I am a Jew who is knowledgeable about Jewish history. What is particularly frightening to me is that if it became politically expedient to turn 180 degrees and start blaming the Jews,, Trump and company would not hesitate. Free speech and the rule of law are the best safeguards against all bigotry including anti-semitism. I oppose the views of Khalil bit that is irrelevant to the larger issue.
Where Democrats had to fire people on a case-by-case-doxxing basis, and Hollywood could only stop one man of dubious moral standing at a time..."
Those were never about the cancellations. It wasn't about punishing individuals for what they said or believed. It was about setting up a system of enforced ideas. If you stepped outside them, you knew that punishment might come your way. The cancel culture apparatus was about keeping the doubters and dissidents quiet... or else.
It was very effective if you look at the self-report data. Unfortunately, a system like that only works if (1) you're willing to completely chill lots of productive speech (they definitely were) and (2) you control all the apparatuses of communication and hiring and promotion and award. Once your grip on those things slips the floodgates can open. THAT might be why you're seeing so many hateful and antisocial posts on the right. People are glorying in the fact that they can express almost any idea. I don't see any evidence that actual racism has increased, in any way. By expressing these thoughts and using these words, shitposters are spitting in the face of a political disposition that told them that any observations about Jews throughout history or the disproportionate representation of African Americans in social pathologies or a possible correlation between trans identity and sexual perversion were completely out of bounds. For a few years, in many spaces, ANY frank discussion about immigration or feminism or cultural differences was completely verboten. That was always the worst aspect of cancel culture. It wasn't the cancellations. It was the suppression of honest and interesting discourse. There's no going back to how it was.
I think it was nice of the White House to at least use X to say goodbye in this young man's native tongue. It shows some decency, some class, even if they're now legal adversaries. Inshallah it'll all work itself out...
You make a compelling case but I meet people who genuinely believe the things they say and in any case there is a point when irony becomes someone's honest opinion. I do not believe people who question the holocaust do so jokingly.
Others have suggested he is/was a British agent too, but, as much as I love a good conspiracy, theorising what Khalil's real deal was when he was working for the British government is faaar above my pay grade.. so will leave the conclusion to the NYT long read I am sure will surface in good time.
"This is where it is essential, democratic comrades, that you do what I do, which is go to right-wing spaces and rub shoulders with the troops. Even the fringiest anarcho-communists would protest to being called anti-semitic."
That's true. They're not anti-semitic in intent, as such as far as I can tell. They just regard jews as group members more than individuals (the same way they regard everyone else) and because that particular group is privileged and powerful and influential (and not one of the groups they love) they have no problem with criticizing them. Since Oct. 7th Jews have also been associated with 'genocide' and 'colonialism', so there are frequent calls for horrific violence, but the advocated violence isn't against Jews. It's against colonizers. Of course, that works out to the same thing.
What a group calls itself might say something about its priorities or its values but it's not the best guide to what that group believes. I've almost never met a Trump supporter who owned the label 'fascist' or 'racist', for example. When people hate Jews, even if it's just because they're supposedly privileged, or colonizers, or genociders, that is anti-semitism, regardless of whether they accept the label. I've known dozens of stridently antisemitic arabs in my life. None of them answered to that label. In their minds, they were simply pro-Palestinian.
I no longer feel comfortable to be honest with you assigning anybody to a single group, especially very big ones like 'the left' or 'the right' or 'Jews' or whatever. I go back to Andrew Sullivan's piece though who calls for empathy and when it comes to people who have skin in the game we can expect them to speak and act in ways we don't like- that does not mean justifying violence or supporting terrorism, but I cannot stomach the lack of empathy pro-israel people have towards the Palestinian diaspora watching their people being ethnically cleansed as a punishment to the actions of a group of people most of them never voted for and whom they have no control over. Empathy must cut both ways.
