These Daily Doses come to you from my happy place in the backyard where I sit in an Adirondack chair with my back to the lone Sequoia Sempervirens that stands guard on the Western edge of our lot here in Silicon Valley. Each day (or so) I’m sharing a brief thought about one thing. Perhaps it’s something that’s on your mind too. And if so, we each get to know we’re in this together.
Ah yes, I'm very familiar with the evil AIPAC. As an active member (and leader) of J Street, a pro-Israel. pro-pease, pro-diplomacy alternative, we often battle for the hearts and minds of American Jews who've lost their way when it comes to Jewish values.
My own Congressman, Mike Levin (CA49th) is endorsed by J Street and threatened by AIPAC every election cycle. AIPAC has decided to align themselves with the GOP right -- an exceptional poor choice, IMO.
I'm sorry you were at the receiving end of their BS, also sorry you didn't prevail in your race. Congress needs more progressive women of color, and more of YOU specifically.
i do not appreciate J Street. It may be hard to remember that Israel is a US ally, and not the agressor after the HAMAS terrorist attack that killed 1200 people and who took hostages. There can be no ceasefire as long as HAMAS holds the reigns in GAZA, where they steal from their own people and make them human shields. I honestly do not understand WHY this is hard to remember, and to realize that the rampant antiSemitism is fundamentally due to the amazing marketing that you have all bought into by Pallywood.
i love J Street. they became my ally in my campagin in that they gave me language for caring about what was happening to Jews and Israelis AND for what was happening to Palestinians.
Julie, Thanks for such a brave article. I too am a dedicated J Street supporter. I do so because it is explicitly pro-Israel, pro-peace, and pro-(American)democracy. We condemned AIPAC for its endorsement and funding of the 100+ insurrectionists, and as you state their pathetic excuse is that they are a "single issue" organization about Israel's welfare. I shudder when I hear that, because it reeks of dual loyalty, another iron in the fire of anti-semitism from the right.
AIPAC is not yet out of the CA-16 race. They are actively trying to silence any criticism of Israel or its government. With a man like Netanyahu as the current Prime Minister, silencing criticism of his government amounts to pulling the wool over people's eyes. Unfortunately, AIPAC has what seems to be an infinite supply of wool!
Julie, I appreciate your perspective and that you have stated you are against antisemitism. With that said, I would love to throw out a few additional points on top of the other comments. First, instead of being "happy to debate anywhere or anytime," how about offering to listen to why your words stung some of your readers. I personally think that you have a right to criticize AIPAC and I appreciate that this "was an expository essay" about your experiences. However, there are a lot of PACs aside from AIPAC that support January 6 insurrectionists. You could have easily titled the article "The Extreme Power of PACs" and go on to explain your experience with AIPAC. Instead you chose to title your article "On the Outsized-Role of the Pro-Israel Lobby" and focus almost exclusively on AIPAC (aside from one vague paragraph towards the end) with many references to antisemtic tropes such as "wealthy and powerful donors." In light of rampant antisemitism, violence at synagogues in LA, intimidation on NY subways, vandalizing of Jewish businesses, calls that 6,000,000 wasn't enough or Hitler should have done more, can you not appreciate why your post hits a nerve? As Jews, we see it time and time again - many articles with salacious headlines, criticizing the Israeli government for the war in Gaza with little to no mention of Hamas or hostages (or the fact that Hamas started a war on 10/7 that Israel did not want). If an article does happen to mention Hamas, it is buried way down in the article and they cite casualty numbers without noting that combatants are also included in the statistics. These types of one-sided attacks/articles/reporting are one of the reasons that attacks on Jews seem to be acceptable right now.
Also, voting is a balancing act - no one is ever going to 100% agree with a candidate. I might hold my breath and vote for someone I do not like because he/she is pro-choice and that is my number one priority. Someone else might begrudgingly vote for a January 6 supporter because they are scared that they may need to flee with their family to Israel if the situation for Jews in the USA continues on the current path. Someone else might vote for a horrible, anti-democratic misogynist because they feel left behind. Just because you or I do not agree with the way someone votes does not make their stances less valid. And isn't it more constructive to try to understand what is motivating someone rather than dehumanizing?
In light of the vicious attacks on Jews right now, I think your article was insensitive and could unnecessarily fuel more blame and hate towards the Jewish community. I think you could have made your point in a much less divisive manner. As a Jew, I don't have it in me to debate you (as you proposed to another commenter) - I am too emotionally broken. But I would gladly have a discussion on how I feel as a Jew right now as I think it is more important than ever to appreciate that there are two sides to almost every story.
