6 ms·

Israel is a third rail in US politics. One significant faction of the GOP is millenarian evangelical Christians who (a) believe the Israeli state is a necessar

Israel is a third rail in US politics. One significant faction of the GOP is millenarian evangelical Christians who (a) believe the Israeli state is a necessary precursor to armageddon and (b) have spent the past 2 decades trying to conflate “Muslim” with “terrorist”. The Democratic party includes as part of its coalition many American Jews who, despite frustration with the human rights abuses of the Israeli government, feel a strong connection with Israel as a symbolic homeland and are worried that criticism of Israel will lead to broader antisemitism. The US intelligence/defense establishment has strong ties to Israel, the US shares intelligence with Israel, and US firms make a lot of money selling weapons to Israel (a substantial part bought with US tax money). Israel has been the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid since World War II.

seniorivn 5y ago
wow, even if you are a proud tinfoil hat wearer you should learn a way to explain your positions in a factual provable way without any attempts to read anyone's minds or guess anyone's motivations that would be much more effective
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
webmaven 5y ago
> One significant faction of the GOP is millenarian evangelical Christians who (a) believe the Israeli state is a necessary precursor to armageddon and (b) have spent the past 2 decades trying to conflate “Muslim” with “terrorist”. Prior to that, during the Cold War Israel was the US ally surrounded by Soviet client states, so opposing the Godless Commies (whether the important part was "Godless" or "Commies" depended on the audience) was also quite popular.
foolfoolz 5y ago
this angle seems really out dated. the us alliance with israel is not about religious reasons. israel is the one democratic state in a region that mostly has our enemies. israel is a military power. we have strategic interests in maintaining the middle east political bloc imagine if this headline read france instead. we would react similarly
- DFHippie 5y ago
  > the us alliance with israel is not about religious reasons This is simply not true. The base of the US Republican Party is evangelical Christians. This being so, religious reasons are close to the surface. There are surely other interested parties, but Republicans can't get crosswise with any of their conservative Christian constituencies -- evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons. These constituencies have particular beliefs about Israel and the End Times. Likud and other right wing allies of the evangelicals certainly knows this and don't particularly care, not themselves caring about Christian End Times. I'm sure the leadership of the Republican Party also doesn't care. But they need their foot soldiers, and these soldiers do care. It is also true that while there are a lot of liberal Jews who criticize Israel, like Noam Chomsky, there is a large block with a lot of sway in Democratic politics that are very leery of criticism of Israel veering into antisemitism.
  - Digory 5y ago
    This is terribly jumbled. Yes, if you’re in a non-Islamic religion that reveres the Old Testament, you probably support Israel’s land claims. But Catholics, Mormons, and Evangelicals have wildly different views of the end times, and the “Bring in the Armageddon” crowd in particular is an outlier among evangelicals.
    - freeflight 5y ago
      > the “Bring in the Armageddon” crowd in particular is an outlier among evangelicals. Being an outlier still does not stop them from wielding over-proportional political influence compared to other Christian sub-currents, and particularly other religions. To add data to that degree; In the US such well-organized and rich elite interests are very much the de-facto policy makers [0]. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...
    - DFHippie 5y ago
      Yes, I shouldn't have mentioned Catholics and Mormons. The official bit of dogma the conservative Catholics care about is abortion. I'm not sure what the Mormons care about. But I don't think dogma is more than rationalization for most of these foot soldiers. They have this in common with conservative Muslims, Hindus, Jews, animists, and atheists. They want the people they approve of to dominate people they disapprove of. The rationale comes after and cleans up the mess. They learn about the approved hierarchy of power from their leaders and community. And in the US the word has come down from the elect that Israel, or right wing Israel, is their ally. Millenarian theology is just window dressing. Netanyahu mocks Obama before the US Congress so he's their man. It didn't begin with Netanyahu, but he knew how to ride the wave. This is why the Right in the US could turn on a dime and start loving Putin: he hated the same people they did. Dogma is just window dressing, a pretty screen over an ugly truth.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
runarberg 5y ago
I know this is what the up-vote button is for. But I do want to add a redundant comment appreciating this explanation. It explains this adequately in three short paragraphs. The second paragraph is worth expanding from a little. As it can be argued that fear of anti-antisemitism among the left is well warranted. A good example of that is Jeremy Corbin constantly being accused of anti-antisemitism for criticizing the state of Israel for their human rights violation in the last UK general election (a tactic that perhaps worked given the lousy performance of the labour party). Even Bernie Sandars—a jew himself with family ties to holocaust survivors—gets smeared for this reason.