Nobody ever ethnically cleansed the Arabs who call themselves “palestinians” - even though it’s a KGB - created terrorist tool funded and trained by the Russians to kill Jews and destruct Israel. The Arab population of Gaza has multiplied 5 times in the years since Israelites left them alone - it’s rats multiplication number , not human - what kind of “ genocide” is this even the head count increases in geometrical progression? I have not seeing or heard a single one of them or their supporters condemn the multi- generational violence against Jews . I’ve heard those Gaga’s flag flying mahmouds scream to my face “we will rape and kill you all” on the streets of New York City - I want not just that particular mahmoud but all of them deported from the free civilized world where they do not belong .
The Khalil case, from what I've read of it, seems like a bad development in terms of censorship in the US. If something similar we happening in the UK I'd oppose his arrest.
But at the same time, can you blame right-wingers for not caring about the case when it's been amply demonstrated to them that many on the left won't stand up for their rights? Regardless of the legalities, the cross-politics pact necessary to support tolerance for speech looks in pretty bad shape these days.
Yes, I can blame them because the Democrats at least abided by constitutional processes; Obama never defied Congress votes. Trumpists are acting like hooligans. Also, last I checked nobody got deported under the Democrats. Sure, people lost their jobs and reputations were damaged, but the Trump administration is using technologically and morally dubious means to threaten to throw into prison thousands of students and potentially deport them for disagreeing with his foreign policy aims....at least if you are being accused of racism you can ask to see evidence of your said racism, if you are being accused of opposing Russia's actions and the President supports them, you are being asked to change your political beliefs.
The point I'm making is that lefties have poisoned the well on speech regulation. We witnessed years of ideological purges, particularly in the private sector, that led to people being socially ostracised (an exceedingly bad thing!) and professionally ruined. Why wouldn't the other team now exact revenge, given there is no reason to trust that the left won't continue its purge when it next wins an election?
The American right wingers have been shown to have feet of clay when it comes to this case. I can’t count the “free speech absolutist” Americans who have suddenly found restrictions to their supposed absolutism, and just weeks after Vance lambasting Germany for their restrictions on political speech they not unreasonably regard as dangerous - the hypocrisy is off the scale.
American free speech was well meant, but has always been in peril. We are just seeing the latest example of how imperfect it’s always been.
Leftism caused counter reaction. Yes instead of free speech we have a bias. Just now the other way around.
But its not like when left was in power they were moderating themselves..Au contraire they were becoming more rabid and unhinged by year.
So pendulum now swings another way. Its just the way humans are. Other side are not saints. And will act the same way when in power - use it in a biased way. That what power is.
Of course none of this should be a surprise. Especially for you, being an inner circle political animal.
So - as probably the oldest and most working class person on this thread, it can’t be overstated just how much the leftist reaction was a REACTION. I grew up in a world of religious fanatics who believed the world started a few thousand years ago, and that evolution was a Satanist delusion, and that girls who did not accept their natural role as afterthoughts to men were “non-women.”
Progressivism was a reaction to that, and if wasn’t so long ago. Watching middle class, educated young people reach back to that to counter leftist overreach is quite a trip. Can I just ask - before you throw the baby out with the bathwater, would you middle class kids like to ask us old working class people what we saw in progressivism in the first place? Just so you don’t miss the whole damned point completely.
Exactly, I keep on thinking about this, even when people where complaining about the rainbow flags everywhere corporate willy waving I was saying, yes, it is annoying to have DEI rubbed into your face but what would you prefer? to go back at a time when being found out to be gay was a fireable offence? at the end of the day, even some right-wingers can admit that sexism, racism, homophobia etc. STILL exist in our society... wokeness was about the obsessions that it exists everywhere to the maximum degree, the backlash to it is now pretending it was never a thing to begin with... And at the end of the day, nobody got deported for not taking the knee. Social shunning is very different from being stripped of your rights.
That is why islam is so dominant in Europe now? Because left was for working class people? Yeah these grooming paki gangs sure better than these conservative englishmen!
‘Beware the weapons you fashion lest they be used against you’ … I’ve started to believe that the left will only support free speech once they start to have the right denied to themselves in the same way they have denied it to those they don’t agree with.