Thanks Shari. I'm sorry to hear you are emotionally broken. I don't know what it's like to be you, but I have a lot of compassion for you. I, too, am a member of a group toward whom violence and hatred are directed and at times those realities have felt terrifying. (I am not equating your experience with mine, just offering a location for the source of my compassion toward you, and other Jews, and also Palestinians too right now.)
Regarding this piece I wrote: I had a tough experience which I found very unsettling and which stayed with me for months. I finally wrote about it. I agree with you that my title was probably too broad. And I will think about whether I want to edit the title to make more clear what the piece is about.
Also, the topic I said I was willing to "debate" was whether AIPAC is buying elections and supporting insurrectionists. I put it that way because the thing speaks for itself. They are doing both, and as such there is no debate. (They are not the only PAC buying elections but they are the one I had to defend myself against which was the entire point of the piece.)
I think you know this about me but if you don’t, since the early days of this war I have spoken about the murder and rape committed by Hamas on Oct 7. In fact I had the chance to call it out very publicly in a public forum as a candidate for congress in front of a crowd which included a number pro-Palestinian protestors. And some of what I said and the crowd reaction to it was caught on tape, including a small child wearing a keffiyeh and saying in such an innocent voice “They didn’t murder anyone.” You hear protestors booing me. You hear me say “Really? I didn’t think THAT would be controversial.” I have also called for the return of the hostages, and called out the rise in anti-Semitism which of course was already on the rise in America in the Trump years and was made far worse after Oct 7. As people question my bona fides to care about and speak up for Jews and against what happened on Oct 7, I know in my spirit that I stand for Jews as I stand for all people.
I have sat with dozens of people since October 7, including Israelis, Israeli-Americans, American Jews, Palestinians of all religions, Muslims, and Arabs, to listen and learn. I have heard the gamut of opinions from “Palestinians are not even a real people or culture” to “Israel should not exist.” And more poignant things like, “My grandparents still have the keys to the home that was taken from them.” I have also sat with two different scholars of middle eastern history and heard vastly different opinions. And I do not pretend to be an expert on any of it. As an outsider to the conflict, who cares about all of the innocents on both sides equally, I believe that anyone who thinks there’s an obvious right and wrong here is failing to see the humanity and perspective of the “other side.”
I found heartening an interfaith Jewish/Muslim dinner in Palo Alto that I attended on Sunday night. The Israeli host told me “There are 6-7 million Jews and 6-7 million Palestinians. One could try to kill off the other and they will fail. Or we can keep fighting each other forever. Or we can take a third approach which is to put down our history and our hatred and our weapons and our feelings and build a safe place where all of our children can live in peace.” I experience joy being with people on all sides who yearn for that third way.
Julie, I appreciate you responding. I want to make it clear that I was not accusing you of antisemitism. I have read your books and follow your social media and I have appreciated your thoughtful approach. I also want to note that I, like you, also care for innocent people on both sides and want a path to peace that involves dignity and respect for all.
With that said, I was trying to explain why I think your article could perpetuate antisemitism. Let me throw this analogy out and see if it resonates with you (I am not sure this is the best analogy and my apologies if it does not sit well with you but it was all I could come up with right now):
Let's say it is the day after the murder of George Floyd and someone in your community writes an article with "negative things" about George Floyd. The things in the article might even be true (such as the fact that George Floyd spent time in prison). Do most people who read the article think that George Floyd's prison time is not at all relevant to his brutal death? Probably. But could some people who read the article assume that because someone was in prison that the actions of the police officers were justified? Maybe. Did this particular article really need to be written right at this moment? No. Does this article help a community already suffering? No. Wouldn't a more balanced article that included George Floyd's accomplishments and acknowledged his horrible murder have been better? Wouldn't that bring people together rather than tear them apart?
While I understand that your essay was trying to convey something that has been bothering you, I do think that good intentions can unintentionally cause harm. Let me explain to you what I see as antisemitic undertones in your article:
- AIPAC is not doing anything illegal or anything that other PACs do not do. I understand that your goal was to highlight an unpleasant experience with AIPAC but by not calling out other PACs you are, by default, making it seem like AIPAC is "more wrong" than other PACs. This is exactly what Jews are witnessing in the media - the outsized coverage of Israel/Gaza and very little coverage of things happening in Sudan, Syria, Yemen, China, etc. This one-sided coverage gives cover to Jew blaming.