- flyinglizard 5y ago
  Jeremy Corbin did more than just “criticizing the state of Israel for human rights violations” though. This is a politician who, amongst many other things, called Hamas and Hezbollah “my friends”, so clearly his issue with Israel is not about human rights per se.
- yyyk 5y ago
  >Jeremy Corbin constantly being accused of anti-antisemitism for criticizing the state of Israel A 2 minute web search: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/may/01/jeremy-corbyn-rejects-antisemitism-claim-over-book-foreword https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/may/01/jeremy-corbyn-r... "Before becoming Labour leader he called 1902 book containing antisemitic tropes ‘brilliant’. Jewish leaders have written to Jeremy Corbyn to express “grave concern” and demand an explanation after it emerged he wrote a glowing foreword for a century-old political tract that includes antisemitic tropes." https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/23/corbyn-criticised-after-backing-artist-behind-antisemitic-mural https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/23/corbyn-crit... "Labour leader offered support on Facebook in 2012 to artist whose work featured antisemitic tropes" https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/jeremy-corbyn-blamed-zionist-lobby-for-blood-libel-cleric-raed-salah-s-expulsion-from-the-uk-1.482455 https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/jeremy-corbyn-blamed-zionist-l... "By the time Mr Corbyn was writing, Mr Salah's comments were well documented..." It's possible to criticize Israel while not allowing antisemitic bigotry. It's the smart thing to do for someone trying to advance a political cause. However, if one does it again and again, even on instances not involving Israel at all, people will start to take notice.
mr_toad 5y ago
There are many groups, including nation states in the Middle East who would like to destroy Israel and the Jewish people. This is not hyperbole, it’s public policy. And it’s not just words, Israel has been attacked repeatedly by countries intent on its destruction. There are some people inside the US, and outside it, who feel that allowing that to happen would be unacceptable. The western world does not want another holocaust on their conscience.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  But the question is, what makes it more unacceptable than the destruction of other countries, countries who also have enemies, who are not such close allies? "Feel that allowing that to happen would be unacceptable" is the loaded phrase that holds all the content in that description. The US is not giving that much military aid to every country that has such enemies.
  - technobabbler 5y ago
    Arguably, genocide anywhere should be confronted and prevented (though of course it never is, because the compassion of our species is quite limited). In the modern era, arguably few have suffered as much as the Jews, in large part due to their historic lack of a homeland and safe haven. That's not to excuse modern Israeli policy, and I find it atrocious that they treat Palestine this way especially because they know what it's like on the other side. But at the end of the day, most countries that "fall" would just be assimilated into their conquering cultures. The fall of Israel would be another Holocaust. I doubt many of their people would survive at all, given the severe hatred much of the world has for them, especially in that region. I don't think we should be arming Israel, but that's only because they can take care of themselves. Their military is so far and away above their enemies' that they could easily destroy every single country around them if they so chose. We don't need to stay involved there any longer.
    - whatshisface 5y ago
      >most countries that "fall" would just be assimilated into their conquering cultures. It would be really nice if all cross-border hatred was isolated in one theater where it could easily be dealt with, but that's not the case. >I don't think we should be arming Israel, but that's only because they can take care of themselves. One wonders how long it will be until they move on to taking care of their neighbors.
TimTheTinker 5y ago
I'm an evangelical Christian myself, and I think I understand why you characterize us this way, but it's not accurate based on what I know. Along with those I associate with, I support Jews (and to a lesser extent the modern nation of Israel) only because I serve the God who made the sons of Jacob into a nation in the first place. The modern nation of Israel isn't perfect and my support for being their ally isn't unconditional. It also has nothing to do with end-times (except maybe for the fact that they exist as a nation, which is interesting but mostly inconsequential in terms of religion). In terms of end-times events, the rise of widespread hatred for my religion is a far more reliable indicator of their proximity...
- zionic 5y ago
  I grew up evangelical. I have heard multiple pastors in multiple congregations explain that the existence of Israel is divine, that god himself was responsible for it existing after X thousands of years and that everything they did was god’s will. This was all of course necessary for the rapture. For more look up Hal Lindsey’s “Hinge of history” Israel/AIPAC on the other hand is mostly composed of atheists, who are more than happy to participate in evangelical delusions to keep the money flowing.

