Glenn Greenwald
Politics • Culture • Writing
Dems' Attacks on the Green Party, Israel/Gaza's Effect on 2024, and More with VP Candidate Butch Ware
Video Transcript
September 20, 2024
post photo preview

Watch the full episode HERE

Podcast: Apple - Spotify 

Rumble App: Apple - Google


It's Thursday, September 19. 

Tonight: Over the past couple of months, Democrats and their leading surrogates have been dispatched to attack Jill Stein and the Green Party in ways quite vicious and systematic, in ways that I've never seen before. They ordinarily love to dump on the Green Party after they lose an election or to blame the Greens for their loss as if they own those voters by divine mandate and were stolen from them, and more so they like to do that after the election to avoid taking any responsibility in any way for their own losses. But it's very rare – I would say almost unprecedented – that they give the Green Party this amount of attention and oxygen by attacking them so vocally and continuously before the election. That, however, is exactly what Democrats have been doing over the last couple of months. They sent out their self-identified left-wing spokesman for the party, people such as AOC and Keith Ellison to lead the charge against the Greens. And it's very evident that their internal polling, as well as public polling that we've seen, must be showing very alarming data about how many Arab and Muslim voters and even young voters and African American voters intend to vote for the Greens in key swing states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania, because absent that alarming data, they would not be so vocally giving oxygen to the party. 

All of these unhinged attacks – AOC, called the Green Party a, quote, “predatory party” – have only fueled that party even more, giving them far more attention. One of the most beneficial results of all of this has been the elevation in terms of platform invisibility of Stein's vice presidential running mate, the newcomer to politics, at least as a candidate, Butch Ware. He's a Ph.D. in history from the University of Pennsylvania and someone who has come from a childhood of immense poverty, instability and deprivation, and yet where he's made quite an impact in a very short period of time due to his eloquent and clearly genuinely felt defense of his political and social values. 

Last week, both Jill Stein and Butch Ware appeared on The Breakfast Club, the highly popular political show among African Americans and others and had this very telling exchange with one of the hosts, Angela Rye, as she sought to join the Democratic Party and leading the charge in attacking that duo. 

 

Video. Butch Ware. September 13, 2024.

 

Prof. Butch Ware: I am personally offended by the way that blackness is being weaponized in this electoral cycle in order to justify white supremacist genocide in Gaza. 

 

Charlamagne Tha God: Expand, please.

 

Prof. Butch Ware: Malcolm said of Zionism – of the Zionist state, the Israeli state – he said that this is a white Jewish population, an Ashkenazi population being given power by white imperialists to remove brown Arabs from their land, he said, so, therefore, Zionism is white supremacy. In 1979, in “Open Letter to the Born Again”, James Baldwin said the same thing. He said the state of Israel was not created for the salvation of the Jews. It was created for the salvation of Western interests. When you go through Kwame Ture, Malcolm X, James Baldwin, Toni Morrison, Angela Davis, and Assata Shakur, these are all people who cited the Palestinian resistance movement, – not even to bring in Africans, not to mention Nelson Mandela, not to mention Thomas Sankara – who talked about Zionism as being the face of imperialism in the Middle East. Right? This is what the black radical tradition taught me. And the black radical tradition taught me that if we weaponize our blackness in favor of white supremacy, then we become apostates from blackness itself because blackness is not a race. It is an oppositional ideology to white supremacy. I'm a historian of Africa by training. Never before in human history had people speaking hundreds of different languages made themselves into one. People developed a common culture so that you and I can relate to one another. You and I can relate to one another on the basis of a shared culture. And we got our Latin and Caribbean brothers and sisters, you know, especially Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. But also, you know, more broadly, right? They share in that culture. That is a miracle. It's never happened before in human history. Because what happened is that an oppositional identity to white supremacy came into being, and that is us. And when I see that identity now being weaponized to justify the most heinous genocide in our time, like Harriet Tubman is rolling over in her grave right now. Sojourner Truth is rolling over in her grave right now. Bell Hooks is rolling over in her grave right now. Who did I miss? Do you know what I'm saying? The idea that we would weaponize something as sacred as black womanhood and then utilize this to justify blowing up Palestinian kids […] 

 

The more I watch Ware the more impressed I become and if he continues to try to build the infrastructure and the groundwork for a real third-party movement in this country, as he insists he intends to do, I have no doubt that his visibility and impact will only grow as it deserves to.

