So argues Abigail Shrier in a superb piece in the magazine Commentary, This Is Not a Drill, in which she explores the seemingly irrational combination of groups that are supporting Hamas and the Gazans:
Why are the BLM supporters, climate extremists, academic feminists, and trans activists so quick to side with Hamas? Why are those who champion women’s reproductive rights so quick to align themselves with a Hamas-controlled Gaza where women lack the right to drive, let alone get an abortion? Why would they rally to a society where men are encouraged to hit the stray uppity wife? For that matter, why would so many LGBTQ+ groups side against a society that hosts some of the largest Pride festivals worldwide so that they can throw in with another that puts homosexuals to death?
She acknowledges the commonality of a lot of these groups, rooted in various modern perverted forms of ancient revolutionary Marxism. But there’s also a simple common hatred of the West, for various reasons sometimes singular to each group but often overlapping. She points out that despite their theories of Aryan superiority Nazis were quite willing to join up with the Japanese – because their hatred of their Western enemies burned brighter than even their racial hatreds.
So don’t bother informing Gays 4 Gaza that same-sex attraction is proscribed by criminal law in Gaza, backed by a penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, in that very territory they’re so wild about. No need to educate them about the finding by Pew Research that the Palestinian population’s opposition to homosexuality is among the highest in the world; that in 2016, Hamas responded to a senior commander’s homosexual activity with a firing squad; or that gay adoption and gay marriage are strictly forbidden in Palestinian territories.
They already know–and they really, truly don’t care . . .
I had some sarcastic fun with this myself a few days ago with the post, BREAKING: Green Party to Oppress Woman, Gays and Trans, noting some of the implications for oppression unto death that would flow for many of Chloe Swarbrick’s supposed other causes and intersectional groups if her clueless support of “From the River To The Sea, Palestine Will Be Free”, ever came to fruition.
But as Shrier points out, for all the fun of “Chickens for KFC” mocking…
They are not the dupes of a hideous regime in opposition to their values — racial justice, reproductive rights, women’s liberation, climate awareness. We are the dupes for believing they sincerely held those values in the first place.
And here’s another example. In that post on the Greens-Hamas lovein, I pointed out that VICE magazine was getting all weewee’d up about neo-Nazis getting into their precious “pro-Palestine” movement:
Peinovich’s rhetoric is an example of how far-right antisemites are trying to use the pro-Palestine movement, hijack some of its language criticizing the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza, and then use that as a vehicle to push anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and tropes into the mainstream.
Uh huh. VICE better start investigating the Washignton Post:
As Ace says:
That’s not antisemitic, because a leftwinger is saying it and leftwingers have Speech Privilege.
However, if I say that George Soros realized he could not sway top-level elections with his billions but could easily buy wins in lower-profile DA races — a strategy Soros admits to — and that he’s responsible for getting Open the Prisons DAs elected and unleashing murderously bloody crimewaves upon city after city, that’s antisemitic, because the ADL does not credit me with having Speech Privilege.
See, what I said is a “trope” of antisemitism.
But the Washington Post? Just a passionate argument that Jews buy our government with their dirty money.
It would seem that I have not been cynical enough about all these groups.
========
For more such misunderstanding read
The Hollow Men
A Different Understanding of Death
No Minister 