seniorivn 5y ago

wow, even if you are a proud tinfoil hat wearer you should learn a way to explain your positions in a factual provable way without any attempts to read anyone's minds or guess anyone's motivations that would be much more effective

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

webmaven 5y ago

> One significant faction of the GOP is millenarian evangelical Christians who (a) believe the Israeli state is a necessary precursor to armageddon and (b) have spent the past 2 decades trying to conflate “Muslim” with “terrorist”. Prior to that, during the Cold War Israel was the US ally surrounded by Soviet client states, so opposing the Godless Commies (whether the important part was "Godless" or "Commies" depended on the audience) was also quite popular.

foolfoolz 5y ago

this angle seems really out dated. the us alliance with israel is not about religious reasons. israel is the one democratic state in a region that mostly has our enemies. israel is a military power. we have strategic interests in maintaining the middle east political bloc imagine if this headline read france instead. we would react similarly

DFHippie 5y ago
> the us alliance with israel is not about religious reasons This is simply not true. The base of the US Republican Party is evangelical Christians. This being so, religious reasons are close to the surface. There are surely other interested parties, but Republicans can't get crosswise with any of their conservative Christian constituencies -- evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons. These constituencies have particular beliefs about Israel and the End Times. Likud and other right wing allies of the evangelicals certainly knows this and don't particularly care, not themselves caring about Christian End Times. I'm sure the leadership of the Republican Party also doesn't care. But they need their foot soldiers, and these soldiers do care. It is also true that while there are a lot of liberal Jews who criticize Israel, like Noam Chomsky, there is a large block with a lot of sway in Democratic politics that are very leery of criticism of Israel veering into antisemitism.
- Digory 5y ago
  This is terribly jumbled. Yes, if you’re in a non-Islamic religion that reveres the Old Testament, you probably support Israel’s land claims. But Catholics, Mormons, and Evangelicals have wildly different views of the end times, and the “Bring in the Armageddon” crowd in particular is an outlier among evangelicals.
  - freeflight 5y ago
    > the “Bring in the Armageddon” crowd in particular is an outlier among evangelicals. Being an outlier still does not stop them from wielding over-proportional political influence compared to other Christian sub-currents, and particularly other religions. To add data to that degree; In the US such well-organized and rich elite interests are very much the de-facto policy makers [0]. [0] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...
  - DFHippie 5y ago
    Yes, I shouldn't have mentioned Catholics and Mormons. The official bit of dogma the conservative Catholics care about is abortion. I'm not sure what the Mormons care about. But I don't think dogma is more than rationalization for most of these foot soldiers. They have this in common with conservative Muslims, Hindus, Jews, animists, and atheists. They want the people they approve of to dominate people they disapprove of. The rationale comes after and cleans up the mess. They learn about the approved hierarchy of power from their leaders and community. And in the US the word has come down from the elect that Israel, or right wing Israel, is their ally. Millenarian theology is just window dressing. Netanyahu mocks Obama before the US Congress so he's their man. It didn't begin with Netanyahu, but he knew how to ride the wave. This is why the Right in the US could turn on a dime and start loving Putin: he hated the same people they did. Dogma is just window dressing, a pretty screen over an ugly truth.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

runarberg 5y ago

I know this is what the up-vote button is for. But I do want to add a redundant comment appreciating this explanation. It explains this adequately in three short paragraphs. The second paragraph is worth expanding from a little. As it can be argued that fear of anti-antisemitism among the left is well warranted. A good example of that is Jeremy Corbin constantly being accused of anti-antisemitism for criticizing the state of Israel for their human rights violation in the last UK general election (a tactic that perhaps worked given the lousy performance of the labour party). Even Bernie Sandars—a jew himself with family ties to holocaust survivors—gets smeared for this reason.