In a discussion we recorded yesterday – simply because I'm traveling tonight and cannot do the show live; even though you're looking at me, I'm not actually here, I'm traveling – but we sat down with him yesterday and we had a very wide-ranging conversation that covered his personal and political trajectory, his view of the two-party system, his answers to some of the most powerful and good faith critiques of the Green Party, what he has been learning from his ongoing conversations with Muslim, Arab, Latino, and Black voters and working-class white voters in key swing states, as well as his view on the various ways in which the U.S. is now engaged in two wars, at least, both in the Middle East and in Ukraine. Whatever your perspective is on his views and ideology, there is no doubt that he brings a new type of energy, passion, and advocacy to our national conversation. He's clearly a charismatic and compelling figure, and I think you will see that, as I did, in the 45-minute conversation that we had with him. 

For now, here is the interview that we conducted with the vice presidential running mate of Jill Stein on the Green Party ticket, Dr. Butch Ware. 


Interview with Butch Ware (VP candidate for Green Party) 

G. Greenwald: Dr. Ware, it's great to see you. Thank you so much for taking the time to come on our program and talk with us. We're glad to have you. 

 

Butch Ware: Great to be with you, Glenn. 

 

G. Greenwald: Absolutely. So, you have certainly had over the past several months a significant increase in visibility, definitely doing a lot of the rounds in the media, making people very aware. You've created a lot of positive impact on social media. So, I think people have a good understanding of sort of the summary background of who you are, where you've studied and what you've done but politically and ideologically speaking, could you talk about your trajectory from when you got into politics, what led you to the Green Party and how you became a candidate on its national ticket? 

 

Butch Ware: Yeah. Not sure I am in politics. I would definitely qualify myself as a public servant before I would qualify myself as a politician. And I think when reclassified as a public servant, then it's really been 20-plus years. I'm doing similar work, activist work, academic work, organizing work and bringing communities together. I'm trying to leverage the kind of public visibility as well as the kind of community backing to bring about social change. And I think that that was probably what put me on the radar with the campaign. I did an Instagram live with Dr. Jill Stein just to learn more about her candidacy, to learn more about the Green Party platform and after I did that, literally within 24 hours, the Green Party reached out to me about the possibility of running as the VP candidate. So I went through a lengthy vetting process, made a lot of phone calls, and reached out to mentors, people in the Palestinian community, the black community, and the Muslim community more broadly. And I also realized that, like, I actually have very deep roots with the Green Party that I hadn't thought about, you know, sort of actualizing. My closest friend growing up, Sean Young, was actually the son of the longest-serving and first-ever elected Green Party official in the state of Minnesota, on the south side of Minneapolis, Annie Young, who was like a backup mother to my single mom, basically is the one that taught me everything I know about public service and, you know, kind of being engaged in political life in the public. So, in a lot of ways, it made a ton of sense. And then, when I found out that Dr. Jill Stein had been mentored by Annie Young in her early days in the Green Party, I realized that, while some people might not have seen this coming, this particular move makes a lot of sense at a lot of levels. 

