Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Rachel Zahn's avatar

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

Expand full comment
Shari's avatar

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.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts