Elissa Silverman and BLM Anti-Semitism Controversy

[Anonymous]

The Revolution always eats its own. It's interesting seeing super-liberal Silverman in this position. Who's next?

[Anonymous]

I think it was a reaction more to ride BLM’s coattails than necessarily that her support was transactional or conditional.

This not #metoo. Yes, there are other oppressed groups but BLM isn’t necessarily going to be inclusive if it dilutes from its primary message. There may come a time for solidarity, but right now is not it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jews are only going to support Black people if there’s something in it for them. Either money, or power, or something else. That’s just a fact of life, an everybody knows it.

Honestly, why do you think this? The Jewish community has been an ally to the Black community.

Please don’t feed the trolls

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I am completely baffled by the controversy that has arisen from this tweet by At Large Council Member Elissa Silverman:

She was immediately attacked due to making her support for BLM "transactional". However, I don't read her tweet as offering her support for BLM in return for their support against anti-Semitism. Rather, I see her offering her support unconditionally and only expressing her hope that BLM will join her. Never mind that BLM should be opposing anti-Semitism regardless of what Silverman does.

Silverman quickly apologized:

But that hasn't stopped the attacks:

I think the appropriate response by BLM and its supporters to Silverman's initial tweet would be to thank her for her support and assure her that they will always stand by her against anti-Semitism. These attacks on her are very discouraging and disappointing.

Rereading again, and it was conditional or bitter, she apologized as she should have, Let's move on!

I also was confused by it at first. But the more you look at the backstory the more petty and transactional it seems. Look into the history of BLM and JUFJ, which is aligned pretty strongly with Silverman.

No one is accusing her of being KKK, but she clearly has some issues to work through to be a better ally to BLM.

It's the difference between responding to my wife "Yes, of course I love you" and "Yes, I love you. It would be nice if you worked out a little more."

[Anonymous]

Silverman said she unconditionally supports BLM and thinks it’s important. And she said anti-Semitism is a problem too.

White and by extension Bowser said that a secret cabal of worldwide Jews are out to destroy all black people and they control the federal government and the weather. (Ps history shows that there WAS a federal conspiracy to harm black people: see FHA and redlining.)

Who is in the right here? Silverman is doing fine in working for an equal shake for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Silverman said she unconditionally supports BLM and thinks it’s important. And she said anti-Semitism is a problem too.

White and by extension Bowser said that a secret cabal of worldwide Jews are out to destroy all black people and they control the federal government and the weather. (Ps history shows that there WAS a federal conspiracy to harm black people: see FHA and redlining.)

Who is in the right here? Silverman is doing fine in working for an equal shake for all.

Silverman is mostly fine, but can do better. Have you ever talked to her? She can be extremely condescending. I like where she is on the issues but dislike her as a person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think she was being transactional.

There is a dark history of anti-Semitism among *some* AAs—Louis Farrakhan has had resonance among some—and I hope the response from BLM wasn’t a reflection of that.

There is also a strain of anti-Semitism among *some* parts of the progressive movement, as an outgrowth of understandable dislike of cruel Israeli policies towards Palestinians.

I hope that exchange does not reflect any of those undercurrents.

Now who is stirring the pot!!!

It’s absolutely true that there is anti-semitism among SOME on the left.

One example of Women’s March leaders who believe that Jews had some special role in the slave trade: https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-womens-march-leaders-made-anti-semitic-comments-to-fellow-founder

This is something Louis Farrakhan has talked about: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/louis-farrakhan

All I said in my post is that I hope these tweets aren’t rooted in any agreement with that line of thinking.

[Anonymous]

Here is the basic issue at hand. "Black Lives Matter" is a statement of anti-racism. It should not be conflated with the organization when people say it. So Silverman got it wrong by saying "I hope BLM stands with me on..."
And BLMDC should also not confuse themselves with the issue itself. It is perfectly OK to be 100% behind Black Lives Matter as statement, concept, and especially practice and not be 100% behind every idea that BLMDC floats.

[Anonymous]

Louis Farrakhan is an extreme anti-Semite and all Black leaders should condemn him for that.

Other than that notable case, much of the “anti-Semitism” on the left is blown way out of proportion by the likes of Bari Weiss. As far as I can see, this is Bari Weiss’s mission in life— to split Jews away from the one sane party that remains in America.

Also historically, much of the real Left in the US WAS Jewish.

Jews have been pushing hard for diversity and equality for a long long time. The effort by the professional Right to redefine Judaism as not being about values is insane. (“Reform Jews only care about social values, they’re not real Jews.”)

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the basic issue at hand. "Black Lives Matter" is a statement of anti-racism. It should not be conflated with the organization when people say it. So Silverman got it wrong by saying "I hope BLM stands with me on..."
And BLMDC should also not confuse themselves with the issue itself. It is perfectly OK to be 100% behind Black Lives Matter as statement, concept, and especially practice and not be 100% behind every idea that BLMDC floats.

I mostly agree with this and I think you are making a very perceptive distinction. I would only point out that Silverman didn’t hope that “BLM” would stand with her, but rather @DMVBlackLives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Louis Farrakhan is an extreme anti-Semite and all Black leaders should condemn him for that.

Other than that notable case, much of the “anti-Semitism” on the left is blown way out of proportion by the likes of Bari Weiss. As far as I can see, this is Bari Weiss’s mission in life— to split Jews away from the one sane party that remains in America.

Also historically, much of the real Left in the US WAS Jewish.

Jews have been pushing hard for diversity and equality for a long long time. The effort by the professional Right to redefine Judaism as not being about values is insane. (“Reform Jews only care about social values, they’re not real Jews.”)

Support of Louis Farrakhan wasn’t just in that one case at the Women’s March. I generally agree with you, but it’s sadly a broader issue than just those 2 women.

[Anonymous]

Yes Farrakhan needs to be widely condemned. What he says about Jews is vile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two potential issues:
1. There's an implied accusation that they wouldn't support antisemitism.
2. She's centering herself when right now we're supposed to raising and centering black voices.

There are parts of the movement that don't.

[Anonymous]

I support the Black Lives Matter sentiment but not the whole movement at this stage due to their prior anti Semitism wrt Israel and the fact that I don’t think all cops are bad.

I don’t think all criticism of Israel is antisemitic but i think if you’re going to criticize Israel, it’s antisemitic if you don’t couch the criticism with: I am aware that Hamas wants to kill all Jews on the planet, but nevertheless I still think Israel is too harsh. Most criticism of Israel that I see conveniently overlooks that fact.

[Anonymous]

Anyway, I agree with Jeff’s original post. Fwiw.