The Progressive American

As social media platforms fail to enforce their terms of service, anti-Semitism spreads.

It has been three years since the Tree of Life shooting in Pittsburgh, where eleven people were killed in an anti-Semitic attack that shook the world. Now, Jewish creators on Twitch and multiple social media platforms are subject to the same vitriol that reared its ugly head in Pittsburgh.

Anti-Semitism is long-standing prejudice that has plagued the world. It is one of the oldest forms of ethnic hatred, dating back to the ancient era and spreading into the medieval era, where Europeans blamed Jewish residents for the Black plague and retaliated with violence. Among some of the persecutions medieval Jews suffered were false accusations of well-poisoning, tortured confessions, and being burned alive.

In the modern era, however, anti-Semitism has become a matter of propaganda, harassment, and eventual violence. In October of 2019, two people were killed in a shooting in the Halle Synagogue Shooting, in which a 27-year-old attacked the congregants. The shooter was later determined to be an anti-Semite, who routinely posted on sites such as 4-Chan and 8-Chan about Jews and feminists. During the attack, the massacre was live-streamed on Twitch, prompting calls for the live-streaming platform to do more to address anti-Jewish hatred and violence on its site.

However, anti-Semitism remains a problem. Miami Heat center, Meyers Leonard was the subject of intense controversy over his usage of anti-Semitic slurs during a stream on Twitch in which he referred to his online opponent as a “f—ing k— b—-.” The slurs spurred intense outrage among the public and resulted in Leonard being suspended and fined $50,000 for his offensive statements. He was banned from Twitch but was reinstated within the month.

Leonard is not the first to spread such vitriol. Other streamers such as Tom Cassell, aka ProSyndicate, and Henry “HenryG” Greer, have also been accused of anti-Semitism. Though Twitch has established an advisory council to address the rising tide of prejudice and toxicity, anti-Semitism remains a problem. Something Eristocracy, a Jewish-Canadian history streamer knows all too well.

Note: Eristocracy requested to be referred to by her username to protect herself from harassment. The Progressive American agreed with the request as she has taken great pains to protect herself. Requests for anonymity will be respected in any future interviews.

Eristocracy, a streamer who has been active for a little over a month and who her fans affectionately refer to as “Eris” has seen a rise in her following and with it, plenty of attention. As of April 28th, she rests at a comfortable 5.9 thousand followers on Twitch and a similarly strong 5.42 thousand subscribers on YouTube. Earlier this month, she interviewed the Socialist streamer Vaush, discussing his many takes on online politics and discourse, along with some controversies.

As a result of this growing influence, Eris has also been the target of anti-Semitic tirades by another streamer. In her recent stream on Wednesday, Eris explained that another streamer specifically targeted her and disregarded her Jewish heritage, accusing her of being responsible for Apartheid despite Eris being a child at the time. This streamer then proceeded to go onto another’s stream and repeated the offensive and prejudiced commentary there.

Describing her first impressions of the platform’s potential for hate, Eris explained how she expected the attacks, but strives to maintain her identity as a Jewish woman, saying:

I knew I’d get antisemitism, it’s why I used to be quiet about being jewish but I told myself when I streamed I wouldn’t live my life in fear. So I made the very intentional decision of being open about it, and I was expecting hate, it’s one of the major reasons I chose to use an avatar to be anonymous and protect myself.

Eris’ concerns don’t exist in a vacuum. The Anti-Defamation League, which tracks and combats anti-Semitism, reported that 8 percent or 2.3 million Canadians harbored some form of anti-Semitic views in 2019, with a quarter saying that “Jews are more loyal to Israel than to the country they live in.”

