 |
| Father Michael Pfleger and Louis Farrakhan (Sun-Times) |
Ordinarily, I would salute such a man for his dedication and devotion to social justice. Even though I might have on occasion disagreed with some of his tactics, his heart always seemed to be in the right place. People like that deserve our respect and admiration even when we do not agree with their politics. But yesterday he did something that completely reverses my opinion of him. It is a perfect example of how the good intentions of social justice can can go horribly wrong.
Father Phleger chose evil over justice by choosing to promote one minority at the expense of another. He invited Louis Farrakhan to speak in his church in response to Facebook acting on their new policy of zero tolerance for hate speech - by banning him. That was the right decision. If there was any black person more responsible for Jew hatred than Farrakhan, I can’t imagine who that might be.
It isn’t that Farrakhan is the only black antisemite. There plenty of black antisemites . It’s that Farrakhan has a very large following. And that other than his virulent antisemitism, the values he preaches are not all that different than the values of the American Judeo-Christian ethic based on a shared bible.
This is what makes him so influential and dangerous. Any good that might result from promoting those values is wiped away by his hatred for Jews. His constant denials of that are laughable in face of the many times he said things that would have made Hitler proud.
There is little doubt about Farrakahn’s antisemitism. Which made it a no brainer for Facebook to ban him – along with other purveyors of hate a few days ago.
Pfleger would have none of that. Why? He claimed he was defending the right to free speech - which Facebook took away from Farrakhan. (Apparently he believes that people should be able to promote hatred of minorities as a constitutional right.)
The problem is that this claim is a bold faced lie. Can anyone imagine Phleger giving former Klansman, David Duke a platform in his church? He too lost his Facebook free speech rights - same as Farrakhan. Had Pfleger done that, I might have given him the benefit of the doubt. Although he may still invite Duke to speak in his church, I think it more likely that pigs will fly.
Any sense of decency and real social justice should have caused Phleger to ban both of these haters. That would have been the right message to send. Instead he has given Farrakhan his own imprimatur - adding even more prestige and credibility to him among his flock - and beyond. To the best of my knowledge Pfleger did not even make a disclaimer before or after Farrakhan’s speech – which can easily be interpreted as agreement with him.
It destroys any credibility Pfleger might otherwise have as an advocate for social justice. It has now become apparent that he believes in social justice for only one group of people. Even if it is at the expense of another. That is truly sick. It’s kind of like what Hitler did for Germans at the expense of the Jewish people.
For what it’s worth, Chicago’s Catholic archdiocese dissociated themselves from this event:
In a statement, the Archdiocese of Chicago said it's not sponsoring the event and that Cardinal Blase Cupich was not consulted. The statement goes on to support free speech but also says "There is no place ... for discriminatory rhetoric of any kind."
Meanwhile Farrakhan spoke about ‘Satanic Jews’ to a fawning and standing room only crowd a St. Sabina. A crowd that applauded him several times – some of them live streaming his speech.
Pfleger was deaf to the pleas of Holocaust survivors that asked him not to do this, as noted on Chicago’s local ABC television affiliate:
"I know words hurt, I have lived through it, and as a Holocaust survivor I know what was done to us and to me in the concentration camps because of words," said Fritzie Fritzshall – a Holocaust survivor and the president of the Illinois Holocaust Museum in Skokie.
There is no way the Church hierarchy should allow Pfleger to continue his ministry. He may not be an antisemite. On the other hand Farrakhan considers him a longtime friend and brother. I don’t know how anyone can be a friend and brother to an overt antisemite without being one themselves.
Either way, one thing is certain. He invited a recognized antisemite to address his people without a word of criticism. His lame excuse about protecting freedom of speech is as phony as a 3 dollar bill. And from here on in - he should be recognized for phony he is by all people of good will.