Defending The Indefensible: A Look Into Ash Sarkar's Anti-Jewish Fetish

 

This tweet might be four years old, but it is worth addressing again, given the ugly head of antisemitism has reared once more and risen from the depths of depravity. Like historical sources, tweets can tell us a lot about a person and their actions. Thoughts are composed in a way, not as sophisticated as texts or speeches that have been made, but can also provide information and understandings about people and their intentions. Ash Sarkar is by no means devoid of criticism, no matter how many labels she may place upon herself, whether it be as a woman, a person of colour, a Muslim or a Tottenham Hotspur fan. Either way, defence of the indefensible must be considered a critical outlook, and when we explore the significance of what she is saying, and what she has not yet followed up on with corrective action, we can take a look into the psyche of a corruptible and immoral character.

For context of Ash's bizarre tweet, we must go back to 2010. Two graffiti artists by the names of Ewa Jasiewicz and Yonatan Shapira, took it upon themselves to spray the words 'Free Palestine' on the walls of the Warsaw Ghetto, as a political message at the site of mass incarceration of Jews and others and a place where many were killed, starved to death, died due to disease or were deported to concentration camps. The purpose of this was to deliberately be shocking and provoke outrage, and the pair got exactly what they wanted. It is reprehensible to believe that Jasiewicz and Shapira could still be consultants on 'anti-racism', write articles for The Guardian and even be tasked with teaching members of a British teachers' union about antisemitism in 2021, but that would never happen, would it? Jasiewicz in particular has been more vocal that Shapira, and has gained more traction and support from the British political left. It shouldn't have to take explaining as to why what they did was reprehensible, but for those who can't grasp this basic concept, here's why some may interpret these actions as being deeply racist.

The Warsaw Ghetto serves as a memorial site: a site to the thousands who were murdered or transported from the site to death camps. Many of these victims were Jews, including children. I had the 'pleasure' (and I use this in inverted commas because of the horrors that remained within the ghetto and how it makes one feel) of visiting the site as part of a greater research project with leading Holocaust expert David Cesarani in 2011. The symbol of this historic site was to preserve the memory of people (not just Jews) who had been led here, taken away from their homes in preparation for death. Ash clearly did not understand this in her history classes, nor has she ever read a book about the matter. There is a wall nearby the ghetto that Jasiewicz purposefully targeted with the intention of drawing parallels between Israel, Palestine and the 92000 people who died in the ghetto. For a group of people that keep insisting that they don't wish to draw these parallels between Israel and the Jews (and by doing saw call anybody who does antisemitic for doing so), they have a nasty habit of doing this consistently. Most normal people would see this act as being very racist as it makes the distinction that Jews are universally responsible for what happens in Israel, or that the treatment and deaths of those in the Warsaw Ghetto should be politicised for pushing an agenda that (rather ironically) calls for the massacre of Jewish people in the Levant. However, because the Labour Party was run by lunatics that had taken over the asylum between 2015 and 2020, leader Jeremy Corbyn praised Jaisewicz and offered her a platform during a Momentum event in 2018. Jeremy Corbyn continuing his streak of being the unluckiest 'anti-racist' to walk this planet.

Then there's the untruth in Ash's statement that the wall was a regular from graffiti artists, which is plainly false. There is no evidence that the wall that was desecrated (not with quotation marks on this occasion) was ever used as a graffiti site, nor has it ever been used as such. This is the logic of supposed 'anti-racists' who believe that it is within their right to use charged language that conflates two separate matters, but also to co-opt sites that have a greater meaning to European Jews than to Gentiles who have never had this as a lived experience. I don't care if you want to daub 'Free Palestine' on your own doorstep, just don't do it on ours. It was meant to shock and 'send a message' so to speak, no different to when neo-Nazis spray swastikas on synagogues, graves or on schools. It's not the only instance over the last few years where Jewish institutions have been desecrated with this same message.