Around the world, anti-Semitism has been weaponized with the rise of the internet, with many countries struggling to restrain its impact. In Austria, anti-Semitic abuse has increased, following a familiar trend of prejudice that seems to be spreading across the world. Such a rise has resulted in some efforts by social media platforms to curtail anti-Semitism and hate more generally. Twitter announced that it would ban Holocaust denial, partially because of the rising tide of anti-Semitic hatred on its platform. Indeed, the ADF reported that between 2017 and 2018, 4.2 million anti-Semitic tweets were spread on the site. And that only includes the ones written in English.

Despite its attempts to restrain the rising hatred against Jewish creators, Twitch’s enforcement remains insufficient for creators like Eris. Though expecting the hostility, the lack of inaction has been deafening to creators like her, as she takes great pains to avoid bringing unnecessary hostility to the platform. Meanwhile, she says, Twitch is unwilling to act with such concerns in mind.

“My biggest issue has been the lack of action in regards to streamers doxxing, making death threats, and promoting harassment towards other streamers. They need to decide if this is the kind of content they want to profit off of and support.”

Though this concern has been raised before with Twitch, it remains unclear if the efforts to demand change will be successful, as there is what Eris describes as a “financial incentive structure” the promotes and perpetuates a culture of toxicity online. The more hostile and prejudiced the audience, the more viewers they can gain.

In addition to the consistent problems coming from her harassers, Eris also notes the lack of support from left-wing commentators on Twitch, with whom she shares ideas, albeit with some disagreement. Frustrated from the lack of pushback from left-wing circles against this hatred, Eris explained that:

“I knew antisemitism was on the rise, but seeing how mainstream and accepted it has become, especially while hiding under “woke” terminology just feels particularly gross. That terminology is valid and is being used as a weapon against the very people it was supposed to protect. I was literally told to ‘go back where I came from’ and few leftists batted an eye.”

The harassment is made worse for Eris by the fact that she has dedicated videos and streams to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which already provokes immense hatred online.

The pain that comes with it is generational for Eris, whose grandparents were victims of the Holocaust. This, of course, culminates with the fact that she began her online career debating Holocaust deniers to prevent them from spreading their ideas. Although she no longer does so. The attacks serve as a suppressing force, as they seek to silence Jewish creators. This inevitably results in content creators like Eris feeling “… uncomfortable” and serves as an example as to “ why there are so few Jewish and other minority streamers on Twitch.”

All of this comes as a rise in anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S. where Twitch is based. In 2015, the most recent date of observed data available for the U.S., the ADF reported that 10 percent of Americans held some form of anti-Semitic attitudes. Indeed, 33 percent of respondents said that Jews were more loyal to Israel than the country in which they resided.

Among religious-based hate crime victims, Jews ranked among the highest in 2018, a trend that goes back to at least 2015. In 2015, 51.3 percent of all religious-based hate crimes were committed against Jews. Although it is worth noting the FBI does not examine hate crimes on the basis of ethnic hatred towards Jews.

Such violence inevitably demands a reaction to prevent further violence and hatred. For creators like Eris, the responsibility for stopping the rising tide lies with the sites and services that platform the hate and that listening to Jewish creators would be a step in the right direction.

“I wish mainstream platforms would start to be aware of the rising rate of antisemitism, and stop ignoring our issues because of false notions that “antisemitism is over”. Hate crimes against Jews have been the most common type of hate crime in the US for 5 years, it’s about time people started taking the issue seriously.”

While it is unclear if the major platforms are listening, some leaders are. After the Tree of Life shooting, Pittsburgh Mayor Bill and Poway Mayor Steve Vaus, have begun encouraging others to join them in signing the Mayors United Against Antisemitism statement, a document that now holds almost 600 signatures from local leaders across the United States. While local leaders are taking the initiative, federal leaders will likely have to address the problem as well. Still, without adequate enforcement of anti-hate policies online, the violence and vitriol will continue, putting people like Eris and her colleagues at risk for the mere act of existing freely.

So, there are again some technical issues with the podcast that I will be fixing, but the podcast will be out late. I’m not canceling again, but I will release it Wednesday as a bonus episode. This is not a cancellation, but I will update you all Saturday.

Greenwald’s response to the allegations against Rep. Gaetz reveals an inability to consider circumstantial evidence.

The last week and a half have been tense for Rep. Gaetz, who has been under investigation for alleged sex trafficking. Such tension has garnered many reactions, with some Republicans hesitating to defend the congressman from Florida. Still, some would hesitate to count Gaetz out even as the investigation reveals more about Gaetz’s relationship with the alleged sex trafficker, Joel Greenberg, and a 17-year-old girl. Glenn Greenwald, who is known for his work with Edward Snowden as well as his work launching the Intercept, is one such person.

Though not defending the alleged activities, Greenwald recently published an article on Substack, arguing that how the public has reacted to the Gaetz scandal not only violates Rep. Gaetz’s due process rights but also lends itself to the hysterical tendencies of the media. Moreover, Greenwald seems to see the recent scandal as part of a larger effort by online activists who seek to patrol the sex lives of private individuals.

Greenwald was so passionate about the issue that he dedicated a video to the same topic, making many of the same arguments that he made in his article.

From the beginning of his article, Greenwald makes a bold claim, that the media believe that Matt Gaetz is a predator who forces girls into prostitution despite their age. Such a framing device is useful for Greenwald, as it allows him to establish the media as the wellspring of Matt Gaetz hysteria.

That Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) is a pedophile, a sex trafficker, and an abuser of women who forces them to prostitute themselves and use drugs with him is a widespread assumption in many media and political circles. That is true despite the rather significant fact that not only has he never been charged with (let alone convicted of) such crimes, but also no evidence has been publicly presented that any of it is true. He has also vehemently denied all of it.”-Greenwald’s introductory premise.

This position is the most extreme version of the coverage that Gaetz has endured, making it all too easy for Greenwald to attack. It allows him to appear more rational than that of his counterparts and allows him to ignore circumstantial evidence against Gaetz. This framing, though not clearly intentional, is remarkably convenient to Greenwald’s argument.

But more than that, Greenwald argues that the allegations against Gaetz, while not inherently true or false, are consumed by an online frenzy that has previously sought to smear him. Citing several tweets, some random and some prominent, Greenwald points out that some commentators have actively engaged in speculative judgments against the Florida congressman without any reason to do so. The implication, therefore, is that the current allegations are subject to those same forces.

Serving as Greenwald’s prime example of rhetorical irresponsibility is Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wy) who, in an interview with Face The Nation, described the “charges” against Gaetz as “sickening.” However, Greenwald claims that such a statement is not only false but that by saying that the charges against Gaetz are concerning to her, Cheney has inadvertently made a false statement and that she is spreading lies that Gaetz has been charged with a crime.

His main source of evidence for this claim is a brief Daily Beast article that describes her statements during the interview. What does not mention in his article or his video is that Cheney explicitly recognized that there was an investigation, not a conclusive charge and that the term “charges” was colloquial for the allegations against Gaetz. Indeed, Cheney actively avoided answering questions regarding Gaetz throughout the interview, refusing to comment on the ongoing investigation. If Cheney was trying to argue that Gaetz was facing charges, then she’s doing a terrible job of it.

The assertions that the public—representatives, journalists, and Twitter commentators—have irresponsibly spread rumors about Gaetz ignore the significance of the evidence against Gaetz and the frequency of new revelations in this anti-Gaetz saga. Though Greenwald notes that states have inconsistent ages of consent the fact of the matter remains that it is federally illegal to proposition anyone under the age of 18 for sex along interstate lines. Meaning that it is illegal for Gaetz to have someone under 18 years engage in a “commercial sex act” even if other states have lower ages of consent.

