The Regressive Left

Nothing tends to generate controversy on this or any other blog as much as a good dust-up between those representing “Left” and “Right” on the political spectrum.  As with more ancient battles between religious believers, the stakes are high in such debates where people’s arguments tend to get bound up with important aspects of personal identity.

Even so, a fair amount of light can be generated during these kinds of heated debates.  For example, in an ongoing exchange I had with an eloquent critic of the Left (who feels too many on our side ignore the Red side of the Red-Green alliance between Western Leftists and Islamists), our argument was much more of the Thesis and Antithesis leading to Synthesis variety than boring old head butting.

In responding to Left-Right issues, I tend to focus on how we define what constitutes “The Left.”  After all, Israel was founded by Labor Zionists whose Leftist political identities were as important to them as were their Jewish ones.  And, in the decades following the foundation of Israel, it was Democratic politicians who could be trusted to support the Jewish state more than Republican ones.

That was then and this is now, I suppose.  But even if we accept that times have changed, my opinions are still colored by the fact that in every BDS fight I’ve ever been involved with, my allies (just like my enemies) all considered themselves to be Left of center.  And such a phenomenon makes sense if you consider the battles over BDS et al as representing a war of conquest of the Left end of the political spectrum being waged by the same people involved with the war for the elimination of the Jewish state.

As is often the case, a phenomenon requires a name before it can be discussed and debated in concrete terms.  And one that has started to gain traction recently, the “Regressive Left,” provides a powerful description of what might be going on in the wider political universe.

The term was first popularized by British ex-Islamist Maajid Nawaz to describe fellow liberals who refused to accept any criticism directed at minority communities, including the Islamist community he had fled.  Before and after the term was coined, the concept of self-perceived Progressives participating in “regressive” behavior (like trying to shut down free speech and embracing bigotry) has been part of controversies that began to roil the Atheist community when some members started directing their ire at Muslims vs. Christians, Jews and New Agers.

Slowly but surely, the term has made its way into more conversations, especially during the current era of campus culture wars and street activism that seem to involve self-proclaimed Progressives engaging in reactionary behavior characterized by extremely troubling tactics.

If you look closely at that behavior and those tactics, however, you will find elements quite familiar to those of us involved with fighting the global anti-Israel propaganda campaign over the decades.

To begin with, Regressive Leftists seem to take for granted that those they are trying to impose their will upon are empathetic, especially with regard to issues of racism.  At the same time, those demanding that everyone else fess up to their own flaws and make amends are entirely impervious to any criticism of their own bigotry.

If this sounds familiar, consider the dynamic we have come to expect from those pushing BDS in which the BDSers appeal to the public’s concern over the abuse of human rights, hatred directed at minorities or the suffering of others but become aggressively hostile at the merest mention of the fact that their movement and the nations and movements to which BDS is allied represent the best examples of those negative behaviors in the world today.

Similarly, look at the demands Regressive Leftists place on the actions and thoughts that others are allowed to take and have (in the form of speech codes and demands that authority punish those with whom they disagree) while accepting no limitations whatsoever on their own behavior.  And if campuses are the hothouses in which Regressive Left culture is being incubated, we are already seeing demands that such misbehavior not only be allowed but celebrated and subsidized.

Finally, the tolerance of coercion – even violence – as a way to “win the debate” seems to be going mainstream within the wider culture as the tactics used to shut down pro-Israel speakers are now being applied to others (including Presidential candidates).

This makes sense once you realized that the totalitarian minded have always used the Jews to push the limits of how much a society will tolerate extreme behavior, at which point such extremism becomes an accepted norm (or at least much harder to contain).  And where this dynamic is playing out (within the Left) also makes sense once you realize the enormous amount of effort and resources anti-Israel forces have put into trying to turn the entire Left end of the political spectrum into their prison bitch.

Again, campuses are the best place to see this process in play as important causes like prison reform and campus rape must all take a back seat to the BDS agenda in the name of an “intersectionality” that couldn’t care less if partisan demands for endorsement of BDS drive others away from all those other causes.  The aggression directed at anyone who dares mention that support for attacking Israel might be misaligned with other matters dear to the Left (notably gay rights) is another example of how priorities within the Regressive Left are driven by ruthlessness rather than concern for the weak and suffering.