I note that Douglas Murray observed Khalil’s wife lamented his arrest likening it to him being kidnapped despite there being very little sympathy from Khalil for the 200 plus innocent people kidnapped on 7 October …
None the less the writer has a point - while this person might be an odious a**hole, arresting people we don’t agree with can only end badly … we need to get back to dealing with ideas from people we don’t agree with by better ideas and not by shutting them down or arresting them …
It’s hard to believe anyone who is onboard with a terrorist organisation like Hamas is not onboard with their tactics, including murder, rape, mutilation and hostage taking … I’ve seen similar protest figures (and indeed some elected politicians) from the hard left in my country simply not be able to bring themselves to speak clearly against the war crimes of Hamas, it seems to me because they think the means justifies the end. I’m quiet over the lack of ability of some to see atrocities for what they are irrespective of ‘whose side’ is doing them. Regardless I agree with your the central tenant of your article that that shouldn’t result in arrest. It’s a sloppy slope and I fear we are sliding further and further down it …
There is no evidence whatsoever he is onboard with Hamas. Protesting against the Israeli governments actions does not make one supportive of Hamas's actions. Just like presumably supporting Israel does not automatically make one pro-ethnic cleansing while Israel's PM has made it abundantly clear that is what he is going for.
The group Khalil was associated with had occupied campus buildings, intimidated Jewish students, blocked access to certain areas of campus and in general violated norms of behavior. It is not clear whether he was involved in those activities but he was a spokesperson, sone say leader, for that group.
Many people object to activities such as these and feel they are inappropriate on campus. And many dislike masked protesters behaving in a militant fashion.
What should have happened is that the university ought to have punished these students from the outset. Any who broke laws ought to have been arrested and charged. Any who were not students should have been trespassed. These people were permitted to go on behaving badly for too long and some of that wrath has fallen on Mr. Khalil. He is basically an agitator and perhaps deserves his fate
I see a new situation developing over one "Fabian Schmidt" arrested a day or
two ago that does actually appear to be egregious behavior by ICE enforcement.
But yes, the Trump administration will likely abuse the power of deportation.
You blatantly ignore that a green card still has plenty of rules to adhere to. It’s fairly straightforward - Americans are tired of the two tier rules that work in the left’s favour. Foreigners disrupting America on behalf of other foreigners, with leniency, finally has someone who can speak on behalf of Americans and say - fine if you are a citizen, fine if you obey the rules, fine if you get the same justice and fine if you’re not funded by political interests and we’ll have to do what it takes to overcome the left’s apparatus to allow it because it fits their narrative regardless of the logical damage it does.
He has not been charged with any crime, that is the whole point. Your comment is irrelevant to this case. Peaceful protest is not a crime, nor is holding ideological views we disagree with.
I hope Khalil's detention snaps them back to reality.
I forget who said unconditional love is just love whose conditions you haven’t discovered yet but I feel the same way about free speech absolutists. It’s a näive fantasy.
And the slippery slope is the favorite fallacy of those who have only one leg to stand on.
I hope Khalil's detention snaps them back to reality.
I forget who said unconditional love is just love whose conditions you haven’t discovered yet. I feel the same way about free speech absolutists. It’s a näive fantasy.
I am a Jew who is knowledgeable about Jewish history. What is particularly frightening to me is that if it became politically expedient to turn 180 degrees and start blaming the Jews,, Trump and company would not hesitate. Free speech and the rule of law are the best safeguards against all bigotry including anti-semitism. I oppose the views of Khalil bit that is irrelevant to the larger issue.
These people are really dangerous.
It is exactly as you say - Trump, Musk et al do not act based on long-held values but on immediate interests.
You're a good one, kid.
:-)
"...MAGA has industrialised Cancel Culture.
Where Democrats had to fire people on a case-by-case-doxxing basis, and Hollywood could only stop one man of dubious moral standing at a time..."
Those were never about the cancellations. It wasn't about punishing individuals for what they said or believed. It was about setting up a system of enforced ideas. If you stepped outside them, you knew that punishment might come your way. The cancel culture apparatus was about keeping the doubters and dissidents quiet... or else.
