No It is Not Acceptable Because Brooks is Jewish
The arguments that veteran NYT writer David Brooks makes against Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner are valid. Obviously doing the bidding of his master, Donnie Trump, Kushner tried to set up a back channel to
Russia that was secure from U. S. monitoring. One intent, which so far has not been stated
by anyone, was obviously to discuss Trump business dealings with the Russians.
In making his criticism Brooks repeatedly uses the terms ‘clan’ and ‘clannish’.
We tell young people to serve something beyond self, and Kushner seems to have been fiercely, almost selflessly, loyal to family. But the clannish mentality has often ill served him during his stay in government. . .
Clannishness, by contrast is about tight and exclusive blood bonds. It’s a moral approach based on loyalty and vengeance against those who attack a member of the clan. It’s an intensely personal and feud-ridden way of being. . . .
We don’t know everything about his meetings with the Russians, but we know that they, like so much other clan-like behavior, went against the formal system.
All of the Jewish people, and we do mean all including the author here know the history of the term ‘clan’ and anti-Semitism. That term has been used to describe Jews in their supposed conspiracies against non-Jews and the totally discredited belief that Jews plot among themselves to the destruction of everyone else. It is a vicious code word. By using the term Brooks aligns himself, knowingly or not, with the most vile haters in American society.
The fact that Brooks’s family was Jewish does not insulate him from the charge of anti-Semitism. In fact, his ignorance, deliberate or not based on his heritage makes him even more pathetic.