Baba Sale Congregation, Los Angeles, CA

Adat Yeshua Messianic Synagogue, Norwich, UK

Synagogue Congregation Beth El, Los Angeles, CA

Barcelona Synagogue, Barcelona

Zion Synagogue, Plovdiv, Bulgaria

Chabad of Parkland, Parkland, FL

Ceuta Synagogue, Ceuta

These are just a few examples where people have used this message to specifically target the Jewish community. It's weird how this has not been condemned by the political left (not from any sources I have seen) and yet, in December 2019, Momentum activists hijacked and weaponised for political purposes, graffiti that had been daubed on a shop window, asserting that Jews were responsible for 9/11. Momentum purposely made sure that Jewish people were not welcomed, as long as they subscribed to certain viewpoints, and made a 'vigil of self-righteousness'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riDP1JUmCoc

If 'solidarity' is with Jews, as many like Sarkar claim to have, then the same condemnation for what was obviously neo-Nazi inspired would then be extended to the deaths of those at the Warsaw Ghetto who had their final resting place used as a political site against a state that happens to be majority Jewish? The answer will of course be a resounding 'no'. I had an interesting conversation with a man named Tommy (who I will not give the full name of, but on Twitter his name has something to do with a rebellion in a port city in Russia and a profession by which one bakes bread) who asserted that the desecration of the memorial was wholly a good thing as it 'sent a message'. The 'message' being projected, in the eyes of the political left like Sarkar, is that there can be parallels drawn between the Warsaw ghetto and the treatment of Jews with that of Palestinians by Israel. The first thing one has to consider is that the two are similar, when they are not. The IDF do act with impunity in Palestinian areas, that cannot be denied. What is disingenuous and not historically accurate is why that specific reason has happened. The Palestinians receive billions in aid from western nations - the Jews in the ghettos did not. Palestinian 'ghettos' have running water, heat and electricity - the Warsaw and subsequent other ghettos did not. People in Warsaw were transported to death camps and placed in gas chambers on the way - the Palestinians are not. The only thing that connects the two is the fact that Jews have been involved in both, and using the charged memory of those who were slaughtered or sent to their deaths in Warsaw is weaponised. The same with using analogies that Gaza, an area that has department stores, swimming pools and thriving souks, is a 'concentration camp' is also used specifically to be racially charged and put guilt on Jews that survived or have descendants that have had to live with the consequences of the genocide in Europe.

Then, I had a strange interaction with this fellow on Twitter:

This person, with only ten followers as of me writing this blogpost, was defending Sarkar and the general principle of desecrating the Warsaw ghetto as it was meant to 'shock' and deliberately draw the distinction between Israel and the victims of the Holocaust. Whilst they acknowledged that it was crude, they still supported the idea and believed that, whilst not daubing the message 'Free Palestine' on modern synagogues was abhorrent, doing it such on places of historical significance, especially where the Jews are concerned, is fair game. This could include, naturally, the concentration and death camps of Europe. This explains a lot about ideology, and whilst I don't expect Sarkar to have read this at all, I would not be surprised at all if this is what she would also believe, as she did not distinguish as to what was a correct place to promote such a message and those that are unacceptable. It would be, therefore, morally right to be able to spray paint the message 'Free Tibet' or 'Free Hong Kong' on a memorial to the Rape of Nanking in protest of Chinese policy, or 'For The Migrant Workers' on a memorial dedicated to slavery in protest over Qatar's use of slave labour in the run up to the World Cup. None of this would be productive, nor would it be morally justifiable either, because it draws parallels with people who have no responsibility for those actions. Governments and institutions are one thing, but targeting those and discrediting the sacrifice that people made by scoring political points is, quite frankly, indefensible.

This has also reared interest because of a recent documentary by comedian David Baddiel entitled 'Jews Don't Count', which tackles the idea that whilst the political left and progressive movements have made triumphant strides into supporting ethnic minorities that have been affected by racism and racial inequality, the one group that they continue to ignore or encourage the racism experienced by Jews. Ash had started, before the documentary's release, to obsessively fetishise the experiences that Baddiel mentions and blatantly not even address what he was prepared to say a part of the documentary:

Sarkar believes that liberals, progressives and left wingers have not ignored antisemitism, and this is 'provably untrue'. There is very little to no truth in this, as we have found out over the past seven years or so, particularly in left wing circles. As mentioned previously, and in my last blogpost, the left has tried everything to dismiss experiences of antisemitism in this country unless it comes from the far-right, or even better for them, the Conservative Party. This is selective mutism when it comes to the understanding of antisemitism - that it doesn't always have to be overt like the marchers in Charlottesville who said that 'Jews will not replace us'. This week alone, members of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement, who have more to do with left wing support for the black power movement, also shouted 'Jews will not replace us'. I see no condemnation from Ash or other members of Novara Media in solidarity with Jewish people. 

