← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Jack Cassidy

An American Jew Laments Decline in Jewish Influence (by Alex Cockburn @ Counterpunch)

Thread ID: 17002 | Posts: 15 | Started: 2005-02-27

Wayback Archive


Jack Cassidy [OP]

2005-02-27 19:43 | User Profile

[u][color=blue][font=Times New Roman]http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn02262005.html<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />[/font][/color][/u]

[color=#990000][font=Times New Roman]Weekend Edition[/font][/color] [font=Times New Roman]February 26 / 27, 2005[/font]

[font=Times New Roman]CounterPunch Diary[/font]

[font=Times New Roman][color=#990000]An American Jew Laments Decline in Jewish Influence[/color][/font]

[font=Times New Roman][color=black]By ALEXANDER COCKBURN[/color][/font]

[color=#990000][font=Verdana]A[/font][/color][font=Verdana]cross the world the Jewish lobby in [/font]<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />[font=Verdana]America[/font][font=Verdana] is accorded extraordinary power, almost to the mythic levels of guileful effectiveness once attributed to the British Secret Service. And in truth, MI6, as the Secret Service was also known, never approached the Jewish lobby in overall clout. But these days, if you read analyses by American Jews of where their power is headed, the tone is often dour and the forecast grim. They say, in the words of the American anti-Arab fanatic Daniel Pipes, "the golden age of the Jews" in [/font][font=Verdana]America[/font][font=Verdana] has passed its zenith.[/font]

[font=Verdana]This may seem strange when there is universal recognition that George Bush may well be the most pro-Israel president in the nation's history, when the role of the so-called "neocons", usually short-hand for the more fanatical supporters of Israel in American public life, is identified as crucial in pushing for the war on [/font][font=Verdana]Iraq[/font][font=Verdana] and now on [/font][font=Verdana]Iran[/font][font=Verdana], when pro [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] votes in the US Congress sweep through by margins of over 90 per cent.[/font]

[font=Verdana]But listen to a man like Illinois-based political analyst Richard Baehr, writing in American Thinker. Baehr could fairly be described as a Zionist ultra. He can also read numbers objectively. Recently he outlined in a speech and then in his publication the reasons he sees for concern.[/font]

[font=Verdana]The indices of dismay for Baehr show most clearly in population statistics. From 1990 to 2000, he points out, the Hispanic population grew by 13 million. just over 50%. The black population grew by 4 million, or 11%. The Asian population grew by 4 million, or over 60%. The population of non-Hispanic whites grew by 6 million or 3%. Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 22% of the country's population growth during the ten year period, Hispanics for half of it. Non-Hispanic whites are now 70% of the population, headed for 50% by 2050.[/font]

[font=Verdana]Meanwhile, from a peak of 6 million American Jews, or 4% of the US population in 1950, Jews are now just about 5.2 million in number, according to the latest Jewish population surveys, or a bit less than 2% of the US population, and the trend points down to maybe three million in the next but one generation.[/font]

[font=Verdana]Baehr laments that "With an intermarriage rate around 50%, and a fertility rate of 1.6 children per Jewish woman, Jews are committing population suicide." He takes a swipe at liberal American Jews, most of them supporters of legal abortion: "American Jews marry late and often never marry, and have fewer children as a result. The commitment to abortion rights as a pre-eminent political issue strikes me a particularly odd, with Jewish numbers declining at an accelerating rate. Rather than being aggressive advocates of abortion rights, Jews might more rationally be advocates of carrying unwanted pregnancies to term, and then giving up the babies for adoption. This is especially the case since many Jewish women marry late and have difficulty conceiving."[/font]

[font=Verdana]Reading Baehr you might even conclude Planned Parenthood is not a Malthusian plot sponsored by the Rockefellers, but Nixon's deftest dirty trick, fixing the Supreme Court to pass Roe v Wade in 1973. Huh? Listen to Baehr: "In fact, if no abortions had occurred in the last 30 years, and the total number of abortions were added to the populations of each state since Roe v Wade was adopted, Al Gore would have been running for re-election in 2004, since the states he won in 2000, such as California, and New York, would have had several more electoral votes in that year, and Bush's states fewer. Gore would have been elected regardless of the Florida outcome." Kevin Phillips, move over! This makes the southern strategy look like chickenfeed. That's why Nixon needed the hundred grand from Howard Hughes, to bribe Harry Blackmun. You don't think Nixon would have figured this out? One of these days I bet we'll find Operation Herod buried in Nixon's papers.[/font]

[font=Verdana]Back to Baehr's nightmare of Muslim breeders. As Jews decline in number, he points with a quivering finger at the Arab and Muslim population in America heading in the other direction. Baehr cites two academic studies putting the US Muslim population at between 1.8 and 2.9 million, with the total Arab/Muslim community "probably about 3.5 million, two thirds the size of the Jewish community."[/font]

[font=Verdana]Turning to political influence in the form of financial contributions, Baehr notes that in the 2004 campaign, four Jews - George Soros, Peter Lewis, Steven Bing and Herbert Sandler - gave over $80 million to Democratic political funds. While "this level of political giving by a few individuals has never happened before in the history of the countryIsrael is not the leading agenda item for any of them. They were Bush-haters, pure and simple. This is true of much of the political money that comes from Jews in [/font][font=Verdana]Hollywood[/font][font=Verdana] (from where Bing hails). [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] is not the motivator for their contributions."[/font]

[font=Verdana]Baehr goes on to portray, somewhat fancifully, the Democratic Party as increasingly falling into the clutches of what he sees as the ultra, Israel-hating left, headed by Michael Moore, the movie director. I seem to remember [/font][font=Verdana]Moore[/font][font=Verdana] taking enormous pains last year to absolve [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] from any unpleasing role in Fahrenheit 911, by the simple tactic of not mentioning that troublesome nation. By "[/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] hating" Baehr appears to mean anyone who speaks up in any way for justice for Palestinians or criticizes Ariel Sharon. Seeing the Democratic Party as a lost cause for [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] over the long term, and on the decline as a political force in [/font][font=Verdana]America[/font][font=Verdana], he extols the alliance between Christian Evangelicals and Orthodox Jews and the Republican Party.[/font]

[font=Verdana]To anyone used to lamenting the overwhelming tilt towards Israel in intellectual circles and the media it is bizarre to find Baehr writing that he sees a "Distancing of media, academic and intellectual elites from Israel" and to hear him citing Frank Luntz, a pollster, as saying "there is great danger ahead, because American elite opinion is not sympathetic to Israel, and it is getting worse. Elites view [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana] as aggressive and warlike and Palestinians as victims. Academia is the community that is the least sympathetic to [/font][font=Verdana]Israel[/font][font=Verdana], since lefty radicals from the 60s run the faculty at most schools."[/font]

[font=Verdana]Happily for the blood pressure of his audience, Baehr did open his often gloomy survey with these words: "There is good news and bad news. The good news is that the reports of the decline of Jewish and pro-Israel influence, and the rise of Arab/Muslim influence in the American political system are at the moment greatly exaggerated. The bad news is that change is underway, and the relative shift described above is occurring."[/font]


Jack Cassidy

2005-02-27 19:51 | User Profile

"An American Jew laments the decline in Jewish influence".

Yes, well, I don't think it is anytime soon that we here at Original Dissent will be left with merely the blacks and spics to bitch about. :-)


Bardamu

2005-02-27 20:08 | User Profile

The population of non-Hispanic whites grew by 6 million or 3%. Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 22% of the country's population growth during the ten year period, Hispanics for half of it. Non-Hispanic whites are now 70% of the population, headed for 50% by 2050.

Don't you just love being defined as a "non" to another group that by and large isn't white to begin with. A multicult opens his mouth and a lie comes out. :angry:


Ponce

2005-02-27 21:15 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Jack Cassidy]"An American Jew laments the decline in Jewish influence".

Yes, well, I don't think it is anytime soon that we here at Original Dissent will be left with merely the blacks and spics to bitch about. :-)[/QUOTE]

Is ok Jack you will always have me heheheheheheh

Ponce <--------the Cuban rebel.


Stuka

2005-02-27 21:54 | User Profile

It's funny. On the one hand, Jews become indignant whenever someone criticizes the enormous influence that Jews enjoy on Western society. In fact, in order to destroy their enemies, Jews usually characterize such criticism as "conspiracy-mongering"--as if only an evil anti-semite could entertain such a crazy notion.

On the other hand, Jews themselves love to talk about how unique, powerful, talented, and influential they supposedly are. In fact, as the Counterpunch.org article illustrates, they even go so far as to lament the decline of this level of influence.

This blatant contradiction never fails to amuse me.:lol:


mwdallas

2005-02-27 22:30 | User Profile

[QUOTE]Baehr laments that "With an intermarriage rate around 50%...."[/QUOTE] As far as I know, the last time anyone checked, the figure was 14%. Baehr's article is just your typical rally-the-troops internal propaganda, as false as what is presented for gentile consumption.

Medding et al. found that 86% of Jews married another Jew in their first marriage, compared to 70% in their second marriage, and 54% in their third marriage. I believe this was in 1992, but the cite is in MacDonald's trilogy.


