Questioning the Patriotism of Freeman's Critics

For 60 years, liberals have had the unenviable task of defending our loyalty and patriotism from right-wing attack dogs who claim that we hate America. In the Jewish community, we have witnessed a parallel phenomenon. Too often, those with dovish political views toward Israel have had to defend their stances against claims that they are insufficiently attentive to the fundamental threat to Israel and the United States from Islamic terror.

Now, longtime critics of Israel's advocates are appropriating these right-wing tactics to question the loyalty of their ideological opponents. The clearest case of this is Stephen Walt's recent essay in Foreign Policy. In criticizing those who have challenged the fitness of Chas Freeman to serve as the Chair of the National Intelligence Council, Walt states, "[a] journalist [Jeffrey Goldberg] whose idea of 'public service' was to enlist in the Israeli army is challenging the credentials of a man who devoted decades of his life to service in the U.S. government. Now that's chutzpah."

For years, Walt has complained about the intimidation of Israel's critics. Suddenly, Walt, himself, is trying to intimidate his own critics by questioning Goldberg's loyalty to his country. It is especially ironic, apparently unintentionally, given that the title of Walt's essay, "Have they not a shred of decency?", echoes the famous line uttered by Army Counsel Joseph Welch to shame Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1954 for his anti-communist witch hunts. Tail-gunner Joe would have been quite proud of Walt's use of patriotism as a means of sliming his opponents.

Walt is not the only one playing the patriotism card. On TPM, M.J. Rosenberg recently blogged, "Unlike his [Freeman's] critics, he is not driven by politics. He's sometimes right and sometimes wrong but he is motivated by his belief in what is best for America." I hope Rosenberg is not implying that all of us who question Freeman's suitability for this job don't care about what's best for America?

Of course, some security hawks also play this game of "who is a patriot." I recently had to endure a lecture from one who was emphatic that a dovish Jewish group was "traitorous." Throughout the 2008 election, we had to suffer the know-nothings who endlessly questioned then candidate Barack Obama's patriotism.

No side comes out smelling clean when it engages in this mudslinging. However, we progressives should make a particular effort to avoid calling our opponents unpatriotic. Since at least the 1940s, progressives have undergone endless attacks from conservatives questioning our loyalty to America. Rightly, we have resented these demagogic attacks and have reserved our greatest scorn for the purveyors of such slime. We recognized that, no matter how strong our opinions might be on a given issue, it degrades our democratic culture when we resort to questioning opponents' patriotic motivations.

The late eighteenth century essayist Samuel Johnson had it right when he mused about this use of loyalty as a political weapon. Dr. Johnson declared: "[P]atriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

Comments

[Fein]

I think that the people's rationale that justifies this is,

"It's okay for a foreign government's special interest groups to subvert our government, when it's the foreign government 'I' approve of."

That's why it's so true that we have the government we deserve.

[BubbaC33]

Which foreign government has a special interest group that has subverted the US government?

[chaos4700]

Careful. He's got his "anti-Semite" label maker warmed up and ready to go.

[flyboyyin5]

The REAL problem is not that Israelis and some American Jews subvert our government, which they definitely do. The problem is OUR GOVERNMENT! As long as Congresspersons are allowed to take money from lobbyists and donors, we are going to have a corrupt system. The Israelis work that system, so do the bankers. The U.S. Gov't. gives money to the Israelis (several billions of $$ a year!) and the Israelis take a small portion of that money and divert it back to their favorite congress members to do two things (1) ensure the continuance of the money flow, and (2) defeat candidates and politicos who disagree with the Jewish lobby. The attacks on Freeman are part & parcel of the latter. Root out the corruption in Washington and the Israelis will no longer be able to control our purse strings!

[BubbaC33]

I wish AIPAc and other Israeli lobbyists had half the power and influence you and others have attributed to them.

[Realization]

The important thing is that Americans should be concerned first and foremost with what is good for America. Unfortunately, there are strong interest groups that have influenced policy in ways that don't benefit the U.S. The Israeli Lobby is one of these. Policy toward Cuba has also been formed by a vocal political minority in key voting districts. There used to be the Taiwan Lobby.