Though Greenwald has attempted to play down, the severity of the alleged wrong-doing by Gaetz by comparing it to the scandals surrounding progressive candidate Alex Morse, the truth is that there is no point of similarity between Morse’s case and the allegations against Gaetz. Gaetz’s position is clearly different because Greenwald notes in passing, Gaetz’s Venmo payments to Joel Greenberg, an alleged sex trafficker, are public knowledge. Said payments involved Gaetz sending $900 to Greenberg, who, in turn, paid three women with a total of exactly $900. One of these women turned 18 only a few months prior. If there was no evidence of wrong-doing on Gaetz’s part, this would’ve died out a long time ago, but they aren’t going away, and Greenwald can’t change that.

It is one thing to use Gaetz’s case as a source for intellectual inquiry, but to suggest that everyone else is being hysterical about Gaetz is a gross misrepresentation. There is a distinction to be had about respecting due process and choosing a side—something that Greenwald has already done.

As the investigation on Matt Gaetz closes in, questions about his political future arise.

The case against Florida representative Matt Gaetz has accelerated since The Progressive American first reported on the investigation on Sunday, with the tides seemingly turning against him. Already, the Independent reports that Gaetz faces a House ethics investigation, further putting the third-term congressman’s political future in question. While Republicans have been hesitant to protect him, Gaetz has fought against the alleged wrong-doing alone.

It has been nine days since The New York Times first broke the story that the Justice Department was investigating Gaetz for alleged statutory rape, and the investigation has only revealed more damning information against the representative. New reports show that Gaetz sought a pardon during the last months of the Trump administration, though it was never granted. Said reports suggest that Gaetz sought to use his political connections to avoid prosecution. Although, former President Trump denies that any such request was made.

Then there are the newly uncovered Venmo payments to alleged sex trafficker and former Seminole County tax collector, Joel Greenberg, which go back to May of 2018. In a report published by The Daily Beast, Gaetz is alleged to have sent Greenberg $900 in May. The next morning, Venmo records show that Greenberg then paid three women separate, totaling $900. It should be noted that one of these women had turned 18 only 6 months before.

Though Greenberg describes these payments as paying for “school” and “tuition,” the indictments against him are directly related to so-called “sugar daddy” relationships. Seminole County officials have also been examining the payments, with auditors finding at least $300,000 in “suspicious” expenses. The Justice Department is also investigating Gaetz for supposed pay-for-sex schemes that may be related to these online payments, which are no longer public, presumably deleted by Gaetz.

In the meantime, Gaetz has hired a PR firm to defend his reputation known as Logan Circle Group. The firm has reportedly threatened to sue two reporters over their coverage that suggested Trump was distancing themselves from Gaetz. Gaetz has also hired Trump ally and defense lawyer, Marc Mukasey, who is working to help defend the Trump organization from legal problems, further binding him to Trump’s affiliates.

That might not be enough, however, as support for Gaetz remains relatively low. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) called for Gaetz’s resignation on Thursday, making him the first Republican to do so, and now, Greenberg appears likely to plead guilty to the charges against him. Such a plea would likely result in an agreement between investigators and Greenberg, who could testify against Rep. Gaetz. If that occurs, Gaetz’s chances of remaining in politics would be in serious jeopardy, if not his freedom. Or as Greenberg’s lawyer put it “I am sure Matt Gaetz is not feeling very comfortable today.”

Due to unforeseen technical problems, the podcast will not be published tomorrow. Files are not working and my current computer is under repairs. Several articles will replace them in which I will give my thoughts that would’ve been shown in the podcast. I sincerely apologize, and I hope this will never happen again.

As the investigation into Rep. Gaetz continues, allies are dropping off.

The Justice Department is hot on Rep. Gaetz’s tail, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, as allegations of sex trafficking spread about the controversial member of Congress. After the report came out, an uproar surrounded Gaetz, who denied the allegations and has refused to resign.

Though defiant in his response, the situation has not gotten better for the self-described “Florida Man,” after an interview News host Tucker Carlson ended in what Carlson called “one of the weirdest interviews I’ve ever conducted.” The interview has widely seen as a failure that further incriminates Gaetz, while others such as Vox’s Aaron Rupar have called it “disastrous.”