This is part of her 'all lives matter' moment. Baddiel's thesis and his programme was to address the rise in antisemitism, not anti-black, anti-GRT or Islamophobic hate. There have been documentaries on all those forms of discrimination also, and yet Baddiel never demanded that those documentaries be under scrutiny for ignoring antisemitism. If he had, then Sarkar would have a point. What she does here is just reinforce the point. For the past two years, we've heard that 'black lives matter doesn't mean that other lives don't matter, it's just that black lives matter in this moment.' This documentary does that too, stating that 'we're not saying that other forms of racism don't matter, it's just that anti-Jewish racism matters for us in this moment.' But, what do you expect from Ash Sarkar, who wanted Holocaust Memorial Day to commemorate the victims of all genocides? Principles fall out the window when she wants them to, and her lack of willingness to actually listen to what has been said, tells us a lot more about her understanding.

One thing that I have also found irritating in this discussion is around the content creator's abhorrent use of blackface in the 1990s. David Baddiel infamously used blackface to mock former Nottingham Forrest player Jason Lee, which is absolutely despicable. It wasn't okay then, and it isn't okay now. I, however, do believe in forgive and forget, as I was taught growing up. Baddiel publicly denounced and apologised on many occasions for this, and was invited on Lee's podcast AbsoluteLee to discuss the incident and how people can better themselves. I have always maintained that people can do this by making positive changes and, instead of living in the past, can rectify what they have done to make those changes. It reminds me of former KKK leader Johnny Lee Clary, who had reformed his previously racist ways through the help of Reverend Wade Watts, and became a spokesman for anti-racism and denounced white supremacy (though obviously Baddiel and Clary were miles apart on that front). The past cannot be undone, but if people can apologise and better themselves, I'm all for it.

Baddiel himself in the documentary acknowledged his past and apologised again about what had happened. He is still met with a barrage of pictures of him dressed up as Jason Lee from the 90s with captions about how he isn't the best person to discuss racism. Despite apologies, it will never be enough for some people, because Baddiel has the disadvantage of being Jewish. Non-Jewish people appear to get away with this all too infrequently, such as former NUS Leader Shaima Dallali, who had been suspended for an old tweet, referencing the Battle of Khaybar, in which the warlord Muhammad slaughtered Jews on the way to Islamic conquest in the region. Dallali had apologised for it, but when the NUS suspended her as president of the union, the political left were quick to stand in solidarity with her as she used her privilege as a woman of colour and her pro-Palestinian politics to gain traction and support. Baddiel himself was still met with a barrage of comments that did not directly address that, but addressed his Jewish identity instead.

Normally, most people would also want to condemn this, especially as it is also addressed at all Jewish people and not just at Baddiel. However, I ask too much sometimes:

Being a Jew is now a trigger word.

"I'm not racist, but..." energy right here.

How dare you question the Messiah?

Both missing the point and reinforcing the point of the documentary all in one, here. And they say we Jews are responsible for the two-for-one deals!

Our good friend Jackie Walker saying that addressing antisemitism is a terrible thing and that we should all shut up about it. Great solidarity, Jackie!

Sarkar is by no means responsible for what her fans, or those who would naturally be supportive of her, put online. Only she is responsible for her own actions and words. It's the double standard and hypocrisy of her takes that I find are impossible to ignore. As a woman of Bengali descent, I would never want to see her being racially abused, and if she was (despite political differences). Ash deleted this tweet before, but I had responded to the abuse that she had been suffering online by racist trolls.

