Antisemitism has been around for a very long time. From a more modern perspective, so has the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In light of the recent conflict in Israel and the breakout of “Free Palestine” protests across the United States, Congress thought it important to further define antisemitism in law to curb discrimination against the Jewish people. The House passed H.R. 6090 to that effect.
Should society accept antisemitism as good and just? Certainly not. But should the Jewish people and the nation of Israel be afforded additional or unique protections per the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Also, no.
So-called conservatives who are supporting this kind of legislation are unable to see the forest through the trees. There are two main issues at play here. One is the proliferation of a type of hate speech designation, an abomination to the First Amendment. And the other is the inability to address the real issue at hand – an escalation of lawlessness and violence leading up to a Presidential election most likely fueled by enemies of America, like China.
It is hard to imagine that Americans are unable to recognize or draw a correlation between what we are witnessing right now on our college campuses and the summer of 2020 when we decided that burning our cities to the ground was normal. Just like we did not have a catastrophic racism problem then, we do not have an antisemitism problem now in America. What we have is an unwillingness to enforce law and order.
We are allowing small groups of people to create large and public displays of chaos which are then displayed by the media in an effort to exacerbate the issue, causing American sentiment to focus on solving the wrong problem. To now appease the outcry of antisemitism, Congress chose to focus itself on further abrogating constitutionally secured rights of free speech, no doubt setting a precedent for the current and future administrations to go after speech that it may deem offensive or contrary to the narrative that will achieve its ultimate goals.
And while Congress is focused on discrimination and free speech, no one really cares to ask the important questions like, “Who is funding all of these protests,” “Where are the protesters (criminals) from,” “Why are these protesters (criminals) allowed to take over and destroy public spaces,” “Why are these people not arrested?”
And while we are busy not dealing with the answers to those questions, does it matter that this chaos is now leading us into another Presidential election where once again, the table will be set for fraud and a possible illegitimate outcome?
To some degree, I feel as if we have already been so conditioned to this chaos that we have not only come to accept it but to expect it. The chaos is the “new normal.”
As disappointing as this reality is, it is equally disturbing that some of the most conservative members of the U.S. House including members of the Freedom Caucus, thought it reasonable to begin singling out certain classes or nationalities of individuals deserving of protection from discrimination or “hate speech.” Understand that H.R. 6090 expands the Civil Rights Act by now legally defining discrimination at the behest of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) and their 2016 adoption of a working definition of antisemitism voted on in Bucharest, Romania.
To those concerned about the degradation of US sovereignty due to the upcoming W.H.O. Pandemic Treaty negotiations, understand that some conservatives have no problem limiting your First Amendment rights by ceding your right to free speech to international organizations. According to the IHRA and per members of Congress that voted for this atrocity, here are some ways you can break the law:
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Since when in America is it criminal or discriminatory to make allegations and accusations, deny “facts,” apply double standards, use symbols, or draw comparisons? Look. There is no question that some people say not only ignorant things but statements that are provably false. Moreover, it would be great if some folks would keep their opinions to themselves. But in America, the right to question or disagree with any prevailing narrative is a bedrock of our Constitutional Republic. And that right is not predicated on whether or not those opinions are popular or factually accurate.
But that is what is being codified into law (should this pass the Senate). This bill uses the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to place an emphasis on discrimination, particularly against one group of people (Jews) and then defines what qualifies as discriminatory in that instance by definitions of the IHRA, an international and intergovernmental agency (not accountable to and not elected by the American people).
And while your government is concerned as to whether or not you are being antisemitic, there is little to no effort made by Congress to work with local law enforcement agencies to ensure that violent criminals funded by foreign enemies and terrorist organizations are apprehended, put in jail, and in some cases, deported. Notwithstanding the fact that history would show that these are most likely activities linked to election interference pending in the upcoming elections.
Some things that would actually curb antisemitism in America would be to secure the border, deport illegals including terrorist cells and Chinese foreign nationals, stop funding Iran and terrorist organizations, and seize the funds of organizations that are financing this chaos on our university campuses.
But we are too politically correct for that.