 

G. Greenwald: There's, of course, a long history that I think is deliberately whitewashed to make people think this never happened of third-party candidates, of independent candidates, having a very major role in our politics, going back to the century before during the Woodrow Wilson administration. Eugene Debs, the socialist candidate, was such a threat that they had to imprison him. Obviously, you go through the '60s and ‘70s, you're talking about things like the black power movement and radicals like Malcolm X and Marcus Garvey and the Socialists, the Weather Underground that grew up around the Vietnam War. I think in the last several decades, though, they've really kind of clamped down on this notion that, no, there's just a two-party system. Unless you're a billionaire, you can't really have any meaningful impact as someone outside of the two-party system. And a lot of people I know who now support the Green Party, who want an alternative to both parties, where people who originally, when they got into politics, had critiques of the Democratic Party, but at the end of the day, they felt like voting for them was the best way to advance their values, however unsatisfactory it was. And I'm wondering if that's the case for you. Was there a time ever in your kind of political consciousness when you saw the political world and social activism where you felt like the Democratic Party was a viable vehicle for you to do work in? 

 

Butch Ware: Never. Not for a single day in my entire life. And the reason is that Malcolm X, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, was, you know, sort of a mentor at a distance, temporally and spatially. I was born in 1973, Malcolm passed away before I came along, but the autobiography of Malcolm X led to my conversion to Islam and was the beginning of political consciousness for me, at age 15. And Malcolm warned about the Liberal. He described the Liberal as a fox, it bears its teeth and you think that it is smiling at you, but you are on the menu, whereas the conservative as a wolf, it bears its teeth and you know that it's there to eat. So, I've never in my entire adult life trusted either liberals or conservatives. And the two-party system that we – well, we don't have a two-party system – but the two parties that have come to dominate the American political system are dominated by liberals and conservatives. So, I've never thrown my lot in with the Democratic Party at any level. I voted for the Democrats in the first election that I ever voted – for Bill Clinton. I voted for Clinton the first time around, I was 18 years old, and I voted for Obama, in 2008. And I think that those are the only two times that I've actually voted in a presidential election. I'd have to go back and check on that. I think I voted in primaries at other points in time. My mom was somewhat engaged in Democratic Party politics in the city of Minneapolis, but because of Annie, we mostly stayed around Green and third-party movements. To return to your broader question that Bill Clinton election was the beginning of the end of viable options for third parties for a generation and the reason is Clinton sold out on campaign finance reform. My own understanding was that at that point in time, the Democratic Party was interested in campaign finance reform because all the corporate money was behind the Republican Party and this was something people now forget that Bill Clinton ran on. I was actually very much motivated by this because I thought that the influence of money in politics was going to make it impossible for people like Annie Young and others to do well and be successful. And what the Democrats found out is that if they went corporate, too, they could raise as much money or more than the Republicans could raise and we saw essentially for the past 30-plus years, the Clinton political machine dominate the Democratic Party and go further and further towards corporate selling out, to the point that they're now fundamentally indistinguishable. There is an ideological difference between, quote-unquote, “liberals” and quote-unquote, “conservatives” but there is no functional difference between Team Blue and Team Red when it comes to their beholdenness to AIPAC, to the war machine, to the 1%, to corporate dollars. And I made a social media post before I ever joined the campaign that said whether you vote Team Blue or Team Red, militarized fascism wins. Because what we're essentially seeing in the struggle between Democrats and Republicans is a struggle for factional control over the corporate machine of the 1%. Their patronage networks overlap fundamentally with AIPAC and the war machine. And there is just kind of a fight at the margin between certain kinds of identity groups on one side and Christian nationalists on the other but, ultimately, they serve the same corporate masters. And you are now seeing this with Team Blue as they recruit, you know, people that were well to the right of Ronald Reagan and, without blinking an eye, the Democratic Party embraces war criminals like Dick Cheney because, fundamentally, Team Blue and Team Red of the same team, I call them purple fascists. 

 

G. Greenwald: Yeah, it was really interesting when Liz Cheney talked about not only her endorsement of Kamala but also her father's. She made very clear it's not just because of animosity toward Trump or his comportment. She said very clearly I'm more comfortable with the Foreign Policy ideology of the Democratic Party and Kamala Harris and Joe Biden than I am with the Trump-led Republican Party and no one was even confused by that. For me, that made complete sense. If I were Dick Cheney and my views had been what they had been his whole life, I feel very comfortable in the Democratic Party as it's currently constituted as well. 

