When Jeremy Corbyn insulted British Jews by accusing them of not wanting to study history and failing to understand English irony, I fired a torpedo at his tuchus for his stratospheric asininity. Jewish prophets laced their orations with irony and Jewish priests chronicled history in Solomon’s Temple when Comrade Corbyn’s ancestors were cavorting in cowhide and communicating in grunts and cave graffiti, I pointed out.
So when my literate and lettered cousins from the Board of Deputies of British Jews suddenly turned on Suella Braverman, MP for Fareham, and horsewhipped her in the Leftist media for using the term ‘cultural Marxism’ in a speech to the Bruges Group, a pro-Brexit think tank, I smote my thigh and was confounded, in the manner of the prophet Jeremiah.
Mrs Braverman, unlike most fake conservatives who populate the Tory party like maggots on Jezebel’s cadaver, is a kosher conservative. “As Conservatives, we are engaged in a battle against cultural Marxism…. I’m very worried about this ongoing creep of cultural Marxism which has come from Jeremy Corbyn,” she said in her address last Tuesday.
Within hours, the Board of Deputies was hopping mad like grasshoppers and calling down the media locusts from the Guardian and Independent and it was all getting a bit like the prophet Nahum’s visions of wrath against Nineveh. Mrs Braverman was smeared with the sticky tar of ‘guilt by association’ because she had used a “far-right conspiracy” term from the black bowels of “murky internet forums.”
Mrs Braverman, unlike most fake conservatives who populate the Tory party like maggots on Jezebel’s cadaver, is a kosher conservative.
The Board of Deputies, braying less coherently than Balaam’s ass, then declared that the term ‘cultural Marxist’ had “a history as an antisemitic trope” and so Mrs Braverman should “clarify the remarks and undertake not to use the phrase in future.” Even the Jewish Chronicle stooped to reductio ad absurdum by dredging from the muck Anders Breivik, the far-right terrorist from Norway, who mentions cultural Marxism in his manifesto.
Bracketing Suella Braverman with the alt right is like coupling Alexandria Ocasio Cortez with Mensa, the world’s best-known high IQ society. Mrs Braverman née Fernandes is a brown-skinned immigrant of Goan-Indian ancestry who’s married to a Jew. Moreover, a whole battalion of conservative Jewish commentators use ‘cultural Marxism’ (aka ‘Frankfurt School’ or ‘Critical Theory’ as a catchall phrase to lump together the leprosy of political correctness, the cult of victimhood and the dogmatic creed of intersectionality that is eviscerating the Judaeo-Christian West.
Permit me to list a sprinkling of these Jewish celebrities. Talk-show host Dennis Prager tweets as “highly recommended” the essay on ‘Sports Journalism, Cultural Marxism and the Miami Dolphins.’ “If thinking Frankfurt School Marxists had a bad influence on America is anti-Semitic, than count me as an anti-Semite,” tweets Jonah Goldberg, author of Liberal Fascism. Academic Allen Mendenhall in his essay ‘Cultural Marxism is real,’ shows it has “a history, followers, adherents, and (has) left a perceptible mark on academic subjects and lines of inquiry.”
My good friend Canadian poet, songwriter, and author David Solway, describes how “Cultural Marxism—has embarked on a sustained campaign to weaken and ultimately to abolish the institution of marriage as it has been commonly understood since time immemorial.” David Horowitz, a former Marxist explains how nihilism on today’s campuses is the product of the Frankfurt School.
Dave Rubin, a gay liberal, cautions against confusing liberalism with post-modernism or “Cultural Marxism” which “can only destroy, it cannot create.” Yoram Hazony, one of the finest academics to integrate the Hebrew Bible with political theory, when asked if there is “an approved politically correct (oh the irony) term for Cultural Marxism?” clarifies: “Yes, the term for this school and related trends is ‘neo-Marxism.’ But ‘cultural Marxism’ isn’t such a bad description if you’re not into academic jargon.”
Trying calling any of the above Jews anti-Semitic and you’ll get a sharp Yiddish telling-off: “Gey strashe di gens!” (“Go threaten the geese”).
So what about the charge that cultural Marxism is a “conspiracy theory,” as the Jewish Chronicle puts it? Joe Mulhall from ultra-Left Hope not Hate (our version of the US Southern Poverty Law Center) labels it an “obviously fake conspiracy theory” with “anti-Semitic undertones.” Even theologian John Milbank cannot resist calling “‘cultural Marxism’ a moronic invention of the Alt-Right which in no way corresponds to the real intellectual and cultural shifts, with all their vagaries, over the last 50 years.”