Gaetz has alleged that the investigation is part of an extortion scheme that his father, reported to the FBI. While the extortion allegation is real and the FBI is currently investigating it, there is little evidence connecting the alleged perpetrators to the allegations against the young congressman. Moreover, the investigation that now threatens Gaetz came out of another investigation into another Floridian stateman: the former Seminole County tax collector Joel Greenberg.

Though Gaetz may not realize it, his allies are seemingly abandoning him and his political capital appears to be slipping. The New York Times reported on Friday that Gaetz spokesman, Luke Ball, had resigned. Ball was a long-term ally of Gaetz and had been helping the embattled representative prepare his defense against the Justice Department’s investigation. Why Ball resigned is not publicly clear, but with increased hostility to Gaetz and the lacking partisan support from Republican colleagues, such support may have become untenable.

Republican support for Gaetz has been tepid, as Republican leadership has hesitated to come to his defense. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said that if the allegations prove true, he would remove Gaetz from his seat on the Judiciary Committee. Meanwhile, some Republicans have taken to condemning Gaetz in private. CNN’s chief political correspondent, Dana Bash, noted that “If you could see my text messages from some of his current and former colleagues, I actually can’t repeat what some of them say on morning television..”

Despite the traditional Republicans’ hesitance to support him, more controversial Republicans have taken up Gaetz’s defense. In a statement to CNN’s Ryan Nobles, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) indicated his support, stating simply “I believe Matt Gaetz.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has also tweeted her support.

Still, the support of Greene and Jordan is unlikely to change much. Already, Republicans in Florida are increasingly turning against the Congressmen. Even the former President is hesitant to get involved. Advisors to Trump have insisted that he avoid connecting himself to the investigation and he has reportedly admitted that the investigation looks “really bad” for Gaetz. Though the President is not completely convinced that the investigation is not a smear.

While the investigation is still ongoing and could take months to complete, the effects are clear. So long as Gaetz continues to flounder in his defense, his career will continue to flounder with him. If that happens, Rep. Gaetz will be a representative no longer.

Update

The podcast will return next week.

Despite its repeated claims that it is a news outlet, Fox has increasingly embraced pro-Trump personalities as hirees.

Fox News hired Kayleigh McEnany, the network announced on Tuesday, adding another Trump personality to its ledger of increasingly Pro-Trump talent. The recent hire comes after a collection of other Pro-Trump officials and associates were brought onto the network, further tightening Fox’s connection with the former president.

Despite its claims to objectivity and journalistic integrity, Fox has consistently shown a willingness to give access to Trump and his acolytes, mudding the waters of their coverage. The Huffington Post reported on Monday that Lara Trump, former President Trump’s daughter-in-law, was brought onto the network as a paid contributor, receiving a warm welcome from Fox and Friends.

Trump family members are not the only ones finding employment with Fox; former officials are as well. Earlier this year, ABC News reported that Fox hired Trump’s former director for the National Economic Council, Larry Kudlow. The network announced that the former Trump official would have his own weekday show, as well as a position as a commentator on all of Fox’s platforms. Kudlow’s experience “intuitive on-air presence will add depth and insight to our business analysis programming” Fox CEO Suzzane Scott explained in a statement.

The recent hires bring a dimension to the relationship Fox has with the former President and his allies, as Trump’s campaign lambasted Fox after they called Arizona in favor of Joe Biden during the 2020 election. Indeed, Trump consistently promoted their more conspiratorial rival, OAN despite them having a smaller audience than Fox.

Despite this, Trump and Fox’s relationship seems to be turning over a new leaf, as the recent hires of Trump allies shows. Fox has given the former President his desired coverage, something that he can longer receive after his Twitter ban. Already, Fox has given Trump a platform to engage in the rhetoric that launched his bid for the presidency in 2016, suggesting that the hap-hazard alliance between the two could be rebuilding itself. However, with the relative calm of the Biden administration, Fox’s ability to rebuild Trump’s career beyond appealing to his audience will likely be limited.

