Gary Anderson Blog | Larry Summers Wants Too Broad A Definition Of AntiSemitism | Talkmarkets
Muckraker of the Financial System

The Fed knew about the housing bubble before it burst but lied and said they didn't: Bill HR 1424 to buy bad paper (eventually called TARP) was introduced in March 9, 2007, before there began to be bad commercial paper from private subprime RE loans, in August.

I have ... more

Larry Summers Wants Too Broad A Definition Of AntiSemitism

Date: Friday, April 1, 2016 5:52 PM EDT

Larry Summers recently tricked the populace with his call for banning the $100 while failing to inform the masses as to the real reason. Now he is saying that colleges should permit antiSemitism in speech and deed, and then fails to accurately define what antiSemitism is. I will discuss the British court case that explains that Zionism (the Rothschild project) is not the essence of Judaism at the end of the article.

In seeking to ban the $100 bill, Summers said it was all about preventing crime, when it really is all about doing away with cash in order to permit a freer use of negative interest rates!

Now Summers is saying that antiSemitism should be permitted, but the main focus of the article is defending the State Department's analysis that antiZionism is antiSemitism! But he even doesn't get that right either. Summers says that considering whether antiZionism is antiSemitism is the requirement that Israel be treated no worse (regarding sanctions) than other nations that do bad things.

Now, there is a tension in his article. He wants more free speech, but then says if you aren't going to allow free speech as racism for other groups you should ban it when it is antisemitic. Summers actually is saying two contrary things in one article. I think he wants free speech to be expanded for all, and so there would be more antisemitic speech, but he wants it quickly identified as antiSemitic when it may not be antisemitic at all.

As for the State Department, he said:

The State Department has made clear that it regards demonizing Israel or “applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” as anti-Semitism. This makes obvious good sense. Does anyone doubt that applying standards to African countries that were not applied to other countries or singling them out for sanction when other non-African countries were guilty of much greater sins would be deemed racism?

I get that vanilla definition as the State Department says:

1 2 3 4
View single page >> |
Disclaimer: This and other personal blog posts are not reviewed, monitored or endorsed by TalkMarkets. The content is solely the view of the author and TalkMarkets is not responsible for the content of this post in any way. Our curated content which is handpicked by our editorial team may be viewed here.


Leave a comment to automatically be entered into our contest to win a free Echo Show.