I'm no doubt missing something here, but I don't see that Alam is arguing that this alleged "proxy war" is about to be launched to placate the Jewish vote. I read him as arguing that the Israeli tail is wagging the American dog as the result of Zionist influence, which is not exercised through the ballot box, but through various institutions such as AIPAC. Alam argues that because of the corruption of our electoral system, members of Congress serve only the special interests of the lobbies that put them in office. Since AIPAC is the most powerful of these lobbies, regardless of the size of the Jewish electorate, its interests must be served above all. If any member of Congress opposes Israelis interests, AIPAC and other Zionist groups have sufficient influence and financial clout to drive him or her from office, even in parts of the country where the number of Jewish voters is negligible. Or so Alam argues. I'm not saying that it is a persuasive argument, but it is a bit more subtle than simply "Jewish votes = U.S foreign policy." After all, I don't anyone will argue that under the present regime political influence is simply a numbers game . . .
-----Original Message----- From: Doug Henwood [mailto:dhenwood at panix.com] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 11:41 AM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: Re: "Israel's proxy war"
loupaulsen at attbi.com wrote:
>The argument that US politicians have to do the bidding of right-wing
>Zionists in order to court the Jewish vote and get elected is also
>unconvincing and is basically mistaking effect for cause.
Jews are something like 3% of the U.S. electorate and concentrated in New York and LA, places that Republicans almost never carry in presidential elections. Right-wing Christians are the major pro-Israel force in electoral politics.
Doug