- By focusing on "AIPAC funding January 6 insurrectionists," you insinuate that the people who fund AIPAC (mostly Jews) are "traitors" to America. As I mentioned, I believe politics is about trade-offs. There are many Jews in other states who will have to decide if they will vote for 10/7 denying Democrat if they want to keep reproductive rights. Why is that any different than weighing voting for a Jan. 6 supporter who you think will not abandon Israel? These are not easy decisions and it does not make someone care less about the USA because they also care about the safety of Jews.
- Your article mentions wealthy donors and influence many times - very common antisemitic tropes. And when your 40K Facebook followers scroll through and see you say "AIPAC can raise and spend as much as they like to influence American elections. (And boy do they.)" in the lead-in your article (before they even click on the link), what do you think is the first thing that will come to their mind?
- I am not trying to downplay your experience, feelings or opinions with the AIPAC representative. And I am not trying to advocate for or against AIPAC. All I am trying to do is highlight how your article can unintentionally cause pain and ask whether this is the right time to publish a piece like this. Instead, I would love for people to ask themselves why so much money is given to Jewish-related PACs such as AIPAC and J Street - probably because Jews in the U.S. do not feel safe.
As much as I want peace and prosperity for all, I cannot control what is happening in Israel and Gaza right now. I can, however, raise awareness about the fact that Jews are under threat for just being Jews. I can ask people to be allies and speak up against all forms of hate. And I can ask you to give some thought to my words and see if you can appreciate my views on your essay.
Hi Sara. I appreciate that you wrote me back, yet I fear that this is too long for me to fully respond to. A few points: 1) Thank you for mentioning J Street. I found them to be a wonderful intellectual partner during the campaign and was proud to earn their endorsement. 2) It is amazing that there are so many Jewish-related PACs and I understand you feel that they exist because Jews in the U.S. do not feel safe. I wish there were also that many PACs supporting Muslim interests because my constituents here in Palo Alto, whether Muslim or Jew all feel persecuted under present circumstances. 3) You say this was not the right time for me to post this, yet I posted it because the situation had been haunting me literally since it happened and I have been almost unable to write (which is my profession) because this was blocking me. I'm relieved I told the truth of my experience; most politicians who go through the AIPAC process are afraid to speak - there is that much FEAR of AIPAC. Is that good for our democracy? No. 4) January 6 was terrifying and over a hundred people who perpetuated it are being supported by AIPAC which I continue to find utterly disgusting and frankly dismaying.
Thanks for writing this, Julie. It takes courage for many of who are your contemporaries to speak what needs speaking. Our young people are showing us daily that they are not afraid or if they are, they do what is right anyway. I learn from the daily and with this writing you shared today, I learn from you too.
Wow... just when I thought the underside of the belly of politics could not get worse, I read your post. Makes me even prouder of you to know you were willing to wade into the election fray. We need more principled and thoughtful people like you leading our country. We also need election reform to bring down the influence of money. Frankly, this is discouraging and definitely a reason to vote - we, the people, are entitled to fair representation and I will be sure to vote my choices. Thank you for relating your experience; bravo.
thanks Mary. the money in politics is like metastatic cancer. it grows and spreads and takes what it wants. the supreme court set us on this course with its assertion that money is speech and that corporations are people. i'm glad to know so many orgs are working on campaign financing reform but i don't have a lot of hope about anything changing anytime soon.
I did not know that and I appreciate the learning; you offered a succinct description that will stick with me for a long time. I'm sure you're right in that reform is far in the future. Thank you.
Rep. Bowman said horrific shit since the start of 10/7 including denying rape. And he will lose not because of the lie AOC and he are pushing about AIPAC (and you just sunk to the levels of defending) but because people in his district vote and maybe they care more about their districts needs than the latest self-proclaimed Mid East expert. Every time I hear a speech or see an interview he dug his hole deeper, and AIPAC didn't do a thing to make him do it. Latimer has run a better campaign based on all members of his districts' needs, not harassing Jewish constituents & making "The Jews" and "The Jewish Problem" the center of every goddamn speech like Rep Bowman.