With this new vocabulary in place, the war within the Left can now be described and measured based on the level of progress the Regressive Left does or does not make in its attempted takeover of mainstream Progressive culture.  It would be easy to say such a takeover has already gone too far, but I hesitate to say that we’ve reached the point of no return.

After all, when Josef Stalin played this same game last century, demanding that anyone who considered themselves Progressive who did not toe the Soviet line was a hypocrite and traitor, he had dozens of nations, hundreds of military divisions, and thousands of nuclear weapons to back up his threats.

The Palestine uber alles brigade, in contrast, has nothing but their own socio-pathology which they use to manipulate the weaker willed.  But just as a tough-minded generation of anti-Soviet Leftists (which included those aforementioned Zionists) kept Stalin at bay, so too can a truly Progressive Left take on the Regressive Left and win – if they have the will to do so (and support from us when they do).

4 thoughts on “The Regressive Left”

  1. You’re exactly right that this is a battle being fought within the left– or perhaps better characterized as between the moderate left and the Far Left. Keep in mind that the Far Left objects to Democrats as much as Republicans (recall Nader in 2000).

    Similarly, the Far Left in the late 40s/early 50s also had a significant Stalinist component. Not only here, but also among the Labor Zionists in Israel. Yossi Klein Halevi describes (in his book Like Dreamers) May Day parades in the 1960s held on the Labor kibbutzim led by Zionist pioneers who still kept pictures of Stalin on their walls. And this was a decade after Khruschev had publicly denounced the crimes of Stalin. This political stream has now become almost extinct in Israel, because the remaining Far Left community of foreign-funded NGO’s, extremist university professors and Hadash (the Communist party) is overwhelmingly anti-Zionist. Similarly, the Far (Regressive) Left in the West has no tolerance for Zionism.

    Indeed, though, genuinely leftist Zionists– who can speak fluent “progressive”– are the ones who need to step forward in the battle against the Regressive Left. And while I disagree with many of their political positions, I’ll give credit to groups like Ameinu for coming out with documents like this: http://www.ameinu.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Progressive-Zionist-Answers-to-the-Anti-Israel-Left1.pdf

  2. This was an unfortunate statement: “Finally, the tolerance of coercion – even violence – as a way to “win the debate” seems to be going mainstream within the wider culture as the tactics used to shut down pro-Israel speakers are now being applied to others (including Presidential candidates).”

    ” Anything marginalized people do to affirm the value of their lives and liberty will inflame those who are threatened by the prospect of equity. Should Black and Brown people quietly play along with a society that has been built in opposition to our well being, because doing otherwise might excite some racists? Should we quiet down about not wanting to be killed or deported en masse as well? Should we stop making accomplishments that might make white people feel threatened”~ http://transformativespaces.org/2016/03/13/no-welcome-mat-for-fascism-stop-whining-about-trumps-right-tofree-speech/

    1. Perhaps, although what might happen if someone or some group decides that the current marginalized group issuing demands does not represent marginalized people (or particular marginalized people) to their liking and decide to “affirm the value of their lives” by pushing the former group aside or using “any means necessary” to shut them down and take their place. Would the first group have a leg to stand on after declaring that all behavior is acceptable when lashing out against racism?

      In fact, what is to prevent someone from declaring your opinions racist and, based on nothing more than that declaration, they decide to do whatever it takes to prevent you from being heard, even if that behavior includes actions that might make you feel threatened? Can you really complain, having declared that ends justify the means whenever “the oppressed” (however that gets defined) lashes out against “racism” (however that is defined)?

      So much of today’s politics seems to be based on people justifying their desire to behave in ways they would never tolerate from opponents. And once that evil genie leaves the bottle, it’s going to be damned difficult to squeeze it back in.

  3. If you make not of this on a ‘Progressive’ “pro-Israel” website you will banned almost immediately. Even the one that falsely proclaims that ‘Freedom of Speech’ is the most important right. It willingly allows the most strident anti-Jewish postings. But mention how thin skinned the editor is and you get sent down the memory hole.

    Your website is a shining example of how things should be done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.