That can't be said the same about Rivkah Brown, who stated that Baddiel's school was a 'Zionist primary school':

What I think she meant to say was 'Jewish'. I mean, no anti-racist would conflate Zionism with Jews, right? That would be very antisemitic to say so. Rivkah Brown is not genuine when it comes to confronting anti-Jewish racism, particularly on the political left, unless she can gain from it. The 'Zionist school' she mentioned was featured in the documentary and highlighted some of the problems that the political left are not willing to confront. For one thing, the school had an intruder practise in case a gunman entered the school trying to harm the children inside. The school, like many Jewish schools in this country, have been threatened by far-right and Islamic extremists over the years. I've mentioned this before, but even in my homeland of Denmark, our school had to prepare us for similar things. These are children who could be attacked because of their identity. Rivkah's dismissal of this is imperative to studying how Jews don't count, in their eyes. That and the bizarre response by Miriam Margolyes, who said that Jews should apologise and continuously condemn the actions of the State of Israel and Muslims should do so when discussing ISIS and other Islamic theocracies that they have nothing to do with. Again, this conflates the idea that British Jews have something to do with the actions of Israel's government, which is (once again) extremely racist.

In a strange world where people almost have to publicly whip themselves and apologise for the sins of their ancestors' past, I am reminded that there is no such thing as the perfect person. Individuals can make mistakes, but can rectify their mistakes by doing good. Sarkar is not entirely an antisemite, but she has fetishised the idea that anti-Jewish racism is something that can be both unacceptable, and yet not seen as important. I would want to say that she should put her feet in someone else's shoe, but I don't know if jackboots necessarily come in her size.

Going Death Con 3

 

Defcon 3: Force readiness increased above normal levels.

On the evening of October 8th, before heading off to bed, Kanye West unleashed a tweet that redefined his career. The day before, unbeknownst to many, he also inferred that Puffy Daddy was controlled by Jews on Instagram, which saw his dormant account (as West had not used this for two years) locked by the administration team. From here, Kanye started his own war path against the very villains that he created in his own head. His own misdemeanours, personal demons and arrogance led him to the conclusion that, instead of taking responsibility for one's actions, it is far better to blame it on a minority that the majority of which in that population has no considerable power, but he could blame effectively as it seemed plausible: the Jews.

This hasn't been Kanye's first flirtation with antisemitic activities online. In November 2013, West believed that President Obama had difficulties pushing legislation through Congress because as a black man, the President of the United States didn't 'have the same connections as Jewish people...We ain't Jewish. We don't get family that got money like that.' (sic) He followed this up in the December by calling his tirade a 'compliment' to Jewish Americans and that he never understood 'being told that you have money' would be considered insulting. West is a complex figure, and there's no denying the sheer arrogance and brashness that has made him one of the most successful musicians of all time. In 2005, after Hurricane Katrina, as part of a promotional video to help the victims of the disaster, West declared that 'George Bush doesn't care about black people'. Fast forward to 2009, West at the MTV Video Music Awards, storms on stage to take a prize away from Taylor Swift and declare that 'Beyoncé had one of the best music videos of all time', much to Bee's embarrassment. West has argued many times that awards have been rigged against him in favour of other artists and that he is 'the greatest of all time'. South Park famously parodied an oblivious West on an ego trip when he couldn't understand the 'fish sticks' joke. Most baffling of all was his assertion that 'slavery was a choice' in regards to the capturing, raping and torture of African people when brought to work on plantation fields in the United States. However, like Teflon, not much manages to stick to Ye. 

Kanye West, like many polarising figures, should be treated like a science experiment. West is not going to be a revolutionary like Mao or Castro, but rather a specimen of his own time. It is fascinating to see his journey from claiming that President Bush did not care about black people in 2005 to then being openly endorsed and endorsing President Trump from 2016. What has categorised Kanye West's evolution, so to speak, is the polarisation between white nationalism and black supremacy in an era of ever changing politics. Both have now come to the spotlight over the past decade or so as both movements have gained significant traction. White nationalists have become emboldened, whether intentionally or not, by the rise of Donald Trump, and black supremacists have taken a grip of the American political left in the wake of Black Lives Matter. In fact, what makes Kanye fascinating (for lack of a better word) is that he seemingly unites both, despite some in both camps rejecting him all together. What do I mean by this? We have to then analyse his infamous 'White Lives Matter' moment in early October 2022, where along with polarising figure Candace Owens, Ye launches a line of sweaters where black models wear symbols that white nationalists say is fine and black nationalists decry. Days later, he says he is going 'death con 3' (sic) on the Jews as the ADL had denounced the phrase 'White Lives Matter' as a white nationalist slur. This, rather ironically, only gained the support of black nationalists/supremacists for Kanye. White nationalists too loved the use of the phrase 'going death con 3'. Twitter locked Kanye's account. They gave white and black nationalists the ultimate fuel to the proverbial fire: that the Jews are controlling our freedoms and are trying to censor extreme positions and opinions.