Is an accidental dogwhistle due to lack of full understanding still a dogwhistle? Yes, it is. Pushing the left wing version of "Jews control the government" is a sad look. Many Jewish American Democrats who have had progressive values and upheld the Democratic party for decades read this shit every day while we watch groups beat up members of an Orthodox synagogues in LA or spit on old Jewish men in NY. I have changed since 10/7. I don't support any politician on the left who is toeing the line into leftist space laser Majorie Taylor Greene territory. While Jews aren't a monolith and I am sure many of the Bay Area Jewish community are fine with all this, I and many others are not. Our ((($$$))) money doesn't control the US government. But we do vote.
Hmm. I was writing specifically about the control AIPAC has in American elections, yet you have chosen to make it about anti-semitism, and harassment of Jews, both of which I condemn. That's the state of things. If we dare to speak out against AIPAC, we're told we're blowing a "dogwhistle" and "pushing the left wing version of "Jews control the government."" I'm just saying AIPAC has an extremely outsized voice in American elections. They're buying elections with their tremendous resources. And they support insurrectionists. Happy to debate that any day with anyone.
Julie - I agree with the sentiment expressed by S R Paul. Using him as a way to make a case against AIPAC undermines your case for the reasons S R stated.
I'm talking about why Bowman is going to lose his seat & his dogwhistles and your amplification of them. But, yes, there are plenty of arguments to make against lobbying in the US. Your bias and focus on one is telling.
Choosing AIPAC to blame for the loss of Bowman's seat is the new progressives line. I've watched the speaches. Denying what his constituents (some of the most liberal solidly D voting Jewish community) want for themselves. This is the flip side to the MAGAs in many ways. They use Soros, you all want to make it AIPAC. As I said, the timing is also grotesque.
SR, "your bias and focus on one is telling." It isn't a bias and a focus - it was a recounting of an experience I legitimately had with the lone lobbyist that was trying to decide whether to come after me in my primary. (Put differently, this was not an expository essay on lobbyists or campaign finance - this was me telling a personal account of my lived experience.) As for Bowman, AIPAC came out in full force against him, spending $14.5M at last count and making it the most expensive house primary in US history. It may not be the only reason Bowman lost but AIPAC didn't spend all that money for nothing.
Is the problem AIPAC or is the problem money in politics? You could have taken this thought a step farther and said, "but the real problem is dark money in campaigns. We need an amendment to the constitution to change that." I mean, really, AIPAC is the ONLY PAC with "outsized influence" in politics? Not by long shot. In failing to do this, you have subtly, but definitely, taken sides in a culture war of epic proportions.
Is AIPAC dedicated to democracy in America? No. Their primary purpose is to do everything within their power to protect the state of Israel. Having power in American politics is key to this. As things stand right now, they back Trump. Why? Because the progressives have gone all in with the "pro-Palestinians." What "pro-Palestine" means now is an end to the state of Israel. There has been tons of paranoia coming out of the Jewish community for decades. Unfortunately, this is NOT paranoia. And it's not just about Israel, it's about Sharia law demolishing western values.
Before you scoff at what I just wrote and dismiss it as nonsense, please listen to what Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Masih Alinejad have to say.
You said you didn't say as much about the Israel/Gaza "conflict" as you would have liked. Please do now say all you want to. This is a conversation I think we need to have.
Before October 7th, I always thought of myself as an American first and a Jew second. Despite its flaws, I was a patriot because, at least on paper, the US is the only country where one nationality/ ethic/ cultural/ religious group is allowed to dominate over others. To no peoples is this more important to than the Jews.
But what I have learned since then is that American's, including, astonishingly, black America, has been ready and willing to throw us all under the bus. I now know my allegiance is to Israel first. The AIPAC doesn't care who is in office, only whether the people in power in this country will ally with Israel. Why? If we lose Israel, that's lights out for the Jews. It may take several generation, but that's what will happen.
It won't be the first time a culture or people will have been extinguished, but never a culture that has fought so hard and so long and has contributed so much to the progress and improvement of humanity in general.
Looking forward to your candid thoughts about Gaza/Israel/Hamas/ the hostage crisis. I expect it will be a lively debate.
Hi Deborah. Thank you for this. This wasn't an expository essay on dark money or on campaign finance – it was about a challenging personal experience I had with AIPAC when I was a congressional candidate. (They were the only PAC I had to defend myself against.) It stuns me that an "American" organization is funding Jan 6 insurrectionists, and that their defense to this is "we don't get involved in domestic politics." I was silent about my experience for months but have come to appreciate that many do not understand this aspect of AIPAC so I decided to share it.
