The cast of Friday’s PBS NewsHour was greatly confused. Host William Brangham didn’t understand why the anti-Israel college demonstrators, on the whole, have been branded as anti-Semitic, while Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart didn’t know why it is so hard for the demonstrators to protest Israel without degenerating into anti-Semitism.
Brangham’s remarks came on the heels of New York Times columnist David Brooks warning that the protests are toxic for Democrats, “I think if the protests continue to veer in the direction they’re veering, you could see some pretty serious repercussions, which is why Biden is speaking, which is why Chuck Schumer is speaking, trying to distance themselves from what the protesters are doing.”
Claiming his first-hand look at the protests disproved the idea that they are rampant with anti-Semitism, Brangham wondered, “I mean, Jonathan, a lot of the critics of these protests like to say that it’s all anti-Semitism, just a hot stew of anti-Israeli bias. I was at one of the NYU protests earlier this week, and there is some of that, for sure. But it’s mostly young people, as you were describing, who are despairing over what is happening in Gaza. How is it that people who care deeply about this issue can’t — can somehow protest and not be risked being branded as anti-Semities?”
Capehart began by correcting him, “So, there’s anti-Semitism, but then you anti — you said anti-Israeli,” to which Brangham apologized, “I’m even conflating it myself here.”
That settled, Capehart proceeded, “Exactly. And that is the issue. It is possible to criticize the government of Israel, the state of Israel, the prime minister of Israel, the policies, what he says, his actions, without veering into ugly anti-Semitism. If you don’t like what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing in Gaza, not allowing enough humanitarian aid to go through, that is a legitimate criticism.”
He then added, “But to then go into all the ugliness, some of the ugliness that we have heard, that’s not okay. I don’t understand how — why it’s so hard to state your objections without being bigoted about it.”
Perhaps we can help both Brangham and Capehart out. If you listen to what the leaders of the movement say, they talk about defeating Zionism which is simply the belief that Israel should exist. That is not criticism of Netanyahu and is an anti-Semitic position, according to President Barack Obama’s State Department.
As your typical liberal, Capehart believes that there should be a ceasefire leading to two states for two peoples and that Netanyahu is an obstacle to this, but he and his fellow liberals keep projecting their liberalism onto Marxists and others who do not want such an outcome by refusing to acknowledge that the problem is with the group’s leaders and professors, not a handful of bad actors who corrupted a genuine anti-war, pro-peace movement.
Here is a transcript for the May 3 show:
PBS NewsHour
5/3/2024
7:36 PM ET
DAVID BROOKS: And, so I think if the protests continue to veer in the direction they’re veering, you could see some pretty serious repercussions, which is why Biden is speaking, which is why Chuck Schumer is speaking, trying to distance themselves from what the protesters are doing.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM: I mean, Jonathan, a lot of the critics of these protests like to say that it’s all anti-Semitism, just a hot stew of anti-Israeli bias.
I was at one of the NYU protests earlier this week, and there is some of that, for sure. But it’s mostly young people, as you were describing, who are despairing over what is happening in Gaza. How is it that people who care deeply about this issue can’t — can somehow protest and not be risked being branded as anti-Semities?
JONATHAN CAPEHART: Okay, what — excuse me. So, there’s anti-Semitism, but then you anti — you said anti-Israeli.
BRANGHAM: I’m even conflating it myself here.
CAPHEART: Exactly. And that is the issue. It is possible to criticize the government of Israel, the state of Israel, the prime minister of Israel, the policies, what he says, his actions, without veering into ugly anti-Semitism. If you don’t like what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing in Gaza, not allowing enough humanitarian aid to go through, that is a legitimate criticism.
But to then go into all the ugliness, some of the ugliness that we have heard, that’s not okay. I don’t understand how — why it’s so hard to state your objections without being bigoted about it.