Eric Rudin

Wow wow wow. Take a minute to watch these incredibly powerful remarks from a Rabbi in London. I’ll add - if you’ve never had to send a loved one an “are you ok?” text after yet another attack, kindly stfu.

Medhi Hasan went on ITV last night to talk about the stabbing of two Jews in London and declared it’s a “problem” that many Jewish ppl support Israel. Very unhelpful to say the least.

It’s all too clear that a country in which Jews are attacked on the streets simply because they are Jewish, synagogues need to employ security, & anti-Semitic slogans & images are paraded through city centres or exhibited in art galleries is exactly what we’ve become.

People have asked me my opinion on Maine, now that the Democratic primary is over. I have opinions, but no conclusion. I have no conclusion because I am a consequentialist and this is a rare case where my calculus is unresolved. As a consequentialist, this is what I believe: Democrats need to amass as much power as possible. The Senate is a very particular lever of power. The majority helps us to protect the judiciary, mitigating longterm structural harm. A person who we otherwise despise, if they give us the majority, should typically be viewed a warm body in service of the greater good. These are the calculations that led me to campaign for Fetterman in rural PA, despite my dislike of him. These are the same calculations that led me to defend Manchin, whenever PRIMARY MANCHIN would rear up (No one else could have held that seat). In every single case, I would say: it's not about the person; it's about the majority. Platner is different. Why? Because he is more than just a warm body. He is bleeding red flags that compromise our broader position as a party. So the consequences spread further. He's not just an asshole with a vote we need. He has the potential to be more toxic. He compromises our moral standing. And, if he performs erratically, yet holds incumbent strength, he could be a long-term poisonous force. Further consequences: I am a woman, offended by Platner. Another group of people offended by Platner are Jews. And the treatment of Jews over the past two and half years--including denial of pain & gaslighting--has not only hurt members of our coalition, but caused *structural damage* through the core of the party. Jews are a small numerical proportion of the party, but a large part of its historical heart. When you ignore, hurt, or gaslight Jews, or any other group essential to our party's character, including Black voters, you stab our party in its heart. You create longterm damage. Cracks. Fragility. Etc. So, even if I could get over my feelings as a woman--and trust me, I'm pretty hardcore, so I think I probably could--in service of the Senate majority--I will not participate in gaslighting Jews or throwing their concerns to the winds. Because I 1) care about people, 2) care about truth, and 3) see the broader structural damage that is occurring. It is easier for me, as a consequentialist, as a person who understands power, to sideline my OWN feelings than it is for me to sideline the feelings of others. I have never once, in my political life, argued anything but, "Ok, we don't like X, Y, Z guy, but our like/dislike is immaterial to the power the majority affords. He is a warm body that gives us power." I've turned my consequentialist calculus over the Platner situation repeatedly. Which is the main reason I spoke so strongly against him. For me, he creates an unresolvable problem. So, today, I'm not going to argue against doing everything in our power to preserve the majority. But I'm not going to argue for it, in the case of Platner, either. Because I feel that argument carries harm too grievous to entertain. Those are my thoughts. Perhaps others, who are equally torn, will go through the same framework and reach different conclusions. That's fine and I don't begrudge it. What I do begrudge is those who continue to introduce harm into the Democratic party and then ignore or even mock the voices of those who express they have felt this harm. If you support Platner and you actually want to WIN that Senate seat, rather than expressing dominance on the internet, you should attend to the harm you create and continue to defend. Otherwise the poison you introduce will become ever more toxic. For these reasons, I won't comment on Platner much beyond today *unless* it's in service of a broader point. The malfeasance of certain consultants and political actors. The disrespect and gaslighting directed at Democratic voters whose opinions you should value. And so on. It is very rare that my consequentialist calculus fails me so thoroughly, but it does in this case. So I'm going to sit back and watch. Let the chips fall where they do.