It was very effective if you look at the self-report data. Unfortunately, a system like that only works if (1) you're willing to completely chill lots of productive speech (they definitely were) and (2) you control all the apparatuses of communication and hiring and promotion and award. Once your grip on those things slips the floodgates can open. THAT might be why you're seeing so many hateful and antisocial posts on the right. People are glorying in the fact that they can express almost any idea. I don't see any evidence that actual racism has increased, in any way. By expressing these thoughts and using these words, shitposters are spitting in the face of a political disposition that told them that any observations about Jews throughout history or the disproportionate representation of African Americans in social pathologies or a possible correlation between trans identity and sexual perversion were completely out of bounds. For a few years, in many spaces, ANY frank discussion about immigration or feminism or cultural differences was completely verboten. That was always the worst aspect of cancel culture. It wasn't the cancellations. It was the suppression of honest and interesting discourse. There's no going back to how it was.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/horizontal-information-flow
I think it was nice of the White House to at least use X to say goodbye in this young man's native tongue. It shows some decency, some class, even if they're now legal adversaries. Inshallah it'll all work itself out...
You make a compelling case but I meet people who genuinely believe the things they say and in any case there is a point when irony becomes someone's honest opinion. I do not believe people who question the holocaust do so jokingly.
This post is a home run; well said.
Damn straight.
Very well said.
Craig Murray has some interesting analysis on Khalil’s background and why Khalil in particular may have been targeted in this case: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/03/the-curious-case-of-mahmoud-khalil/
Others have suggested he is/was a British agent too, but, as much as I love a good conspiracy, theorising what Khalil's real deal was when he was working for the British government is faaar above my pay grade.. so will leave the conclusion to the NYT long read I am sure will surface in good time.
"This is where it is essential, democratic comrades, that you do what I do, which is go to right-wing spaces and rub shoulders with the troops. Even the fringiest anarcho-communists would protest to being called anti-semitic."
That's true. They're not anti-semitic in intent, as such as far as I can tell. They just regard jews as group members more than individuals (the same way they regard everyone else) and because that particular group is privileged and powerful and influential (and not one of the groups they love) they have no problem with criticizing them. Since Oct. 7th Jews have also been associated with 'genocide' and 'colonialism', so there are frequent calls for horrific violence, but the advocated violence isn't against Jews. It's against colonizers. Of course, that works out to the same thing.
What a group calls itself might say something about its priorities or its values but it's not the best guide to what that group believes. I've almost never met a Trump supporter who owned the label 'fascist' or 'racist', for example. When people hate Jews, even if it's just because they're supposedly privileged, or colonizers, or genociders, that is anti-semitism, regardless of whether they accept the label. I've known dozens of stridently antisemitic arabs in my life. None of them answered to that label. In their minds, they were simply pro-Palestinian.
I no longer feel comfortable to be honest with you assigning anybody to a single group, especially very big ones like 'the left' or 'the right' or 'Jews' or whatever. I go back to Andrew Sullivan's piece though who calls for empathy and when it comes to people who have skin in the game we can expect them to speak and act in ways we don't like- that does not mean justifying violence or supporting terrorism, but I cannot stomach the lack of empathy pro-israel people have towards the Palestinian diaspora watching their people being ethnically cleansed as a punishment to the actions of a group of people most of them never voted for and whom they have no control over. Empathy must cut both ways.
Nobody ever ethnically cleansed the Arabs who call themselves “palestinians” - even though it’s a KGB - created terrorist tool funded and trained by the Russians to kill Jews and destruct Israel. The Arab population of Gaza has multiplied 5 times in the years since Israelites left them alone - it’s rats multiplication number , not human - what kind of “ genocide” is this even the head count increases in geometrical progression? I have not seeing or heard a single one of them or their supporters condemn the multi- generational violence against Jews . I’ve heard those Gaga’s flag flying mahmouds scream to my face “we will rape and kill you all” on the streets of New York City - I want not just that particular mahmoud but all of them deported from the free civilized world where they do not belong .
The Khalil case, from what I've read of it, seems like a bad development in terms of censorship in the US. If something similar we happening in the UK I'd oppose his arrest.
But at the same time, can you blame right-wingers for not caring about the case when it's been amply demonstrated to them that many on the left won't stand up for their rights? Regardless of the legalities, the cross-politics pact necessary to support tolerance for speech looks in pretty bad shape these days.
Yes, I can blame them because the Democrats at least abided by constitutional processes; Obama never defied Congress votes. Trumpists are acting like hooligans. Also, last I checked nobody got deported under the Democrats. Sure, people lost their jobs and reputations were damaged, but the Trump administration is using technologically and morally dubious means to threaten to throw into prison thousands of students and potentially deport them for disagreeing with his foreign policy aims....at least if you are being accused of racism you can ask to see evidence of your said racism, if you are being accused of opposing Russia's actions and the President supports them, you are being asked to change your political beliefs.
The point I'm making is that lefties have poisoned the well on speech regulation. We witnessed years of ideological purges, particularly in the private sector, that led to people being socially ostracised (an exceedingly bad thing!) and professionally ruined. Why wouldn't the other team now exact revenge, given there is no reason to trust that the left won't continue its purge when it next wins an election?
The American right wingers have been shown to have feet of clay when it comes to this case. I can’t count the “free speech absolutist” Americans who have suddenly found restrictions to their supposed absolutism, and just weeks after Vance lambasting Germany for their restrictions on political speech they not unreasonably regard as dangerous - the hypocrisy is off the scale.
American free speech was well meant, but has always been in peril. We are just seeing the latest example of how imperfect it’s always been.
Leftism caused counter reaction. Yes instead of free speech we have a bias. Just now the other way around.
But its not like when left was in power they were moderating themselves..Au contraire they were becoming more rabid and unhinged by year.
So pendulum now swings another way. Its just the way humans are. Other side are not saints. And will act the same way when in power - use it in a biased way. That what power is.
Of course none of this should be a surprise. Especially for you, being an inner circle political animal.
So - as probably the oldest and most working class person on this thread, it can’t be overstated just how much the leftist reaction was a REACTION. I grew up in a world of religious fanatics who believed the world started a few thousand years ago, and that evolution was a Satanist delusion, and that girls who did not accept their natural role as afterthoughts to men were “non-women.”
Progressivism was a reaction to that, and if wasn’t so long ago. Watching middle class, educated young people reach back to that to counter leftist overreach is quite a trip. Can I just ask - before you throw the baby out with the bathwater, would you middle class kids like to ask us old working class people what we saw in progressivism in the first place? Just so you don’t miss the whole damned point completely.
Exactly, I keep on thinking about this, even when people where complaining about the rainbow flags everywhere corporate willy waving I was saying, yes, it is annoying to have DEI rubbed into your face but what would you prefer? to go back at a time when being found out to be gay was a fireable offence? at the end of the day, even some right-wingers can admit that sexism, racism, homophobia etc. STILL exist in our society... wokeness was about the obsessions that it exists everywhere to the maximum degree, the backlash to it is now pretending it was never a thing to begin with... And at the end of the day, nobody got deported for not taking the knee. Social shunning is very different from being stripped of your rights.
That is why islam is so dominant in Europe now? Because left was for working class people? Yeah these grooming paki gangs sure better than these conservative englishmen!
MAGA is going to absolutely come for you over this but every word is true 🤷🏻♀️
let them
‘Beware the weapons you fashion lest they be used against you’ … I’ve started to believe that the left will only support free speech once they start to have the right denied to themselves in the same way they have denied it to those they don’t agree with.
I note that Douglas Murray observed Khalil’s wife lamented his arrest likening it to him being kidnapped despite there being very little sympathy from Khalil for the 200 plus innocent people kidnapped on 7 October …
None the less the writer has a point - while this person might be an odious a**hole, arresting people we don’t agree with can only end badly … we need to get back to dealing with ideas from people we don’t agree with by better ideas and not by shutting them down or arresting them …
how do you know Khalil has no sympathy for those kidnapped by Hamas?
I had read otherwise but in the absence of first hand knowledge I’ll take your word for it.