The snowball festered in several interviews with Tucker Carlson and Drink Champs, in which Kanye went unchallenged on his many views, including his declaration of love for Hitler and Nazis in general, that he was being targeted by the 'Zionist Jews' and the 'Jewish media'. LeBron James wouldn't allow him to continue going on his tirade of vitriol, stopping the airing of his The Shop talk show featuring West. White nationalist group the 'Goyim Defence League' protested in favour of Kanye, placing a banner that said 'Kanye is right about the Jews', giving Nazi salutes. Adidas, a brand ironically founded by Nazis, dropped the Yeezy brand in wake of all this. Social media users, known for their virtue signalling and want for a world founded on social justice, did not do their job effectively in holding Ye to account. Instead, it turned against the Jews once more with even more ire than before.

Kanye sees himself as a Christ-like figure, put on this Earth to rid the world of sin and cleanse the unclean. He depicts himself on the cross being crucified by the 'unbelievers' or giving a Sermon on the Mound to those who want to be righteous. Kyrie Irving, a basketball player for the Brooklyn Nets, also had a few things to say on the matter also. As a Black Hebrew Israelite, Irving holds the belief (much like Kanye) that black people are the actual Jews and that all other Jews are fake, imitators or are infidels (in polarisation to Ye's original belief in 2013 that black people could not be Jews as they did not have the financial power). Irving tweeted out a link to a movie called Hebrews To Negroes: Wake Up, Black America - a film (and yes, I say film rather than documentary) that explicitly denies the Holocaust, shows admiration for Henry Ford and Adolf Hitler, claims that Jews worship Satan and that Jews are solely responsible for the Atlantic Slave Trade and the control of the media.

Once again, much like West, Irving has bridged the gap between white and black supremacists alike, as they have a common enemy. Much like David Duke and other white supremacists, Irving and West cement the misnomer that Jews are of Khazarian or Turkic descent and not that of Semitic descent, whilst black people of African descent are, despite many ethnic, linguistic and cultural differences that  actually negates this argument. More so, Doron Behar's 2010 study concluded that an Ashkenazi line of Jews have no relation at all genetically to that of the Central Asian regions, and that more than 50% of all Ashkenazi Jews can find their relationships biologically, linguistically and culturally closer to that of Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews. The only conclusive report that gives the mostly unfounded Khazar theory some legs was Eran Elhaik's evidence of some Caucasians converting to Judaism along the Silk Road, though that it is likely that such conversion happened prior to a number of Jews settling in the Khazarian region. Most Jewish genetics still point to origins in the Middle East, specifically the Levant. So, even with this, there isn't enough to support a theory that all Ashkenazis came from this region. Black Hebrew Israelites, however, still maintain that Jews today are not the real Jews - that black people are the real Jews. And yet, it wasn't the Black Hebrew Israelites that suffered at the hands of the Nazis, was it?

Fast forward to the 12th of November. The Kanye-Kyrie affair has started to die down a bit, but antisemitism from white and black supremacists has not. In fact, it has ramped up. Below are just a few examples that have met with, not only hundreds or thousands of retweets, but also very little to no challenge either.

This is just a small section, but we can see white supremacists and black supremacists agreeing that the biggest problem for them, and the cause of all their own failures in life, is ultimately down to about 2% of the entire United States population. Some of these people over the last two years would have espoused beliefs that due to their skin colour, society mistreats them or is ultimately against them, and would want supposed people with 'institutional power' to support them in their struggle, or to call out instances of racism. Instead of taking personal responsibility for their own misdemeanours, it is easy to just blame it on a people who have been taking the blame for millennia, just like how a certain billionaire rapper has done. 

The reason why we fast forward to the 12th of November was because of Saturday Night Live, which has been a dead horse being flogged for a while now, but has gained minor traction recently because of the appearance of Dave Chapelle. Unlike Kanye and Kyrie, I don't consider Chapelle to be a supremacist of any kind. He is a comedian that I deeply respect and admire for his no-nonsense, brash and often crude take on topics that have been worth defending in the past. During his skit, he ripped Kanye West apart when it came to the representation of Jewish people, and went on to talk a lot about Ye's demeanour and being dropped by Adidas. It was mostly harmless, though there were a few objectional moments during this. First, Chapelle went onto say that 'you can't talk about (((them)))' (I use the parenthesis ironically, by the way) in way that you couldn't speak about blacks or Italians. The second was that 'Jews have been through terrible things, but you can't blame that on Black America'. This is true, and I completely agree, however, it is a baseless assertion. I couldn't find a single instance online or in any history book (I have had a lot of time since being ill) where a Jew blamed the misfortunes of our people on black Americans. What is also true is that black Americans have been through some awful experiences, and yet, black supremacists blame it on the Jews constantly. The film that Irving promoted did just that. Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam do this constantly. Black Lives Matter and the Women's March did it. White supremacists do it. Are we noticing a pattern here? Yes, there has been some iota of sensationalism and hyperbole regarding Dave Chapelle's routine in particular, and that I can agree is ridiculous. That said, what is it about (((them))) that you supposedly can't say? Is it the fear of social repercussions or a fear of legal consequences, because you do not have to be fearful of the second part of that. The Nation of Islam, I am reminded, has existed for 92 years, without members being arrested for wishing death upon the Jews or inciting violence against them. Farrakhan has been particularly shrewd about this, as he knows targeted language that incites violence would land him in prison, so simply states that Judaism is a 'gutter religion', that Jews are 'termites' and Jews worship Satan. The Jersey City shooters were both active supporters of both the Black Hebrew Israelites and Farrakhan, which is often forgotten about in the struggle against racial activity, inspired heavily by these two factions of black nationalism. Now, how would the Black Hebrew Israelites react to that, knowing that a prominent black nationalist and separatist is demonising not only their religion, but them also as people and two shooters were inspired by the BHI movement to want to kill fellow Jews? Especially if they believe that they are the true Jews and we Ashkenazis are nothing more than falsehoods.

Speaking of which, two other prominent extremists that can't be left out are Anna Rajagopal and Jackie Walker, both of whom have used Judaism, weaponised racial divisions and used their own self identity as women of colour to deflect from criticism on their positions. Anna believes that Black and Brown Jews (which do exist, by the way) are somehow superior to the 'default' Ashkenazis, who have never claimed to be the 'default', nor have espoused views that otherwise make sure that they are 'superior' in any way. Anna, much like Kyrie, believes that Ashkenazi Jews like myself, who have lived, breathed and studied Judaism to the point where we can make a Matzo ball blind, are simply reduced to 'white' status, and that is what makes us beneath her.

  

And, of course, calling out West's outbursts online is 'anti-Black':

Jackie Walker also falls into this, using her status as a woman of colour to deflect from criticism, which her band of sycophantic fans eat up and wash down with their soya-based lattes. I object to Jackie Walker using her Jewish and black identity as a way to not only deflect from criticism of her positions, but also to weaponise mainstream Jewish identity against a, shall we say, nouveau riche style of Jewish identity politics that is disconnected from traditionalism, conservative principles that many Jews live by. I say this because she openly defended former BBC journalist Tala Halawa from being sacked from her position after she had tweeted this:

For a Jew, Jackie Walker has not done much for the Jewish community. Immediately, this should be met with condemnation from Jew or Gentile. Instead, when Halawa had been fired, Jackie Walker came back with this:

