by Alan Wolfe

I've just arrived in Canterbury, Church of England territory, and, on opening my computer, discovered reactions to a post I made from Jeff Herf and David Greenberg. So let me try to put myself back in the middle of this controversy and respond. Calling someone anti-Semitic by analogy, Jeff, is no different than just calling them anti-Semitic. I think Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer should not have used the term Israeli "lobby" and should also have recognized that America tilts toward Israel because overwhelming numbers of Americans do. For all their unfortunate language, however, they raised an issue that simply has to be discussed. To call them names, even by historical comparison, is not to engage the discussion. David: if you knew how much I admire Michael Walzer you will appreciate how taken I was with the start of your post. Thank you; it will go down in my (electonic) scrapbook. So let us disagree. Rosenfeld did not use the term anti-Semitic--except in the very title of his report. He is also, by they way, the one who introduced Richard Cohen into the discussion. And, as you know because you listened to the WBUR program, Shulamit Reinharz was even more direct. Asked by Tom Ashbrook whether she was saying that anyone who criticizes Israel is anti-Semitic, she said "absolutely." Ashbrook, as fair a man as can be found on this earth, told listeners he found such an idea "creepy." As for other forms of name calling, Jimmy Carter, while at Brandeis, told the audience how much he regretted using the word apartheid. Except for the AJC retracting its charge against Richard Cohen, I have seen no signs of regret from either Rosenfeld or Reinharz. Many of my friends and colleagues at Open University were, as I was, aghast at the tactics of political correctness used by leftists against liberals a few years back. We are now witnessing an unfortunate example of Jewish political correctness that bears all the same odious features. That it is done on behalf of things that I, like many others who post here, hold dear does not make it less odious.