Centinel

2005-02-27 22:45 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Stuka]It's funny. On the one hand, Jews become indignant whenever someone criticizes the enormous influence that Jews enjoy on Western society. In fact, in order to destroy their enemies, Jews usually characterize such criticism as "conspiracy-mongering"--as if only an evil anti-semite could entertain such a crazy notion.

On the other hand, Jews themselves love to talk about how unique, powerful, talented, and influential they supposedly are. In fact, as the Counterpunch.org article illustrates, they even go so far as to lament the decline of this level of influence.

This blatant contradiction never fails to amuse me.:lol:[/QUOTE]

"Just as African-Americans can use the 'n' word when joshing among themselves and it sounds a lot different than when used by a white person, talk about the political influence of organized Jewry sounds different when it comes from Jewish organizations themselves. Nevertheless, you shouldn't brag about how influential you are if you want to get hysterically indignant when someone suggests that government policy is affected by your influence."

--Michael Kinsley, from [url=http://slate.msn.com/id/2080027]J'Accuse, Sort Of[/url]


Jack Cassidy

2005-02-27 23:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Ponce]Is ok Jack you will always have me heheheheheheh

Ponce <--------the Cuban rebel.[/QUOTE]Ponce,

Are you D.B. Cooper ("Dan Cooper" on the Northwest Airlines manifest)? If you are don't tell me, for while the statue of limitations is up for the skyjacking, the feds started an open-ended ("John Doe") indictment in case "D.B. Cooper" were ever caught. Not that I'd go stool pigeon on you anyway.

Run D.B. Cooper Run!


Jack Cassidy

2005-02-27 23:59 | User Profile

[QUOTE=mwdallas]As far as I know, the last time anyone checked, the figure was 14%. Baehr's article is just your typical rally-the-troops internal propaganda, as false as what is presented for gentile consumption.

Medding et al. found that 86% of Jews married another Jew in their first marriage, compared to 70% in their second marriage, and 54% in their third marriage. I believe this was in 1992, but the cite is in MacDonald's trilogy.[/QUOTE]I recall reading that in some major urban areas the Jewish intermarriage rate is as high as 60% (in places like Minneapolis-St. Paul and LA). In many other areas 50% seems to be the average. But when you read through engagement/marriage announcements it seems like 0%. Dershowitz wrote a book about this a few years ago (The Vanishing American Jew) and lamented the fact that many Jews were marrying non-Jews (his own son married a shiksa). What is curious about this is that Dershowitz is an atheist, so his interest must be strictly ethnic/racial.


Petr

2005-02-28 12:50 | User Profile

[COLOR=Navy][B][I] - "As far as I know, the last time anyone checked, the figure was 14%."[/I][/B][/COLOR]

I have hard time believing this - can you point out the exact source?

Petr


Ponce

2005-02-28 17:18 | User Profile

Hush Jack, let's keep it a secret........

The reason the guy who wrote the above article says that there are only 5.2% Jews is that he is counting only those with Jewish names, if he were to count also those Jews who changed their names to a non-Jewish sounding names the figures would them be about 11%.

Remember that the same thing was done in Russia by those people in order to infiltrate the government and the general population.


mwdallas

2005-02-28 17:48 | User Profile

Petr:

I believe the source is the following:

Medding, Peter Y., Gary Tobin, Sylvia Barrack Fishman, and Mordechai Rimor. 1992. "Jewish Identity in Conversionary and Mixed Marriages," American Jewish Committee Yearbook 92: 3-76.

But check The Culture of Critique to be sure.


Petr

2005-03-01 13:20 | User Profile

[I][B] - "Medding, Peter Y., Gary Tobin, Sylvia Barrack Fishman, and Mordechai Rimor. 1992." [/B] [/I]

I will try to confirm that, but I notice that these figures are in any case already somewhat dated ...

Petr


Petr

2005-03-01 13:23 | User Profile

[COLOR=Blue][B][I] - "The reason the guy who wrote the above article says that there are only 5.2% Jews is that he is counting only those with Jewish names, if he were to count also those Jews who changed their names to a non-Jewish sounding names the figures would them be about 11%."[/I][/B][/COLOR]

Ah Ponce, as confused as ever. The writer was talking about 5,2 [B]million [/B] official Jews in America, not about any percentages.

And where does it say that he is only counting people with "Jewish names"? You apparently pulled that silly idea out of thin air.

Petr


mwdallas

2005-03-01 18:48 | User Profile

The source is indeed the following:

Medding, Peter Y., Gary Tobin, Sylvia Barrack Fishman, and Mordechai Rimor. 1992. "Jewish Identity in Conversionary and Mixed Marriages," American Jewish Committee Yearbook 92: 3-76.

The discussion is in MacDonald's second book, Separation and Its Discontents (in the final chapter). The data discussed in Medding's article come from 1980-1989.