Oy vey! Have these Einsteins come across Oxford University Press or Routledge or Duke University Press? My library has a shelf stuffed with books from academic publishers with titles like Critical Theory: A Very Short Introduction, Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain, Conversations on Cultural Marxism, The Frankfurt School on Religion, The Routledge Companion to Critical and Cultural Theory and The Cambridge Companion to Critical Theory. I also have some of the original writings of Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, and Jürgen Habermas—founders of the Frankfurt School. So who’s the schmuck, here?
“If thinking Frankfurt School Marxists had a bad influence on America is anti-Semitic, than count me as an anti-Semite” — Jonah Goldberg
So let’s stop the throat-clearing and get to the megalosaurus in the luvvy cubicle. Why are our Lefty shmendrik friends plotzing with indignation because the shikse Suella had the chutzpah to call out cultural Marxism (and refuse to apologise for doing so)? It’s anti-Semitic, nu? Really? Because some of the schmoes who plotted to bring down Western Judaeo-Christian civilisation happened to be “Jewish”?
By that token, anyone who criticises Marxism is also anti-Semitic, right? After all, weren’t Marx, Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Steinberg, Yezhov, Volodarsky, Voitinsky, Parvus, Khavinson, Mekhlis, Bukharin, Sverdlov, Mogilevsky, et al all “Jewish”? And I’ve limited myself strictly to Russian commies, Marxies and Bolshies! You want me to start on Poland, Rumania, Hungary, Germany, etc.?
“The association of Jews with revolutionary doctrines and ideological social upheaval has not, unfortunately, been the product of antisemites’ imaginations,” write Dennis Prager and Rabbi Joseph Telushkin in their bestseller Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism. Telushkin and Prager call such Jews “non-Jewish Jews.” Ernest van den Haag writes in The Jewish Mystique: “although very few Jews are radicals, very many radicals are Jews: out of one hundred Jews five may be radicals, but out of ten radicals five are likely to be Jewish…. This was so in the past and it has not changed.”
When Ben Shapiro is asked why most Jews voted for Barack Obama though Obama hobnobbed with anti-Semites like Jeremiah Wright and Rashid Khalidi, Shapiro replies: “The answer is simple: the vast majority of Jews don’t care about Judaism or Israel. They care about secular leftism, which is their religion… most Jews vote leftist because they are upper middle class agnostics with above-average levels of post-graduate education who believe that religion is a great ill, that Biblical morality is intolerant and vicious, and that Judaism itself is passé.”
Before calling Braverman’s use of ‘cultural Marxism’ anti-Semitic, our Board of Deputies (who have just endorsed the government’s pro-LGBT Relationships and Sex Education policy and the right of the State to overrule parents) should have asked: Does ‘cultural Marxism’ even uphold Judaism? Or, does it seek to destroy God’s blessing to the nations, through Abraham and his progeny (“in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed”)?
So why did the non-Jewish Jews and their Gentile counterparts of the Frankfurt School concoct the potent brew of cultural Marxism against Western Judaeo-Christian civilisation? And why are there non-Jewish Jews like Noam Chomsky and Bernie Sanders who seek to continue this poisonous legacy?
Prager and Telushkin offer a compelling answer: “radical non-Jewish Jews are rootless. They do not feel rooted in either the Gentiles’ religion or nation or the Jews’ religion or nation, and they may very well have become revolutionaries in many instances precisely in order to overcome this rootlessness or alienation. Since they refuse to become like the non-Jews through identification with their traditional religious or national values, they seek to have the non-Jews become like them, alienated from traditional religious and national values. Only then will these revolutionaries cease to feel alienated.”
Unfortunately for Jews who seek to honour Judaism through the “Jewish Trinity” (Dennis Prager’s term) of God, Torah and Israel, the ideology of these radical non-Jewish Jews is identified as authentically Jewish behaviour—and this, of course, constitutes vile anti-Semitism.
“The vast majority of Jews don’t care about Judaism or Israel. They care about secular leftism, which is their religion”— Ben Shapiro
The saga of Suella Braverman has been partly resolved (I hope I contributed to this by writing personally to a number of individuals on the Board of Deputies). “We believe she is in no way antisemitic and did not intentionally use antisemitic language,” the Board admitted after a meeting on Wednesday. The media that smeared Mrs Braverman have thus far conveniently ignored the apology.
The apology is well meant but subtly qualified and does not go far enough. The Board of Deputies needs to acknowledge that ‘cultural Marxism’ is not an anti-Semitic trope and in the words of Ben Shapiro, “Those who pretend to back both Judaism and left-wing values are betraying Torah Judaism.”
(Originally published in Frontpage Mag. To comment click here).