Let me ask you, just on a personal note, it kind of attracted my attention that you said, “Look, I'm not a politician. Don't call me that.” The reality is if you're running for any office where you're trying to get votes for yourself, by definition you sort of are, even if you don't think of yourself primarily as that, which I understand. I'm wondering, though, in the past, the Democrats attacked the Greens only when they lost and needed somebody to blame for their failures. They couldn't of course, (Ware laughs) So, after the elections are over, they’re going to reap scorn on Ralph Nader, in 2000 and then Jill Stein in 2016, to blame them. This time, I think it's the first time we're seeing this, there's a great deal of venom and attacks in a very coordinated way coming from some of the most prominent surrogates of the Democratic Party, AOC, Keith Ellison, coordinated DNC attacks, not just on both of you, but sort of on your person and your integrity. I mean, AOC called your party “predatory.” I'm wondering, I assume you knew you were going to open yourself up to attacks, but I'm wondering whether you understood or expected that it was going to be at the level of vitriol and kind of personal destruction that you're now seeing. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
4
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Answering Your Questions About Tariffs

Many of you have been asking about the impact of Trump's tariffs, and Glenn addressed how we are covering the issue during our mail bag segment yesterday. As always, we are grateful for your thought-provoking questions! Thank you, and keep the questions coming!

00:11:10
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Breaks Down Trump's DOJ Speech on Fox News
00:04:52
In Case You Missed It: Glenn Discusses Mahmoud Khalil on Fox News
00:08:35
Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted

For years, U.S. officials and their media allies accused Russia, China and Iran of tyranny for demanding censorship as a condition for Big Tech access. Now, the U.S. is doing the same to TikTok. Listen below.

Listen to this Article: Reflecting New U.S. Control of TikTok's Censorship, Our Report Criticizing Zelensky Was Deleted
QUICK: Ask Questions for Today's Mailbag!

Glenn will be discussing the Israel-Iran conflict and a Trump Administration official who is in an awkward political predicament, so questions on other topics are more likely to be chosen.

Seymour Hersh said the US will commence action this weekend.
https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/what-i-have-been-told-is-coming-in

Cool Episode of ‘The Why Files’……

post photo preview
U.S. and Israel vs Iran: Repeating War on Iraq Scripts; Overwhelming Bipartisan Consensus for Israel's Wars
System Update #469

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXeYkVcgzcgVgwTH4HsgQ-PsjfJnkkerEMKzJUBNbex49ctiCfUGCSwgs9h6Vn3qKESfxyvgEpfVQz8nobvNvfVrE9z8iBrAZvKRdf7iPZ-2Qov6I426kA0Sqc0Yy6Oh5amLisL1-RzSK5ykf5mGHyE?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

The war initiated by Israel against Iran last Thursday was dangerous from the start and has each day only become more dangerous. President Trump has boasted of his pre-war coordination with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He's already been using U.S. military assets to protect Israel. He's now even re-deploying aircraft carriers in the Pacific, where we're told they are guarding against America's greatest enemy – China – now to the Middle East, where Israel has demanded they go to support its war. 

Just a few minutes ago, President Trump ordered the 16 million people who live in Tehran to immediately evacuate a city where it's now 2 a.m. 

With Israel, as always, demanding more. Now, they want the U.S. planes and bombs to destroy Iran's underground nuclear facilities for them. The former Israeli defense minister went on CNN just an hour ago and told President Trump in the U.S. that it's our obligation to fight this war with them. And for them, President Trump has repeatedly opened the possibility of even greater U.S. involvement in the war. 

