews is whitewashed due to her gender, race, religion, immigrant background and leftist political affiliation.
There is a widespread myth that charges of anti-Semitism are meant to suppress critical debate of Israeli policies. However, this is detached from reality. There is a strong tradition of self-criticism in Israeli democracy and among Jews as a people. The Jewish state is also by far the most condemned country in the world. The U.N. regularly passes more resolutions against Israel than against the rest of the world combined.
There is a big difference between criticizing specific Israeli policies compared to demonizing Israel and calling for its destruction. It is entirely possible to criticize the Jewish State without using classic anti-Semitic tropes as Omar repeatedly has done.
Most people realize the obvious difference between criticizing Britain’s policies compared to calling for the destruction of Britain. However, when it comes to Israel and Jews, bigots deliberately seek to blur the line between legitimate criticism and racist bigotry.
There is an ongoing internal battle within the Democratic Party between traditional liberals and emerging far-leftists. In the past, Israel used to enjoy a robust bipartisan support among both Republicans and Democrats. However, the increasingly more powerful far-leftist faction within the Democrat Party is pushing the party to embrace positions that automatically oppose Israel and even embrace anti-Americanism.
This, and not specific Israeli policies, is the main reason why support for the Jewish State among Democrats has dropped in recent years.
While the final outcome in the battle between moderates and radicals has not been settled, the outlook is not particularly optimistic. Leading Democratic Presidential candidates like Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have all publicly supported Omar.
The final outcome of the battle between radicals and moderates and not specific Israeli policies will determine the Democratic Party’s future positions on Israel and the Middle East.