Yet, although this ambivalence on Jew-hatred was expected from some quarters, there has been one supremely notable instance of wholesale hand-waving that has come as a surprise to anyone paying even a modicum of attention. While The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro has usually been vocal and outspoken about anti-Semitism in the past, he has found himself much more understanding this time.
I’m sure the fact that Candace Owens is an employee of The Daily Wire has little to do with that fact.
Many people have had the temptation to hand-wave away this Ye-generated and Owens-exacerbated controversy, hoping it dies down on its own and chalking up the outrage and its myriad apologists to partisanship and reflexive wagon-circling. I understand that temptation—I can even identify with it. It is unfair for one “side” to have to own up to its flaws while its opponents flaunt theirs with impunity.
But if we care to battle the perennial scourge of anti-Semitism, we must recognize that shirking the responsibility to stand up to bigotry emanating from your own house directly enables it when it comes from others.
It isn’t as though a compelling argument is being made here—not by Owens in defense of Ye, and not by Shapiro in ignoring Owens’ role in running cover for Ye.
Let’s just, for a moment, consider what each party said. After Ye threatened on Twitter to go “death con 3 on Jewish people,” Owens bizarrely ranted that there was no way any “honest person” would see that tweet as anti-Semitic because DEFCON 3 is a “military defense position” and because no could can imagine Ye had “gotten together a military strike…to go forward in the morning time in Israel.”
If that wasn’t enough, Owens concluded her rant by complaining, “It’s like you cannot even say the word ‘Jewish’ without people getting upset.”
As bizarre as Owens’ rant was, Shapiro managed to one-up her, tweeting that while what Ye was saying was “clearly anti-Semitic and disturbing,” it was still also true that his “moves toward pro-life, faith, and family conservatism are encouraging.”
That tweet is disturbing on two accounts. As a Jew, it’s disturbing to hear Shapiro thinks that pro-life conviction might ameliorate or excuse Jew-hatred. And as someone who is pro-life, it’s mind-boggling to hear Shapiro seem to imply these two things may be connected.
It wasn’t until his podcast later that Shapiro expounded on this, standing up for Owens and her defense of Ye. First, he argued, you need to understand Ye’s clearly anti-Semitic comments in the broader context of his mental illness. And concerning Owens, who could fault her for standing up for her friend? Besides, it is a “feature, not a bug, of The Daily Wire that we openly disagree about all this stuff…we battle it out,” and just move on.
That is, the liberal bromide of simply agreeing to disagree in the “marketplace of ideas”—as if virulent anti-Semitism is something reasonable folks can disagree about.
There’s so much more there to unpack. First, while mental illness may be contributing to the way Ye is expressing himself, he remains influential and retains a massive platform, and his anti-Semitic filth is as dangerous as if it were coming from someone as sane as the sky is blue.
You only need to observe how Owens reacted to her boss to prove this point. She could have been more delighted.
There is not a single argument Shapiro has made about this sordid series of events that he would ever accept were it to come from anyone else. Imagine if, when Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) trafficked in anti-Semitic tropes, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) argued that she lacked the understanding to know what she said was wrong or employed a “this is so sad” sort of frame.
In fact, you don’t even have to imagine.
You also don’t have to imagine how Shapiro would react if someone tried to hide behind friendship to avoid condemning anti-Semitism. As a matter of fact, he has previously seen having a public friendship with someone as something that is itself sufficient cause to rebuke the friend’s anti-Semitism.
Shapiro, of course, was correct the first time around on all of these. The turnaround here is so complete that it is almost mind-boggling. And for what?
But the point is less about Shapiro’s inconsistency than it is about the fact that what he has done, with respect to his own employee Candace Owens, is to make it virtually impossible to battle the scourge of anti-Semitism. If Ben Shapiro can excuse the anti-Semitism coming from within his own house, he is effectively making it impossible for any example of anti-Jewish bigotry to be inexcusable, tout court.
The notion that there might be some tangible costs associated with voicing age-old tropes that lead to discrimination and violence against Jews is not “cancelation”—which is a greatly over-used paradigm, in any event. As much as Ye and Owens want you to believe that Ye has been left bank-less and that the Jews are responsible for it, that is simply not the same—even if it were actually true, which it is not—as facing consequences for your actions from your employer.
But Shapiro refusing to say or do anything whatsoever about Owens’ defense of the indefensible (other than to say he disagrees)—I assume because she is profitable for The Daily Wire—is to de facto validate what Nancy Pelosi did when she refused to make Ilhan Omar face any consequences for her own overt anti-Semitic.
It is far easier to sit back, demand other people deal with their own issues, and use their inaction to justify yours. To paraphrase Shari Lewis, it’s the song that never ends.
And when the music stops—and it always does—it’s the Jews who are left standing without anywhere to sit. Ben Shapiro, of all people, should know that.
Eli Steinberg lives in New Jersey with his wife and children. They are not responsible for his opinions, which he has been putting into words over the last decade, and which have been published across Jewish and general media. You can tweet the hottest of your takes at him: @HaMeturgeman.
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.