There are so many aspects of this new conflict worth covering and dissecting –and we will do so throughout the week – but tonight we want to focus on the amazing ease the U.S. government has in convincing its population to support whatever new war is presented to it. Over four years ago, intense war propaganda from the U.S. political class and media persuaded Americans to want to fund and arm the war in Ukraine – a war that is still dragging on with no favorable end in sight – and overnight huge numbers of people in the United States have suddenly become convinced without having ever said so previously that war with Iran is some sort of moral imperative as well as a strategic necessity for the survival of American citizens of the United States. 

No matter how debunked, discredited and disgraced that Iraq war narrative has become, as long as one just waits 20 or 25 years, then, apparently, that same script just works like magic all over again. You just haul it out, fearmongering, and huge numbers of people respond by saying, "Yes, let's go to war, let' kill people." 

We'll examine all of that, as well as the standard bipartisan unity in support of new American wars and especially wars involving Israel, you hear Democrats almost unanimously, either staying quiet or praising President Trump, with just a few exceptions from both parties. And we'll look at that as well. 

AD_4nXeYkVcgzcgVgwTH4HsgQ-PsjfJnkkerEMKzJUBNbex49ctiCfUGCSwgs9h6Vn3qKESfxyvgEpfVQz8nobvNvfVrE9z8iBrAZvKRdf7iPZ-2Qov6I426kA0Sqc0Yy6Oh5amLisL1-RzSK5ykf5mGHyE?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

AD_4nXdXi3PHhIfI5UY5jue2s_VN_Dre1s5GH_qzxPS39EBWpyASwtOnszEASDMpdRuJzVlrD4idh5uDoPcdU38-w-kpHnSvAo9rtxSpcN4lW-sAiALyp2wxVRGqfHoLUqaYrKPxb_-HZMv3-aKzQLw90g?key=aMiM9imCrTsNamRKd6Vfew

If you're an American citizen as an adult, you have seen the United States repeatedly go to war. Anyone 18 or over has seen the United States involved in all sorts of wars and that's after the Iraq war, which is now 22 years ago. Essentially, if you're American, it means forever, for a long, long time, for many decades, that you are a citizen of a country that's always at war. 

After World War II, there was a very visible and clear pattern, which is that the U.S. government convinces its citizens, enough of them, to support the war at the beginning. They deluge them with war propaganda, which is extremely strong, primal, tribal and enough Americans initially support the war to let the U.S. government politically go and drop bombs or finance some other country to go drop bombs for it. Then, after six months, a year, or two years, or four years, polls show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose the war that they were convinced to support. Going back to the war in Vietnam, throughout the 1980s’ wars, the War on Terror in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya, the financing of the war in Ukraine, Israel's destruction of Gaza, bombing Yemin and now this new war that the United States is becoming increasingly involved in, in lots of different ways and we're only on the fifth day.

You just see so many Americans on a dime the minute a new war is presented to them, with whatever pretext can be conjured, even if they're exactly the same pretext that most Americans lived through watching proved to be complete lies the last time it was used in 2003, even though it's exactly the same script, exactly the same pretext, coming from exactly the same people. You can get enough Americans to immediately stand up and start cheering for death and destruction and bombing. Not all, a very substantial minority oppose it, I think if the U.S. overtly gets even more involved in the war in Iran, obviously anything resembling ground troops entering Iran, but even perhaps prolonged bombing of Iran as well through U.S. jets and bombs, as President Trump has indicated and Israel has demanded, maybe some of that will erode, that support will erode. But all that's needed is enough support at the beginning of the war to let the government start it. And once the U.S. government enters the war, it doesn't matter anymore whether the people continue to support it; then it's just already done. All the normal arguments are assembled about why we can't stop, why we can't cut and run, why that would be appeasement, etc., etc. All the same scripts all the time, used over and over, and even though they get proven to be discredited, or unpersuasive, or full of lies, you just use the same ones each time. And that's how the United States stays as a country at war.

We've been hearing a lot of people saying, “Look, I'm happy that Israel is bombing Iran, as long as the U.S. has no involvement in the war, we don't enter it, we don't have to pay for it. As long as it's not our war, I'm fine with it.” But, of course, the entire Israeli military is funded by American taxpayers. Every time Israel has a new war, the weapons that it uses come from the United States, transferred to Israel. We pay for their wars, we arm their wars, we support diplomatically those wars and we use our military assets every single time and our intelligence apparatus to support and enable the war, as the United States is already doing. We already have multiple new U.S. military assets ordered to the region by President Trump. They're already active in protecting Israel from retaliation. President Trump openly said that he is considering the possibility of involving the U.S. even more directly in this war with Iran: "We're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved," the president said. (ABC News. June 15, 2025.)

That all depends on what you mean by ‘involved.’ We're paying for the war, we're arming the war, we've deployed military assets that are actively now trying to shoot down missiles coming from Iran as retaliation for the Israelis launching a completely unprovoked attack on Iran, based on the claim that Iran was about to get nuclear weapons, just weeks away, something they've been saying for 30 years, as we've shown you many times, same thing that was said in 2002. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
U.S. Involvement in Israel's Iran Attack; the View from Tehran: Iranian Professor on Reactions to Strikes; CATO Analysts on Dangers and War Escalations

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXd1VoS9xg7si8ZviLBfSqd9c5_FMQdODz9RYxLWVBvtebHFOs0oWtttaWP_7qvL_VZdS0enruALLjYbkU-CdLQUDxNECHRbc5Y9OjrLuK-6y6Uq602-Q9fTzTYkN5_S0oVACoqvAhTWU86eCRc8vZU?key=lmRJixp6Jlz5wRA3fSBDAg

Today's most important news is obvious: Israel last night launched a major military assault on Iran, targeting residential buildings in Tehran, where military commanders and nuclear physicists live with their families, as well as bombing multiple nuclear facilities throughout the country. 

Triumphalist rhetoric flooded American and Israeli discourse almost immediately, until just a little bit ago, when a barrage of Iran's ballistic and hypersonic missiles began hitting Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and other major population centers. Escalation seems virtually inevitable at this point. The level of escalation – always the most dangerous question when a new war has started – is most certainly yet to be determined. 

Then there's the question of the role of the United States and President Trump in all of this. News reports from both the U.S. and Israeli media suggested this morning that Trump was working hand-in-hand with the Israelis to pretend that he was still optimistic about a diplomatic resolution with Tehran, but did so only as a ruse to convince the Iranians that Trump intended to restrain Israel and thus lure Iran into a false sense of security when, in fact, Trump was not only green-lighting the attack but actively working with the Israelis to launch it. President Trump's own statements today proudly boasting of the success of the attack, along with his own concrete actions such as ordering U.S. military assets into position to yet again defend Israel, strongly bolster those reports and clearly indicate a direct U.S. involvement in this war between Israel and Iran, a U.S. involvement that already exists and will almost certainly continue to grow over the next few days and perhaps few weeks and even months. 

We’ll speak to Professor Mohammad Marandi, who is in Tehran and has heard and witnessed a lot of what happened but also has some unique analysis from his role as an American Iranian scholar of foreign policy and to scholars Justin Logan and Jon Hoffman, from the Cato Institute, one of the very few think tanks in the United States, which has long counselled restraint and non-interventionism in U.S. foreign policy. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Federal Court Dismisses & Mocks Lawsuit Brought by Pro-Israel UPenn Student; Dave Portnoy, Crusader Against Cancel Culture, Demands No More Jokes About Jews; Trump's Push to Ban Flag Burning
System Update #466

The following is an abridged transcript from System Update’s most recent episode. You can watch the full episode on Rumble or listen to it in podcast form on Apple, Spotify, or any other major podcast provider.  

System Update is an independent show free to all viewers and listeners, but that wouldn’t be possible without our loyal supporters. To keep the show free for everyone, please consider joining our Locals, where we host our members-only aftershow, publish exclusive articles, release these transcripts, and so much more!