Still, with the recent additions to Fox, it is almost certain that Trumpism will remain a strong fixture in right-wing media for years to come.

As Democrats seek to expand voting, Republicans prepare to expand restrictions.

It has been nearly a month since House Democrats passed HR 1, more commonly known as The People’s Act, and tensions around voting are no closer to improving. Whereas Democrats support expanding voting rights and federal protections for voters, Republicans are determined to expand voting and poll requirements. At the core of the debate is the very idea of what counts as a legitimate and fair election and who has the right to vote in America. Such questions are at the very heart of American Democracy, and who gets to have their voices heard.

The People’s Act, passed in early March, is a vast expansion on the protections of voting rights in America, touching on everything from gerrymandering, campaign finance, and online registration, along with numerous other aspects of voting. But more than that, it serves as a direct rebuke of Republican efforts to enact stricter requirements to vote on the state level, which is sure to provoke immense outrage amongst Republicans, who have continued to appeal to conspiracy theories surrounding voter fraud, which experts say is rare. Republican leaders have pushed back on the bill, arguing that it would give undue power to the Democratic party and its allies.

Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy denounced The People’s Act from the floor of the Senate, saying:

“Democrats want to use their razor-thin majority not to pass bills to earn voters’ trust, but to ensure they don’t lose more seats in the next election…”

This opposition is not merely a matter of public statements and outrage. Earlier this month, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed a bill that cuts early voting and closes the polls earlier, further restricting the time period in which people are allowed to vote. The law passed by the Iowa legislature would restrict early-day voting to 20 days instead of 29 and tighten the rules around when an absentee ballot can be sent in to be accepted. It also prohibits county auditors from setting up additional locations for early voting.

Iowa is not alone in this. After former President Donald Trump attempted to overturn election results in Arizona, Republicans in the legislature have begun their campaign to restrict voting. With 24 bills that would restrict voting in the state, one of which would allow state legislatures to overturn election results, Arizona has become a symbol of Republican efforts to restrict voting.

Critics of the proposed Arizona laws, such as state Rep. Athena Salman, a member of the House Government and Elections Committee, have argued that the restrictions are nothing more than attempts to hold onto political power in the absence of voter support, saying:

“They are trying to make it harder for everyone to vote based on the hope and desire that the people who it harms more and who it disenfranchises more are the people less likely to vote Republican…”

Pointing to recent losses by Republicans, Salman argued that:

“The only way that they can hold onto control is if they make it harder for people to vote so that they can get an unfair and potentially unconstitutional competitive advantage.”

One bill, SB 1485, has already passed the Arizona senate, heading to the House for approval. If passed, the act would require that the state send letters to every person on the early voting rolls but has not participated in the last four elections, asking if they want to continue receiving ballots. Those who don’t answer would be removed irrespective of the desires of the voter.

In Georgia, similar restrictions are being enacted, restricting mail-in-voting, drop boxes, and, most infamously, criminalize giving food and water to those waiting in line to vote. In a state that has recently seen its senatorial representation switch from red to blue, the motivations are hardly mysterious. As of February of this year, 43 states have bills that would restrict voting rights. The conflict over voting could not be more impactful.

This conflict among partisans comes not just when Democrats want to show they can lead in the House and Senate before the midterms; it comes when many states are beginning their redistricting process, coveted drawing of congressional districts to address changes in the census. This process is critical, as some states have faced legal opposition to their attempts at gerrymandering of the election maps, as was North Carolina’s case in 2019.

Still, with Republicans controlling a majority of state Houses and Senates, it is unlikely that Democrats can challenge these laws without federal action, and federal action is unlikely so long as the people’s act needs 2/3 of the senate to pass. In essence, voting rights are dependent upon the filibuster.

Morning podcast

The Progressive American podcast is linked.