flyinglizard 5y ago
Jeremy Corbin did more than just “criticizing the state of Israel for human rights violations” though. This is a politician who, amongst many other things, called Hamas and Hezbollah “my friends”, so clearly his issue with Israel is not about human rights per se.
yyyk 5y ago
>Jeremy Corbin constantly being accused of anti-antisemitism for criticizing the state of Israel A 2 minute web search: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/may/01/jeremy-corbyn-rejects-antisemitism-claim-over-book-foreword https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/may/01/jeremy-corbyn-r... "Before becoming Labour leader he called 1902 book containing antisemitic tropes ‘brilliant’. Jewish leaders have written to Jeremy Corbyn to express “grave concern” and demand an explanation after it emerged he wrote a glowing foreword for a century-old political tract that includes antisemitic tropes." https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/23/corbyn-criticised-after-backing-artist-behind-antisemitic-mural https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/23/corbyn-crit... "Labour leader offered support on Facebook in 2012 to artist whose work featured antisemitic tropes" https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/jeremy-corbyn-blamed-zionist-lobby-for-blood-libel-cleric-raed-salah-s-expulsion-from-the-uk-1.482455 https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/jeremy-corbyn-blamed-zionist-l... "By the time Mr Corbyn was writing, Mr Salah's comments were well documented..." It's possible to criticize Israel while not allowing antisemitic bigotry. It's the smart thing to do for someone trying to advance a political cause. However, if one does it again and again, even on instances not involving Israel at all, people will start to take notice.

mr_toad 5y ago

There are many groups, including nation states in the Middle East who would like to destroy Israel and the Jewish people. This is not hyperbole, it’s public policy. And it’s not just words, Israel has been attacked repeatedly by countries intent on its destruction. There are some people inside the US, and outside it, who feel that allowing that to happen would be unacceptable. The western world does not want another holocaust on their conscience.

whatshisface 5y ago
But the question is, what makes it more unacceptable than the destruction of other countries, countries who also have enemies, who are not such close allies? "Feel that allowing that to happen would be unacceptable" is the loaded phrase that holds all the content in that description. The US is not giving that much military aid to every country that has such enemies.
- technobabbler 5y ago
  Arguably, genocide anywhere should be confronted and prevented (though of course it never is, because the compassion of our species is quite limited). In the modern era, arguably few have suffered as much as the Jews, in large part due to their historic lack of a homeland and safe haven. That's not to excuse modern Israeli policy, and I find it atrocious that they treat Palestine this way especially because they know what it's like on the other side. But at the end of the day, most countries that "fall" would just be assimilated into their conquering cultures. The fall of Israel would be another Holocaust. I doubt many of their people would survive at all, given the severe hatred much of the world has for them, especially in that region. I don't think we should be arming Israel, but that's only because they can take care of themselves. Their military is so far and away above their enemies' that they could easily destroy every single country around them if they so chose. We don't need to stay involved there any longer.
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    >most countries that "fall" would just be assimilated into their conquering cultures. It would be really nice if all cross-border hatred was isolated in one theater where it could easily be dealt with, but that's not the case. >I don't think we should be arming Israel, but that's only because they can take care of themselves. One wonders how long it will be until they move on to taking care of their neighbors.

TimTheTinker 5y ago

I'm an evangelical Christian myself, and I think I understand why you characterize us this way, but it's not accurate based on what I know. Along with those I associate with, I support Jews (and to a lesser extent the modern nation of Israel) only because I serve the God who made the sons of Jacob into a nation in the first place. The modern nation of Israel isn't perfect and my support for being their ally isn't unconditional. It also has nothing to do with end-times (except maybe for the fact that they exist as a nation, which is interesting but mostly inconsequential in terms of religion). In terms of end-times events, the rise of widespread hatred for my religion is a far more reliable indicator of their proximity...

zionic 5y ago
I grew up evangelical. I have heard multiple pastors in multiple congregations explain that the existence of Israel is divine, that god himself was responsible for it existing after X thousands of years and that everything they did was god’s will. This was all of course necessary for the rapture. For more look up Hal Lindsey’s “Hinge of history” Israel/AIPAC on the other hand is mostly composed of atheists, who are more than happy to participate in evangelical delusions to keep the money flowing.