Israel acts in its interests. The U.S. must regain independence and act it U.S. interests. They are not the same.

It would be nice if name calling were not necessary. However, AIPAC has done it for many years. The tide is turning and since that is how they play, there should be no complaints.

Country First. And I mean the U.S.A.

[FCBarca]

I'm not a nationalistic zealot but AIPAC represents everything that is wrong with our foreign policy and having a foreign lobby group dictate US policies..­.It's criminal that it has gone on as long as it has and is the worst kept 'secret' in politics.

AIPAC runs the show and Israel somehow becomes priority #1 for US policy...S­hould never be the case

[BubbaC33]

If wqhat you are writing is true, it is not, how is it any aid goes to any Arab nation? If AIPAC makes all of the decisions why would the US have gone to the aid of Kuwait? Why would the US have sold military hardware to Saudi Arabia? The answer is simple, your ideas on AIPAc are just wrong.

[chaos4700]

Kuwait expelled its Palestinian population in the aftermath of the Gulf War, as you are fond of pointing out. And much of the fuel the US donates to the IDF is refined from Saudi crude.

[EspressoAtNoon]

Jimmy Carter promised a billion or two a year to Egypt when they agreed to sign the Camp David Treaty with Israel. We are in effect paying these Arab countries to be friends to Israel. That money is for Israel's benefit.

As far as Kuwait - it was in our strategic interest not to let Sadam take over Kuwait's oil fields. And Israel considered Iraq a huge threat, anyway, so it was a wash. Israel benefited as a side affect of us keeping Sadam's hands off of Kuwait oil.

Saudi Arabia is a bitter foe of Iran - Israel's biggest nemesis. The Iranians and Sauds have been fighting a proxy war in Iraq between sunis and shia. The Sauds supply oil to Israel.

Iran's enemies tend to be Israel's friends.

[arvay]

I don't question it, I know the answer.

They are unpatriotic, un-American, a self-centered element in our politics which serves the interest of a foreign nation that bleeds us and creates hatred for us around the world.

Time to revoke dual citizenship. Either you're American, or you're something else. There are too many sub-rosa "elses" among us, wielding too much power.

[RhymesWithRight]

Other than Jews, care to name what other "elses" you hate?

[arvay]

Let me spread guano on your use of the term "hate,' this is E! type california bubblecrai­num-speak. OH, downnnnnt be a haaater!

And, let me also spread guano on the constant slander that people who decry the Israeli apartheid state are anti-Semites.

But I do dislike people who pretend to be sincere Americans when they are actually loyal to another country.

[David Epstein 2]

Sorry, but if someone serves in a foreign army, even an ostensible ally's, I think I'm entitled to question where his loyalty lies. That's a big step.

If a guy with that history tells me obsequious catering to Israeli policy, which has become criminal, is in the national interest of the United States, I'd have to say, "Consider the source."

[BubbaC33]

I hold dual citizenship, have served in the IDF, and split time between the US and Israel. Is your point I should not be trusted to be a loyal American?

[almazza98]

Trust you? Here's a question for you Bubba. If two missles were pointed at the US and at Israel at the same time and you could only stop one from launching, which one would you choose?

[RhymesWithRight]

Would you have questioned the loyalty of those Americans who served in the RAF prior to Pearl Harbor, fighting against the Nazis in the Battle of Britain?

Or do you only question the loyalty of Jews who serve in the IDF in order to protect other Jews from those who are dedicated to the murder of Jews?

[arvay]

They didn't have dual citizenship. Anyway, that was an official US government policy.

[RhymesWithRight]

So let's see -- when Frank Schaeffer yesterday accused Republicans of treason for not supporting Obama's economic policies, was he a demagogue engaged in mudslinging? did he degrade our nation's democratic culture by engaging in McCarthyism? And what of the nearly 1000 comments expressing support for and approval of his essay?

[BubbaC33]

The Schaeffer posting has nothing to do with this posting.

[RhymesWithRight]

Ah, but it has EVERYTHING to do with this post.

Forman says it is corrosive of democracy to label one's opponents as disloyal or unpatriotic. Schaeffer labels Republicans as disloyal and unpatriotic for opposing Obama.

If you can't see the connection, you must be blind.