Yesterday, Democratic Rep. Jake Auchincloss said something that used to be taken for granted in Western political circles regarding Graham Platner’s Nazi tattoo: “I find that tattoo and his commentary about it to be personally disqualifying. I hope Maine voters agree with me.”
This isn’t a terribly confrontational way to say it, either. Political parties are big tents, but all have to draw the line somewhere. Auchincloss believes Nazi symbology belongs on the outside of the tent.
It’s worth noting that the Nazi tat merely scratches the surface, no pun intended. Platner’s campaign looks like it was built in a lab underground by the fusion of everything Democrats used to claim belongs outside the tent: misogynistic theories about rape, the celebration of the killing of American troops, unabashed Jew-baiting, open admiration for terrorist groups, racist stereotypes about black Americans, toleration of political violence, etc.
Auchincloss’s choice of zeroing in on the Nazi tattoo is a fascinating one. Had he denounced Platner for sexism or racism, the pushback from pro-Platner Dems might have been more muted. But calling rank anti-Semitism disqualifying is a threat to an entire group of up-and-coming progressives.
One such progressive, representative of the wider cohort, is Saikat Chakrabarti, a wealthy software engineer who jumped to politics in 2016 and made his first big splash a couple years later by helping elect progressive darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who made Chakrabarti her chief of staff.
Now Ocasio-Cortez is a contender for the 2028 presidential election and Chakrabarti is running for Nancy Pelosi’s seat in the House. Under normal circumstances, the combination would represent the rise of a powerful potential alliance. Under current circumstances, AOC won’t even acknowledge Chakrabarti.
Yet even two high-powered progressives on the outs can come together for a certain cause: Graham Platner and his Nazi tattoo.
Chakrabarti declared war on Platner’s congressional critics: “Auchincloss should be primaried.” In other words, there is room either for people sporting Nazi tattoos or people who object to them, but not both, in the preferred Democratic Party of AOC’s former chief of staff. (Ocasio-Cortez’s own embrace of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories only got worse after Chakrabarti left her office, so we know she didn’t object to that part of Chakrabarti’s political persona.)
Chakrabarti and others claimed that this was Auchincloss’s way of endorsing the Republican in the race, Susan Collins. Auchincloss clarified that no, he was simply saying Nazis are bad: “Susan Collins is a rubber stamp for the worst admin in history. Claims that I would endorse her, implicitly or otherwise, ignore my track record supporting Democrats to take back both chambers. As I said months ago, I find Platner’s Nazi tattoo and his commentary about it personally disqualifying. If it were me I’d vote for someone else in the Maine Democratic primary.”
But Auchincloss’s nuance fell on deaf ears. Back the Nazi tattoo guy or you might as well be a Republican.
Between Chakrabarti and Auchincloss, there is no question who has taken the more heterodox position on Nazis. After all, Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer is also backing Platner’s campaign, as is the party’s relevant campaign committee.
Hasan Piker, the Jew-baiting anti-American influencer popular among progressive Democratic candidates, also chimed in against Auchincloss, calling him part of the “straight up israel first democrats.”
But of course, Auchincloss didn’t mention Israel in that statement. He said Nazis are bad. Piker was, by the way, not the only left-winger to bring up Israel in response to Auchincloss. It was a telling moment: Somehow, suddenly influential progressives openly associate anti-Nazism with disloyalty to America.
Enjoy your new friends, Chuck Schumer.
Source:
www.commentary.org