AD_4nXejs0DWGiP8ieMfNSDSHxWeGpA0bYQ2sB6GX53BerQgLDbevN48qlCXkh11p78EUWG7xmSLMCw_dta-m52iwfsgIA3W2CeT9zra6jIl7Krf7sFz7NI2c-vDb2dnkU0ifL9MRhw4ltCOYIB3YKvkIQQ?key=UyjQkErH6uhdu9Xo5Lcq4g

In the first segment, we’ll talk about the victimhood narrative that holds that American Jews, in general, and Jewish students on college campuses in particular, are uniquely threatened, marginalized and endangered. One of the faces of this student victimhood narrative has become Eyal Yakoby, who is a vocal pro-Israel activist and a student at the University of Pennsylvania. 

In 2024, he was invited by House Republicans to stand next to House Speaker Mike Johnson and he proclaimed: I do not feel safe. He said it over and over. “I do not feel safe” has kind of become the motto for his adult life. Now, he seized on those opportunities by initiating a lawsuit against the University of Pennsylvania seeking damages for what he said was the school's failure to fulfill its duties to keep him safe. Mind you, he was never physically attacked, never physically menaced, never physically threatened, but nonetheless claimed that the school had failed to keep him safe and told the congress in the country that he did not feel safe. 

The federal judge who is presiding over his lawsuit, who just happens to be a Jewish judge, a conservative judge, appointed by George W. Bush, not only dismissed Yakoby's lawsuit as without any basis, but really viciously mocked it, depicting his claims as a little more than petulant entitled demands from a privileged Ivy League student who wants to not be exposed to any ideas or political activism that might upset him – sort of depicting him as the Princess in “The Princess and the Pea,” Andersen’s literary fairytale about a princess who's so sensitive to anything that might concern her, that she's even unable to sleep if there's a pea buried beneath the seventeenth mattress on which she sleeps. 

This judicial decision is worth examining not only for the schadenfreude of watching one of America's whiniest pro-Israel activists be exposed as a self-interested fraud that he is, but also for what it says about the broader narrative that has been so relentlessly pushed and so endlessly exploited from so many corners, insisting that the supreme victim group of the United States is, of all people, American Jews. 

Then: speaking of extreme entitlement, Barstool founder Dave Portnoy made quite a name for himself over many years by ranting against the evils of cancel culture, championing the virtues of free speech, and viciously mocking as snowflakes and as people who are far too sensitive anyone who takes offense at jokes, offensive jokes told by comedians. That is what made it so odd – yet so telling – when this weekend we watched the very same Dave Portnoy viciously berated one of his employees for disagreeing with Portnoy's insistence that while jokes about everyone and every group continue to be appropriate, there must now be one exception: namely, according to Portnoy, jokes about Portnoy's own group,  American Jews,  must now be suspended and deemed too dangerous to permit. 

AD_4nXejs0DWGiP8ieMfNSDSHxWeGpA0bYQ2sB6GX53BerQgLDbevN48qlCXkh11p78EUWG7xmSLMCw_dta-m52iwfsgIA3W2CeT9zra6jIl7Krf7sFz7NI2c-vDb2dnkU0ifL9MRhw4ltCOYIB3YKvkIQQ?key=UyjQkErH6uhdu9Xo5Lcq4g

AD_4nXeNPsWu8SYZVkQAs1AKBVzXSCqCNnJSXFRz97DnkaHGIxGix2Zh6YmbJTQCrmPrgX3vqBOePYDLHyYhwxRNyY7s7q2Ucj32uOVbkk6jWZgH6dWxrUKjcwab1q_D0yJ_S0Fv_z7W0ckJp94i_tscuw?key=UyjQkErH6uhdu9Xo5Lcq4g

There have been really a lot of radical and fundamental changes, first on the political culture and then in our legal landscape as a result of the attack on October 7, and particularly the desire of the United States – by both parties – to arm the Israelis, to fund the Israelis, to protect the Israelis as they went about and destroyed Gaza. 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals