The other night Fox’s Tucker Carlson was placed in the dock by the Anti-Defamation League for saying this to fellow Fox host Mark Steyn. (Bold print supplied for emphasis.)
“I’m laughing because this is one of about 10 stories that I know you have covered where the government shows preference to people who have shown absolute contempt for our customs, our laws, our system itself and they are being treated better than American citizens. Now, I know that the left and all the little gatekeepers on Twitter become literally hysterical if you use the term “replacement,” if you suggest that the Democratic Party is trying to replace the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots, with new people, more obedient voters from the Third World. But they become hysterical because that’s what’s happening actually. Let’s just say it: That’s true.
…If you change the population, you dilute the political power of the people who live there. So every time they import a new voter, I become disenfranchised as a current voter. So I don’t understand what we don’t understand cause, I mean, everyone wants to make a racial issue out of it. Oh, you know, the white replacement theory? No, no, no. This is a voting right question. I have less political power because they are importing a brand new electorate. Why should I sit back and take that? The power that I have as an American guaranteed at birth is one man, one vote, and they are diluting it. No, they are not allowed to do it. Why are we putting up with this?”
Cue the outrage from the left.
The ADL, led by one Jonathan Greenblatt – who, take note, is a former staffer in both the Clinton and Obama administrations – penned a letter to Fox CEO Suzanne Scott in the finest of cancel culture style demanding Tucker be fired. Why? Mr. Greenblatt said this, bold print for emphasis supplied:
“Last night, in a segment on his program dealing with voting rights and allegations of voter disenfranchisement, Tucker Carlson disgustingly gave an impassioned defense of the white supremacist “great replacement theory,” the hateful notion that the white race is in danger of being “replaced” by a rising tide of non-whites. While couching his argument in terms of what he described as the Democratic Party attempting to replace traditional voters with immigrants from third-world countries, Carlson’s rhetoric was not just a dog whistle to racists – it was a bullhorn.”
To be polite, this is bunk. I saw the segment and Tucker quite specifically said:
“…I mean, everyone wants to make a racial issue out of it. Oh, you know, the white replacement theory? No, no, no. This is a voting right question.”
Got all of that? The ADL accused – falsely accused – Tucker Carlson of pushing a “great replacement theory” that is, says Mr. Greenspan, racist on its face.
Hmmm.
As Tucker himself indicated on Monday night it is useful to take a look at, yes indeed, the ADL’s own website. I did. And what did I find over there? This curious article.
The ADL article is in essence a fact check on the issue of an alleged Palestinian “right of return” to what is now modern-day Israel. The fact check centers on this stated inaccuracy. It reads:
“Inaccuracy: Palestinian refugees have a ‘right of return’ under international law – the right to reclaim and return to their former homes inside Israel.”
Under the heading of “Response” the ADL statement says this:
“International law and international statute do not call for a Palestinian “right of return” to Israel, but rather for a resolution of the long-standing Palestinian refugee problem which was caused by the Arab attack on Israel in 1948. On humanitarian grounds,Israel has committed to participating in an international effort to resettle and compensate Palestinian refugees.
United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338 refer not to a “right of return,” but of the need to resolve the Palestinian refugee issue.”
The article goes on to be quite specific about the problems it sees between the Palestinians and Israel. It says this, bold print for emphasis supplied.
“A ‘right of return’ is also not viable on practical grounds. An influx of millions of Palestinians into Israel would pose a threat to its national security and upset the country’s demographic makeup.”
Hmmm. So there, in black and white, is the ADL itself saying that an “influx” of Palestinians to Israel would “upset the country’s demographic makeup.” Which is to say, this is the Israeli version of a “great replacement theory,” with Palestinians swarming into Israel and both upsetting the Jewish state’s demographic makeup – replacing Jews with Arabs – and also threatening Israel’s national security.
So in having this support for the Israeli version of the “great replacement theory” posted on the ADL website – should Jonathan Greenblatt be asked to resign? Was this a “dog whistle” to anti-Palestinian racists?
Of course not. The very fact that such a call for Greenblatt to resign would be ridiculous on its face illustrates just how valid was Tucker Carlson’s point.
America is the one country in the world where the entire population, all 100% of it, is descended from immigrants. No one is opposed to immigration. The opposition comes to illegal immigration.
But I digress. The real problem here is the vivid hypocrisy of the ADL, rejecting outright an influx of Palestinians into Israel on the basis of a “right to return.” Which is to say, the ADL is rejecting – and I would say properly rejecting – a Palestinian version of a “great replacement theory.”
Which, in turn, underscores exactly why Tucker is right.
One would think the head of the ADL has better things to do than play the cancel culture game.
