Dear Mr. Sulzberger,
I am writing in protest against David Brooks' recent opinion piece, "The Era of Distortion," in which he argues that anyone opposed to the neoconservative agenda is an anti-Semite ("In truth, the people labeled neocons (con is short for "conservative" and neo is short for "Jewish")...And for a subset of these people, Jews are a handy explanation for everything..And if you can give your foes a collective name — liberals, fundamentalists or neocons — you can rob them of their individual humanity. All inhibitions are removed. You can say anything about them. You get to feed off their villainy and luxuriate in your own contrasting virtue. You will find books, blowhards and candidates playing to your delusions, and you can emigrate to your own version of Planet Chomsky.").
Not only are these statements untrue, they are themselves anti-Semitic. For instance, my father and grandmother are Jewish, and both are vehemently opposed to the neoconservative agenda. Some of the most effective people in the progressive movement are Jewish as well, including many of the people at MoveOn, the Prometheus Radio Project, and Peace Now.
It is one thing to say you disagree with the arguments of these groups on their merits. But David Brooks does not do that: rather, Brooks argues that the people making these arguments are anti-Semites, and therefore their arguments aren't even worth considering. Mr. Sulzberger, by Mr. Brooks' logic, you may be an anti-Semite yourself: after all, the editors who produce the Times' leading editorials came out squarely against many of Mr. Bush's policies, including the war in Iraq and the behavior of people like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Indeed, Mr. Brooks is doing exactly what he says the opponents of the neoconservative agenda are doing: giving his foes a collective name and robbing them of their humanity.
While I fail to see what one's religious or ethnic background has to do with one's political affilitations, I do see that by painting opponents of the administration as anti-Semites, Mr. Brooks is defaming the name of left-wing Jews nationwide. If anyone is an anti-Semite, it is Mr. Brooks, and I will have you know I have lodged a formal complaint against him with the B'nai Brith Anti-Defamation League. I urge you to rid your newspaper of this dishonorable bigot.
Respectfully yours,
Brendan Skwire
I am writing in protest against David Brooks' recent opinion piece, "The Era of Distortion," in which he argues that anyone opposed to the neoconservative agenda is an anti-Semite ("In truth, the people labeled neocons (con is short for "conservative" and neo is short for "Jewish")...And for a subset of these people, Jews are a handy explanation for everything..And if you can give your foes a collective name — liberals, fundamentalists or neocons — you can rob them of their individual humanity. All inhibitions are removed. You can say anything about them. You get to feed off their villainy and luxuriate in your own contrasting virtue. You will find books, blowhards and candidates playing to your delusions, and you can emigrate to your own version of Planet Chomsky.").
Not only are these statements untrue, they are themselves anti-Semitic. For instance, my father and grandmother are Jewish, and both are vehemently opposed to the neoconservative agenda. Some of the most effective people in the progressive movement are Jewish as well, including many of the people at MoveOn, the Prometheus Radio Project, and Peace Now.
It is one thing to say you disagree with the arguments of these groups on their merits. But David Brooks does not do that: rather, Brooks argues that the people making these arguments are anti-Semites, and therefore their arguments aren't even worth considering. Mr. Sulzberger, by Mr. Brooks' logic, you may be an anti-Semite yourself: after all, the editors who produce the Times' leading editorials came out squarely against many of Mr. Bush's policies, including the war in Iraq and the behavior of people like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Indeed, Mr. Brooks is doing exactly what he says the opponents of the neoconservative agenda are doing: giving his foes a collective name and robbing them of their humanity.
While I fail to see what one's religious or ethnic background has to do with one's political affilitations, I do see that by painting opponents of the administration as anti-Semites, Mr. Brooks is defaming the name of left-wing Jews nationwide. If anyone is an anti-Semite, it is Mr. Brooks, and I will have you know I have lodged a formal complaint against him with the B'nai Brith Anti-Defamation League. I urge you to rid your newspaper of this dishonorable bigot.
Respectfully yours,
Brendan Skwire
<< Home