Connect with us

News

This Jew Doesn’t Accept Sean Spicer’s Apology Because I Remember the Past

Published

on

Spicer’s Latest Comments Are a Throwback to Easter Pogroms of the 1800s

Any student of history – and particularly Jewish history – will know that the time around Passover and Easter and into the rest of the Spring and Summer was, for many centuries, a strange mix of religious euphoria and life-threatening fear. 

Passover is the Jewish holiday that celebrates liberation from slavery. It’s a time of pure happiness and gratitude as Jews focus on the miracle of freedom and redmption from the darkest moments of our collective history. And, from the 1800s through the middle of last century, (and probably earlier than that) it also marked the start of our darkest season. 

As Easter approached every year, Christians across Eastern Europe and Russia would terrorize – and even kill – Jews in the name of Jesus. The military or police never stepped in to stop them. Sometimes, they secretly (and even publicly) helped them. 

Why Easter? Ruth B. Bottigheimer explains:

For centuries, Christian churches all over the world taught children to hate Jews. Not only to hate them — but to justify their murder. They did so with one crucial choice: to tell the Gospel story in the words and the content of the book of Matthew rather than in alternate tellings by Mark, Luke, or John.

Matthew repeatedly used his telling of Jesus’ final days to exonerate Romans but to excoriate Jews for Jesus’ crucifixion. He magnified his vision of Jewish perfidy (choosing clemency for Barabbas, a murderer, rather than for Jesus) and violent Jewish unrest (leading Pilate to fear civic riot). He provided the historic justification for centuries of retaliation against Jews for Jesus’ death (Pilate washes his hands, tells the crowd to “see to it yourselves”), and provided the fateful formula, “His blood be on us and on our children.”

So when Sean Spicer gets on TV and parrots rhetoric used by Holocaust deniers to push the idea that Hitler “didn’t sink to using chemical weapons” while calling concentration camps that killed 11 million people (6 million of them Jews) with Zyklon B gas,  “Holocaust Centers,” red flags went up across the world.

To add insult to injury, many of us Jews strictly observe the holiday and spent our mornings in synagogue services and the rest of the first (and second, for some) day offline and purposefully disconnected from the world, so we weren’t able to join the conversation or speak out against his statements until now.

This has been quite a conversation to come back to. 

For his part, Spicer attempted to clarify his statements, issuing an absurd number of revisions and eventually apologizing (badly).

For me, Spicer’s apology rings hollow, for many reasons.

Spicer first called Jewish mega-donor Sheldon Adelson to apologize before apologizing to the rest of the world, as though Adelson speaks for all Jews (he doesn’t) or as if any of us care about his opinion (we don’t). Spicer’s apology to Adelson is a hallmark of anti-Semitic behavior. If/when Adleson forgave him, Spicer would be able to say, “See! This Jew thinks what I did was fine, so clearly I don’t hate ALL Jews! I can’t be anti-Semitic if I have a Jewish friend!” 

Plenty of folks lined up to be the administration’s token Jew – even though that role is already filled by Jared Kushner – including former George W. Bush Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, and some Jews even spoke out in support of Spicer’s comments, furthering the idea that Jews aren’t ever full citizens of a country where they live because Jews are both a religion and a ethno-nation unto ourselves.

That’s literally the kind of talk that historically gets Jews kicked out of wherever we’ve lived – and we’ve been kicked out of just about everywhere. 

I don’t need to explain just how damaging this can be to Jews – history has already shown that. And history has shown, over and over, how people can be persuaded into ignoring warning signs in favor of keeping quiet for the sake of not making waves. 

Because many Jewish folks were offline observing Passover, a majority of the voices in the conversation weren’t Jewish. The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway wrote a very long piece explaining that Spicer just made a mistake – nevermind that he parroted the exact same language Holocaust deniers use – he just made a mistake, and we’re worrying too much. Because if there’s anyone who knows what types of anti-Semitism we should or should not be worrying about, it’s definitely someone who’s never experienced anti-Semitism, right?

God help me if I ever take religious – or life – advice from The Federalist. 

When it comes down to it, it really is possible that Sean Spicer just made a mistake. In his defense, he’s incredibly bad at his job. To fully understand why his comments, matter, though, we have to look at the bigger picture:

One occurrence is a mistake. Two is a slip-up. Spicer’s comments were just another in a long set of anti-Semitic dog whistles and rhetoric. That they came on the first day of Passover and following a pattern of hundreds of years of anti-Jewish violence is no coincidence.

Follow Robbie Medwed on Twitter: @rjmedwed

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

NCRM

Two-Thirds of Americans Say Economy is Keeping Them From Having Babies

Published

on

Nearly two-thirds of Americans aren’t having babies due to the economy, according to a new poll.

According to a Harris-Guardian poll, many Americans are deciding against having children, with 65% saying that they’ve decided against having children because they’re worried about the economy and doubt they could afford it.

The poll also asked about other regular life milestones. Americans are also holding off on getting married (60%), buying a house (75%) or pursuing higher education (61%). It’s not just major events, either—65% said the cost of living had only gotten higher since January, and half said they were having difficulty paying for regular living expenses.

READ MORE: Nikki Haley: Frozen Embryos Are ‘Babies’

A majority of adults, 52%, blamed either tariffs (29%) or other government policies (23%) for causing their household economic woes. Only 4% blamed themselves, with another 6% blaming employers; 16% blamed something altogether different. The only group that largely felt the economy was getting better was Republicans; 33% said it was getting worse, compared to 73% of Democrats and 64% of independents.

The survey of 2,102 adult Americans was conducted between April 24-26. The margin of error is 2.5%.

America’s birth rate has been declining since the 1950s, barring a small bump between 1978 and 1988, according to Macrotrends. In the last 40 years, the number of live births has fallen from a peak of 15.5 live births per 1,000 people in 1988 to 12.01 births in 2024.

The Trump administration has urged Americans to have more children. In April, President Donald Trump floated the idea of giving out a “baby bonus” of $5,000 to new parents, according to CBS News.

While not as generous, the House GOP’s first draft of the budget includes $1,000 to be placed in “MAGA accounts” for new babies, according to Raw Story. The $1,000 could come in handy for new parents—but a May 9 report from CBS estimates Trump’s tariffs have added $1,000 to the cost of raising a child. (This does not take into account Monday’s announcement of reduced tariffs on Chinese goods.)

Declining birth rates could lead to an imbalance of demographics. As Americans get older, there are fewer young people to fill their shoes in the workplace. Fewer workers means lower tax revenue, and aging typically means an increase in health care costs, as Mike Walden, Reynolds Distinguished Professor Emeritus at North Carolina State University, points out.

It’s not all downsides, however. Walden says lower birth rates could also lessen competition for good housing. It could also lead to less traffic congestion, less waste and more land for food production.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

NCRM

Trump Promises to Lower Drug Costs as House GOP Tries to Cut $880B From Medicaid

Published

on

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Monday aimed at cutting drug costs. Meanwhile, his fellow Republicans in the House are trying to gut Medicaid.

Trump’s executive order, “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients,” is an attempt to “equalize evident price discrimination,” allowing Americans to pay the same price as other “comparably developed nations.”

“This abuse of Americans’ generosity, who deserve low-cost pharmaceuticals on the same terms as other developed nations, must end.  Americans will no longer be forced to pay almost three times more for the exact same medicines, often made in the exact same factories.  As the largest purchaser of pharmaceuticals, Americans should get the best deal,” the EO reads in part.

READ MORE: ‘Pushed Up to the Edge of the Cliff’: GOP Proposals Would Kick Millions Off Health Care

Prior to the announcement, Trump posted to Truth Social that “DRUG PRICES TO BE CUT BY 59%,” but did not provide details on where that figure came from. It is also unclear if the White House has the authority to enforce this order, according to NPR.

PhRMA President and CEO Steve Ubl dismissed the executive order, saying that it was other countries paying such low prices that drives up costs for Americans. Ubl implied that the executive order may require those countries to pay more.

“The Administration is right to use trade negotiations to force foreign governments to pay their fair share for medicines. U.S. patients should not foot the bill for global innovation,” Ubl said. “Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardize the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America – threatening jobs, hurting our economy and making us more reliant on China for innovative medicines.”

While Trump was promising to help American health care consumers on Monday, the night before, his colleagues in the House revealed legislation that would cut over $880 billion in Medicaid funding. Republicans say that the cuts will result in savings to the average American, but Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said “millions of Americans will lose their health care coverage,” according to the AP.

“Hospitals will close, seniors will not be able to access the care they need, and premiums will rise for millions of people if this bill passes,” Pallone continued.

Not all Republicans are on board with this bill. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri wrote a guest essay for The New York Times condemning the legislation. He called the bill “both morally wrong and politically suicidal.”

“If Republicans want to be a working-class party — if we want to be a majority party — we must ignore calls to cut Medicaid and start delivering on America’s promise for America’s working people,” Hawley wrote.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

NCRM

US Lifts Ban on Afghan Deportations, Despite UN Warning of ‘Escalating Crisis’

Published

on

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Monday that the ban on deporting Afghans had been lifted due to improvements in their home country. The United Nations has warned this isn’t the case, and deportees could be in danger.

The about-face is yet another example of the Trump administration reversing a Biden-era policy. Beginning in 2022, Afghan refugees were granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS), according to NPR. In addition to stopping deportation, TPS also gives refugees authorization to work in the United States.

Noem said the decision to rescind TPS was due to improving conditions in Afghanistan, citing an “improved security situation” and “stabilizing economy,” according to The Hill. The TPS designation expires on May 20, and becomes effective July 12, 60 days after the announcement is scheduled to be officially published in the Federal Register.

READ MORE: Trump Team Pushing ‘Utter Propaganda’ on Deportations to Create ‘Climate of Fear’: Experts

Despite Noem saying Afghanistan is safe for refugees, the State Department still gives the country a “Do Not Travel” designation. The State Department warns “travel to all areas of Afghanistan is unsafe,” according to NPR.

The United Nations also disputes Noem’s claims. A report published by the U.N. last month refers to an “escalating humanitarian crisis” in the country, and say increase deportations could further destabilize things. Iran and Pakistan have forcibly deported 96,000 Afghan refugees in April alone, the U.N. reported.

Afghan refugees in America—even those with green cards—say they’re afraid to return.

“It doesn’t matter just how you got here,” Muhammad Amiri, a Afghan refugee with legal permanent residency, told NPR. “We don’t feel safe, and we don’t feel good because now, we feel threatened, if they send us back to our country, it will be the same story. [We] feel threatened to be tortured, maybe be killed by [the] Taliban.”

Though Amiri has a green card, the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration has many worried. Amiri’s fiancée is in Afghanistan, and he told NPR he was afraid to visit her, due to fears he may not be allowed back into the country. Amiri’s fears are not unfounded; Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers at airports have already turned away or detained those who come to the United States legally, according to The Verge.

The Taliban,a militant Islamic fundamentalist group, is still in control of Afghanistan. The Taliban bans women from working or being educated. This week, it also banned chess, according to the Telegraph. The Taliban has been in control since the 2021 withdrawal of U.S. forces from the country, ending the longest war in which America has been involved.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.