This, and Walker's belief that Jews were chef financers of the Slave Trade are also baffling. Seymour Drescher concluded that whilst there were Jewish slave owners, this was mostly minimal, and the vast majority who owned ships and plantations that were used in the enslavement of African people, were in fact Christian. It seems that, for many conspiracy theorists, it's easier to find a slightly Hebrew or Yiddish sounding name and connect it to institutions that would seem plausible to be run by Jews (see the Nation of Islam's Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews or The Protocols of the Elders of Zion). One of the main criticisms coming out from these radical factions is that Jews control finances, the media and governments of the world. In fact, most of the financial institutions, television networks and media outlets of the world are actually Irish owned. Now, there isn't a great Irish conspiracy theory that states that the Irish are planning world dominance. There isn't a scope from the far-right that states that the Irish are replacing white Americans with ethnic minorities. There isn't an idea that you can never make jokes about the Irish for fear of being cancelled. Wonder why this might be? Because it would sound ridiculous in theory and practise. The vast majority of Irish Americans are like Jewish Americans: hold no institutional power, are under the thumb of big government and are facing difficult decisions in the wake of rising prices. Walker's conspiracy theories with nothing to back up her claims is strange, and feeds into the same theories that Kanye, Kyrie, the KKK, white supremacists, MAGA fanatics, Anna Rajagopal, the Nation of Islam and Black Hebrew Israelites have been espousing for decades - that somehow, somewhere, in some dimension beyond our reality, the Jews are always in control. Now, I know what will happen should Her Maj get a hold of this. 'Here's a boy saying that Jews control the world, he's a real antisemite!' So, here I am on record, as a Jewish man, that I do not believe this at all. 'He's going after people of colour!' Yeah, for their political statements, not skin colour. I've also talked a lot about white supremacists and their theories surrounding Jews. It just so happens that white supremacists, black supremacists and some individuals that may not identify as either have very similar views.

However, despite the difficulties, there is always hope in the wake of rising racism. NBA legends Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Charles Barkley swiftly condemned Kyrie Irving and Kanye West's antisemitism (both are considered mensches in the Jewish community). Ye's ex-wife Kim Kardashian also slammed her former husband for his racism, as has Jamie Lee-Curtis, Diane Warren, John DiMaggio (legend), Malynda Hale and countless others. This isn't necessarily a 'white' or 'black' problem, but more of a problem with celebrity culture allowing itself to justify the actions of others. You see, Kanye is very privileged, looking at things from an economic standpoint. Before the controversy, it was predicted that Ye was worth $1.8 billion, but is now due to lose $1.5 billion of that worth because of his antisemitic rants (after the loss of the Adidas deal). Celebrities, by nature, are extremely arrogant, and believe that they can say things that they can simply get away with because of their status and established hierarchy. It reminded me of Meryl Streep at the Golden Globes a few years ago, where she may as well have just said: 'I'm better than you' into the microphone for all to hear across the world. The diatribe of trying to believe that one person is better than another because of status is what has defined celebrity culture, and Kanye has definitely shown no humiliation or remorse for that. It is Kanye's very status that has allowed him to influence people into believing what he said was right. Remember, I said that he perceives himself as a Christ-like figure, and we all know what happened to the original Jesus Christ now, don't we? Of course, that was hyperbolic, but Kanye is feeling what I've always maintained: that social consequences for speech is absolutely fine, but not legal ones. 

He had best be reminded what happened to those who did speak out in Nazi Germany. He may find that the grass isn't always greener, especially when it's mown by Jews.  

Sources

Behar, Doron M. (2010) 'The Genome-Wide Structure of the Jewish People'

Rootsi, Behar, et al. (2013) 'Phylogenetic Applications Of Whole Y-Chromosome Sequences And Near Eastern Origin of Ashkenazi Levites'.

Frantzman, S. (2013) 'Terra Incognita: The Return of the Khazar Myth'

Elhaik, E. (2013) 'The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting The Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypothesis'

Atmonavage, J. & Nelson, B. (2019) 'Jersey City Shooters Had Massive Bomb That Could Have Killed People 500 Yards Away, Feds Say'

Drescher, S. (1993) 'The Role of Jews in the Atlantic Slave Trade'