Ah yes, I'm very familiar with the evil AIPAC. As an active member (and leader) of J Street, a pro-Israel. pro-pease, pro-diplomacy alternative, we often battle for the hearts and minds of American Jews who've lost their way when it comes to Jewish values.
My own Congressman, Mike Levin (CA49th) is endorsed by J Street and threatened by AIPAC every election cycle. AIPAC has decided to align themselves with the GOP right -- an exceptional poor choice, IMO.
I'm sorry you were at the receiving end of their BS, also sorry you didn't prevail in your race. Congress needs more progressive women of color, and more of YOU specifically.
Thank you for holding on to what is right (left)
Rachel
I appreciate J Street so much and was proud to earn their endorsement. Thanks for your kind words and for all you're doing Rachel!
i do not appreciate J Street. It may be hard to remember that Israel is a US ally, and not the agressor after the HAMAS terrorist attack that killed 1200 people and who took hostages. There can be no ceasefire as long as HAMAS holds the reigns in GAZA, where they steal from their own people and make them human shields. I honestly do not understand WHY this is hard to remember, and to realize that the rampant antiSemitism is fundamentally due to the amazing marketing that you have all bought into by Pallywood.
i love J Street. they became my ally in my campagin in that they gave me language for caring about what was happening to Jews and Israelis AND for what was happening to Palestinians.
Julie, Thanks for such a brave article. I too am a dedicated J Street supporter. I do so because it is explicitly pro-Israel, pro-peace, and pro-(American)democracy. We condemned AIPAC for its endorsement and funding of the 100+ insurrectionists, and as you state their pathetic excuse is that they are a "single issue" organization about Israel's welfare. I shudder when I hear that, because it reeks of dual loyalty, another iron in the fire of anti-semitism from the right.
AIPAC is not yet out of the CA-16 race. They are actively trying to silence any criticism of Israel or its government. With a man like Netanyahu as the current Prime Minister, silencing criticism of his government amounts to pulling the wool over people's eyes. Unfortunately, AIPAC has what seems to be an infinite supply of wool!
Julie, I appreciate your perspective and that you have stated you are against antisemitism. With that said, I would love to throw out a few additional points on top of the other comments. First, instead of being "happy to debate anywhere or anytime," how about offering to listen to why your words stung some of your readers. I personally think that you have a right to criticize AIPAC and I appreciate that this "was an expository essay" about your experiences. However, there are a lot of PACs aside from AIPAC that support January 6 insurrectionists. You could have easily titled the article "The Extreme Power of PACs" and go on to explain your experience with AIPAC. Instead you chose to title your article "On the Outsized-Role of the Pro-Israel Lobby" and focus almost exclusively on AIPAC (aside from one vague paragraph towards the end) with many references to antisemtic tropes such as "wealthy and powerful donors." In light of rampant antisemitism, violence at synagogues in LA, intimidation on NY subways, vandalizing of Jewish businesses, calls that 6,000,000 wasn't enough or Hitler should have done more, can you not appreciate why your post hits a nerve? As Jews, we see it time and time again - many articles with salacious headlines, criticizing the Israeli government for the war in Gaza with little to no mention of Hamas or hostages (or the fact that Hamas started a war on 10/7 that Israel did not want). If an article does happen to mention Hamas, it is buried way down in the article and they cite casualty numbers without noting that combatants are also included in the statistics. These types of one-sided attacks/articles/reporting are one of the reasons that attacks on Jews seem to be acceptable right now.
Also, voting is a balancing act - no one is ever going to 100% agree with a candidate. I might hold my breath and vote for someone I do not like because he/she is pro-choice and that is my number one priority. Someone else might begrudgingly vote for a January 6 supporter because they are scared that they may need to flee with their family to Israel if the situation for Jews in the USA continues on the current path. Someone else might vote for a horrible, anti-democratic misogynist because they feel left behind. Just because you or I do not agree with the way someone votes does not make their stances less valid. And isn't it more constructive to try to understand what is motivating someone rather than dehumanizing?
In light of the vicious attacks on Jews right now, I think your article was insensitive and could unnecessarily fuel more blame and hate towards the Jewish community. I think you could have made your point in a much less divisive manner. As a Jew, I don't have it in me to debate you (as you proposed to another commenter) - I am too emotionally broken. But I would gladly have a discussion on how I feel as a Jew right now as I think it is more important than ever to appreciate that there are two sides to almost every story.
Thanks Shari. I'm sorry to hear you are emotionally broken. I don't know what it's like to be you, but I have a lot of compassion for you. I, too, am a member of a group toward whom violence and hatred are directed and at times those realities have felt terrifying. (I am not equating your experience with mine, just offering a location for the source of my compassion toward you, and other Jews, and also Palestinians too right now.)
Regarding this piece I wrote: I had a tough experience which I found very unsettling and which stayed with me for months. I finally wrote about it. I agree with you that my title was probably too broad. And I will think about whether I want to edit the title to make more clear what the piece is about.
Also, the topic I said I was willing to "debate" was whether AIPAC is buying elections and supporting insurrectionists. I put it that way because the thing speaks for itself. They are doing both, and as such there is no debate. (They are not the only PAC buying elections but they are the one I had to defend myself against which was the entire point of the piece.)
I think you know this about me but if you don’t, since the early days of this war I have spoken about the murder and rape committed by Hamas on Oct 7. In fact I had the chance to call it out very publicly in a public forum as a candidate for congress in front of a crowd which included a number pro-Palestinian protestors. And some of what I said and the crowd reaction to it was caught on tape, including a small child wearing a keffiyeh and saying in such an innocent voice “They didn’t murder anyone.” You hear protestors booing me. You hear me say “Really? I didn’t think THAT would be controversial.” I have also called for the return of the hostages, and called out the rise in anti-Semitism which of course was already on the rise in America in the Trump years and was made far worse after Oct 7. As people question my bona fides to care about and speak up for Jews and against what happened on Oct 7, I know in my spirit that I stand for Jews as I stand for all people.
I have sat with dozens of people since October 7, including Israelis, Israeli-Americans, American Jews, Palestinians of all religions, Muslims, and Arabs, to listen and learn. I have heard the gamut of opinions from “Palestinians are not even a real people or culture” to “Israel should not exist.” And more poignant things like, “My grandparents still have the keys to the home that was taken from them.” I have also sat with two different scholars of middle eastern history and heard vastly different opinions. And I do not pretend to be an expert on any of it. As an outsider to the conflict, who cares about all of the innocents on both sides equally, I believe that anyone who thinks there’s an obvious right and wrong here is failing to see the humanity and perspective of the “other side.”
I found heartening an interfaith Jewish/Muslim dinner in Palo Alto that I attended on Sunday night. The Israeli host told me “There are 6-7 million Jews and 6-7 million Palestinians. One could try to kill off the other and they will fail. Or we can keep fighting each other forever. Or we can take a third approach which is to put down our history and our hatred and our weapons and our feelings and build a safe place where all of our children can live in peace.” I experience joy being with people on all sides who yearn for that third way.
Julie, I appreciate you responding. I want to make it clear that I was not accusing you of antisemitism. I have read your books and follow your social media and I have appreciated your thoughtful approach. I also want to note that I, like you, also care for innocent people on both sides and want a path to peace that involves dignity and respect for all.
With that said, I was trying to explain why I think your article could perpetuate antisemitism. Let me throw this analogy out and see if it resonates with you (I am not sure this is the best analogy and my apologies if it does not sit well with you but it was all I could come up with right now):
Let's say it is the day after the murder of George Floyd and someone in your community writes an article with "negative things" about George Floyd. The things in the article might even be true (such as the fact that George Floyd spent time in prison). Do most people who read the article think that George Floyd's prison time is not at all relevant to his brutal death? Probably. But could some people who read the article assume that because someone was in prison that the actions of the police officers were justified? Maybe. Did this particular article really need to be written right at this moment? No. Does this article help a community already suffering? No. Wouldn't a more balanced article that included George Floyd's accomplishments and acknowledged his horrible murder have been better? Wouldn't that bring people together rather than tear them apart?
While I understand that your essay was trying to convey something that has been bothering you, I do think that good intentions can unintentionally cause harm. Let me explain to you what I see as antisemitic undertones in your article:
- AIPAC is not doing anything illegal or anything that other PACs do not do. I understand that your goal was to highlight an unpleasant experience with AIPAC but by not calling out other PACs you are, by default, making it seem like AIPAC is "more wrong" than other PACs. This is exactly what Jews are witnessing in the media - the outsized coverage of Israel/Gaza and very little coverage of things happening in Sudan, Syria, Yemen, China, etc. This one-sided coverage gives cover to Jew blaming.
- By focusing on "AIPAC funding January 6 insurrectionists," you insinuate that the people who fund AIPAC (mostly Jews) are "traitors" to America. As I mentioned, I believe politics is about trade-offs. There are many Jews in other states who will have to decide if they will vote for 10/7 denying Democrat if they want to keep reproductive rights. Why is that any different than weighing voting for a Jan. 6 supporter who you think will not abandon Israel? These are not easy decisions and it does not make someone care less about the USA because they also care about the safety of Jews.
- Your article mentions wealthy donors and influence many times - very common antisemitic tropes. And when your 40K Facebook followers scroll through and see you say "AIPAC can raise and spend as much as they like to influence American elections. (And boy do they.)" in the lead-in your article (before they even click on the link), what do you think is the first thing that will come to their mind?
- I am not trying to downplay your experience, feelings or opinions with the AIPAC representative. And I am not trying to advocate for or against AIPAC. All I am trying to do is highlight how your article can unintentionally cause pain and ask whether this is the right time to publish a piece like this. Instead, I would love for people to ask themselves why so much money is given to Jewish-related PACs such as AIPAC and J Street - probably because Jews in the U.S. do not feel safe.
As much as I want peace and prosperity for all, I cannot control what is happening in Israel and Gaza right now. I can, however, raise awareness about the fact that Jews are under threat for just being Jews. I can ask people to be allies and speak up against all forms of hate. And I can ask you to give some thought to my words and see if you can appreciate my views on your essay.
Hi Sara. I appreciate that you wrote me back, yet I fear that this is too long for me to fully respond to. A few points: 1) Thank you for mentioning J Street. I found them to be a wonderful intellectual partner during the campaign and was proud to earn their endorsement. 2) It is amazing that there are so many Jewish-related PACs and I understand you feel that they exist because Jews in the U.S. do not feel safe. I wish there were also that many PACs supporting Muslim interests because my constituents here in Palo Alto, whether Muslim or Jew all feel persecuted under present circumstances. 3) You say this was not the right time for me to post this, yet I posted it because the situation had been haunting me literally since it happened and I have been almost unable to write (which is my profession) because this was blocking me. I'm relieved I told the truth of my experience; most politicians who go through the AIPAC process are afraid to speak - there is that much FEAR of AIPAC. Is that good for our democracy? No. 4) January 6 was terrifying and over a hundred people who perpetuated it are being supported by AIPAC which I continue to find utterly disgusting and frankly dismaying.
Thanks for writing this, Julie. It takes courage for many of who are your contemporaries to speak what needs speaking. Our young people are showing us daily that they are not afraid or if they are, they do what is right anyway. I learn from the daily and with this writing you shared today, I learn from you too.
thank you.
Wow... just when I thought the underside of the belly of politics could not get worse, I read your post. Makes me even prouder of you to know you were willing to wade into the election fray. We need more principled and thoughtful people like you leading our country. We also need election reform to bring down the influence of money. Frankly, this is discouraging and definitely a reason to vote - we, the people, are entitled to fair representation and I will be sure to vote my choices. Thank you for relating your experience; bravo.
thanks Mary. the money in politics is like metastatic cancer. it grows and spreads and takes what it wants. the supreme court set us on this course with its assertion that money is speech and that corporations are people. i'm glad to know so many orgs are working on campaign financing reform but i don't have a lot of hope about anything changing anytime soon.
I did not know that and I appreciate the learning; you offered a succinct description that will stick with me for a long time. I'm sure you're right in that reform is far in the future. Thank you.
Rep. Bowman said horrific shit since the start of 10/7 including denying rape. And he will lose not because of the lie AOC and he are pushing about AIPAC (and you just sunk to the levels of defending) but because people in his district vote and maybe they care more about their districts needs than the latest self-proclaimed Mid East expert. Every time I hear a speech or see an interview he dug his hole deeper, and AIPAC didn't do a thing to make him do it. Latimer has run a better campaign based on all members of his districts' needs, not harassing Jewish constituents & making "The Jews" and "The Jewish Problem" the center of every goddamn speech like Rep Bowman.
Is an accidental dogwhistle due to lack of full understanding still a dogwhistle? Yes, it is. Pushing the left wing version of "Jews control the government" is a sad look. Many Jewish American Democrats who have had progressive values and upheld the Democratic party for decades read this shit every day while we watch groups beat up members of an Orthodox synagogues in LA or spit on old Jewish men in NY. I have changed since 10/7. I don't support any politician on the left who is toeing the line into leftist space laser Majorie Taylor Greene territory. While Jews aren't a monolith and I am sure many of the Bay Area Jewish community are fine with all this, I and many others are not. Our ((($$$))) money doesn't control the US government. But we do vote.
Unsubscribed.
Hmm. I was writing specifically about the control AIPAC has in American elections, yet you have chosen to make it about anti-semitism, and harassment of Jews, both of which I condemn. That's the state of things. If we dare to speak out against AIPAC, we're told we're blowing a "dogwhistle" and "pushing the left wing version of "Jews control the government."" I'm just saying AIPAC has an extremely outsized voice in American elections. They're buying elections with their tremendous resources. And they support insurrectionists. Happy to debate that any day with anyone.
Julie - I agree with the sentiment expressed by S R Paul. Using him as a way to make a case against AIPAC undermines your case for the reasons S R stated.
I'm talking about why Bowman is going to lose his seat & his dogwhistles and your amplification of them. But, yes, there are plenty of arguments to make against lobbying in the US. Your bias and focus on one is telling.
Choosing AIPAC to blame for the loss of Bowman's seat is the new progressives line. I've watched the speaches. Denying what his constituents (some of the most liberal solidly D voting Jewish community) want for themselves. This is the flip side to the MAGAs in many ways. They use Soros, you all want to make it AIPAC. As I said, the timing is also grotesque.
SR, "your bias and focus on one is telling." It isn't a bias and a focus - it was a recounting of an experience I legitimately had with the lone lobbyist that was trying to decide whether to come after me in my primary. (Put differently, this was not an expository essay on lobbyists or campaign finance - this was me telling a personal account of my lived experience.) As for Bowman, AIPAC came out in full force against him, spending $14.5M at last count and making it the most expensive house primary in US history. It may not be the only reason Bowman lost but AIPAC didn't spend all that money for nothing.
Is the problem AIPAC or is the problem money in politics? You could have taken this thought a step farther and said, "but the real problem is dark money in campaigns. We need an amendment to the constitution to change that." I mean, really, AIPAC is the ONLY PAC with "outsized influence" in politics? Not by long shot. In failing to do this, you have subtly, but definitely, taken sides in a culture war of epic proportions.
Is AIPAC dedicated to democracy in America? No. Their primary purpose is to do everything within their power to protect the state of Israel. Having power in American politics is key to this. As things stand right now, they back Trump. Why? Because the progressives have gone all in with the "pro-Palestinians." What "pro-Palestine" means now is an end to the state of Israel. There has been tons of paranoia coming out of the Jewish community for decades. Unfortunately, this is NOT paranoia. And it's not just about Israel, it's about Sharia law demolishing western values.
Before you scoff at what I just wrote and dismiss it as nonsense, please listen to what Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Masih Alinejad have to say.
You said you didn't say as much about the Israel/Gaza "conflict" as you would have liked. Please do now say all you want to. This is a conversation I think we need to have.
Before October 7th, I always thought of myself as an American first and a Jew second. Despite its flaws, I was a patriot because, at least on paper, the US is the only country where one nationality/ ethic/ cultural/ religious group is allowed to dominate over others. To no peoples is this more important to than the Jews.
But what I have learned since then is that American's, including, astonishingly, black America, has been ready and willing to throw us all under the bus. I now know my allegiance is to Israel first. The AIPAC doesn't care who is in office, only whether the people in power in this country will ally with Israel. Why? If we lose Israel, that's lights out for the Jews. It may take several generation, but that's what will happen.
It won't be the first time a culture or people will have been extinguished, but never a culture that has fought so hard and so long and has contributed so much to the progress and improvement of humanity in general.
Looking forward to your candid thoughts about Gaza/Israel/Hamas/ the hostage crisis. I expect it will be a lively debate.
Hi Deborah. Thank you for this. This wasn't an expository essay on dark money or on campaign finance – it was about a challenging personal experience I had with AIPAC when I was a congressional candidate. (They were the only PAC I had to defend myself against.) It stuns me that an "American" organization is funding Jan 6 insurrectionists, and that their defense to this is "we don't get involved in domestic politics." I was silent about my experience for months but have come to appreciate that many do not understand this aspect of AIPAC so I decided to share it.