No It is Not Acceptable Because Brooks is Jewish
The arguments that veteran NYT writer David
Brooks makes against Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner are
valid. Obviously doing the bidding of
his master, Donnie Trump, Kushner tried to set up a back channel to Russia that was secure from U. S. monitoring. One intent, which so far has not been stated
by anyone, was obviously to discuss Trump business dealings with the Russians.
In making his criticism Brooks repeatedly uses the terms ‘clan’
and ‘clannish’.
We tell young people to serve
something beyond self, and Kushner seems to have been fiercely, almost
selflessly, loyal to family. But the clannish mentality has often ill served
him during his stay in government.
. .
Clannishness, by contrast is about
tight and exclusive blood bonds. It’s a moral approach based on loyalty and
vengeance against those who attack a member of the clan. It’s an intensely
personal and feud-ridden way of being.
. . .
We don’t know everything about his
meetings with the Russians, but we know that they, like so much other clan-like
behavior, went against the formal system.
All of the Jewish people, and we do mean all including the
author here know the history of the term ‘clan’ and anti-Semitism. That term has been used to describe Jews in
their supposed conspiracies against non-Jews and the totally discredited belief
that Jews plot among themselves to the destruction of everyone else. It is a vicious code word. By using the term Brooks aligns himself,
knowingly or not, with the most vile haters in American society.
The fact that Brooks’s family was Jewish does not insulate
him from the charge of anti-Semitism. In
fact, his ignorance, deliberate or not based on his heritage makes him even
more pathetic.
No comments:
Post a Comment