It’s hard to believe anyone who is onboard with a terrorist organisation like Hamas is not onboard with their tactics, including murder, rape, mutilation and hostage taking … I’ve seen similar protest figures (and indeed some elected politicians) from the hard left in my country simply not be able to bring themselves to speak clearly against the war crimes of Hamas, it seems to me because they think the means justifies the end. I’m quiet over the lack of ability of some to see atrocities for what they are irrespective of ‘whose side’ is doing them. Regardless I agree with your the central tenant of your article that that shouldn’t result in arrest. It’s a sloppy slope and I fear we are sliding further and further down it …
There is no evidence whatsoever he is onboard with Hamas. Protesting against the Israeli governments actions does not make one supportive of Hamas's actions. Just like presumably supporting Israel does not automatically make one pro-ethnic cleansing while Israel's PM has made it abundantly clear that is what he is going for.
The group Khalil was associated with had occupied campus buildings, intimidated Jewish students, blocked access to certain areas of campus and in general violated norms of behavior. It is not clear whether he was involved in those activities but he was a spokesperson, sone say leader, for that group.
Many people object to activities such as these and feel they are inappropriate on campus. And many dislike masked protesters behaving in a militant fashion.
What should have happened is that the university ought to have punished these students from the outset. Any who broke laws ought to have been arrested and charged. Any who were not students should have been trespassed. These people were permitted to go on behaving badly for too long and some of that wrath has fallen on Mr. Khalil. He is basically an agitator and perhaps deserves his fate
I see a new situation developing over one "Fabian Schmidt" arrested a day or
two ago that does actually appear to be egregious behavior by ICE enforcement.
But yes, the Trump administration will likely abuse the power of deportation.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.newsweek.com/fabian-schmidt-green-card-holder-naked-violently-interrogated-ice-mother-2045361&ved=2ahUKEwjon5Sq946MAxWBJzQIHWscDM0QFnoECBkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2WVSibQAR7-eq5l8pCF18r
You blatantly ignore that a green card still has plenty of rules to adhere to. It’s fairly straightforward - Americans are tired of the two tier rules that work in the left’s favour. Foreigners disrupting America on behalf of other foreigners, with leniency, finally has someone who can speak on behalf of Americans and say - fine if you are a citizen, fine if you obey the rules, fine if you get the same justice and fine if you’re not funded by political interests and we’ll have to do what it takes to overcome the left’s apparatus to allow it because it fits their narrative regardless of the logical damage it does.
He has not been charged with any crime, that is the whole point. Your comment is irrelevant to this case. Peaceful protest is not a crime, nor is holding ideological views we disagree with.
Roy Cohn. Sheldon Addelson.
Maybe you should read this before jumping on the Free Mahmoud bandwagon.
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-845664
I'm only being slightly facetious so bear with me.
1. Hamas is a designated terrorist organization and had Khalil funded them he'd have prima facie violated US law, even as a full citizen.
2. The Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that money = speech (whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant, that's the law as it stands now).
3. If money = speech then speech = money and promoting Hamas = funding it, so by (1) Khalil violated US law.
4. If money = speech but speech ≠ money, then good luck unpretzeling yourself.
CUAD’s manifesto (the group Khalil leads/is a member of) reads like the output of a looney left LLM:
https://www.columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2023/11/14/columbia-university-apartheid-divest-who-we-are/
I hope Khalil's detention snaps them back to reality.
I forget who said unconditional love is just love whose conditions you haven’t discovered yet but I feel the same way about free speech absolutists. It’s a näive fantasy.
And the slippery slope is the favorite fallacy of those who have only one leg to stand on.
I'm only being slightly facetious so bear with me.
1. Hamas is a designated terrorist organization and had Khalil funded them he'd have prima facie violated US law.
2. The Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that money = speech (whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant, that's the law as it stands now).
3. If money = speech then speech = money and promoting Hamas = funding it, so by (1) Khalil violated US law.
4. If money = speech but speech ≠ money, then good luck unpretzeling yourself.
The slippery slope is the favorite fallacy of those who don’t have a leg to stand on.
CUAD’s manifesto (the group Khalil leads/is a member of) reads like the output of a looney left LLM:
https://www.columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2023/11/14/columbia-university-apartheid-divest-who-we-are/
I hope Khalil's detention snaps them back to reality.
I forget who said unconditional love is just love whose conditions you haven’t discovered yet. I feel the same way about free speech absolutists. It’s a näive fantasy.