Three things stand out in Ryu Spaeth’s 7000-word, flattering profile of Ta-Nehisi Coates in New York magazine.

Coates’ apparent blindness to any facts that don’t support his anti-Israel premise;
Coates’ desire for Jews to return to a state of powerlessness and vulnerability;
And the pretense that Coates has done something brave and daring, without regard to whether it will hurt his career.

Spaeth’s profile focuses on The Message, Coates’ new book, which has been released just in time for the one-year commemoration of October 7, 2023 — the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

Unlike New York, my organization wasn’t given an advance copy of the book, so I must take Spaeth’s descriptions of Coates and his work on faith. But even in an otherwise fawning profile, Spaeth ever-so-gently points out that Coates doesn’t have a firm grasp on the events surrounding Israel’s re-establishment in 1948, and that the book overlooks “terrorist groups set on the state’s annihilation,” and “intifadas and the failed negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders going back decades.”

Coates, at least according to Spaeth, is heavy on moral judgments, but light on history.

Spaeth writes of Coates, “the point he is trying to make is that anybody can see the moral injustice of the occupation. ‘What is the experience that justifies total rule over a group of people since 1967?’ he asked me. ‘My mother knows that’s wrong.’”

Why Coates has invoked his mother isn’t clear, but perhaps his mother doesn’t know that Israel got into this situation as a result of a defensive war, or that Israel offered the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza a state in 2000 — and many times before or since.

Perhaps his mother doesn’t know that former President Bill Clinton faults Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat for rejecting the 2000 peace offer, or that the Palestinians again passed up independence in the West Bank in 2008, and again in 2014.

Perhaps she doesn’t understand that the walls and checkpoints in Israel are a response to terrorism. Perhaps she also doesn’t know that Israel’s experiment with unilateral withdrawal in Gaza was proven to be a failure by 2007, when Hamas started throwing its political opposition off of rooftops, and that this failure was confirmed with absolute certainty on October 7, 2023.

A better question is, does Coates know these things? Does he choose to ignore them?

Israel cannot get out of the West Bank by agreement, and cannot get out unilaterally, but Coates issues his moral condemnation freely, without regard to the facts.

Like others who promote the dissolution of the one Jewish state in the world, Coates feigns concern over the Holocaust.

On the topic of Yad Vashem he wrote, according to New York, “in a place like this, your mind expands as the dark end of your imagination blooms, and you wonder if human depravity has any bottom at all, and if it does not, what hope is there for any of us?” And yet, he is also able to say, at the same time, “‘Does industrialized genocide entitle one to a state? No.’ Especially, he said, at the expense of people who had no hand in the genocide.”

The statement is shocking as much for its ignorance as for its callousness.

The League of Nations Mandate “in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” was created in 1922, two decades before the Holocaust.

Moreover, about half of Israel’s Jewish population is descended from those who, after centuries of second-class status, fled or were expelled from other Middle Eastern countries. Does he realize that more than half of Israeli Jews would be considered “BIPOC” in the United States?

He also doesn’t seem to know that there would actually have been a Palestinian state if the Palestinian Arabs had accepted the 1947 Partition Plan. Instead, they — along with five Arab armies — tried to conquer the Jewish State, and kill or expel its Jewish residents.

More to the point, while it is not the Holocaust that entitles the Jews to a state, it was the Holocaust that opened many people’s eyes to the existential necessity of one.

But not Coates.

To the contrary, Coates, at least according to Spaeth’s telling, wants Jews returned to the stateless and powerless situation that were the predicate conditions for the Holocaust to occur.

After the above description of Yad Vashem, Spaeth writes, “but what Coates is concerned with foremost is what happened when Jewish people went from being the conquered to the conquerors, when ‘the Jewish people had taken its place among The Strong’….”

And later in the essay, he reiterates, “in [Coates’] hands, the story of Israel is a cautionary tale of the corrupting influence of power, a warning to the oppressed who might dream of one day exerting their will over an otherwise unkind world.”

And while many saw the events of October 7, 2023, as proof of what Hamas and other jihadist groups would like to do to Jews without the protection of the state of Israel, Coates — as he has in the past — excuses the attack in his interview with Spaeth: “‘part of me is like, What would I do if I had grown up in Gaza, under the blockade and in an open-air prison …. And if that wall went down and I came through that wall, who would I be? Can I say I’d be the person that says, “Hey, guys, hold up. We shouldn’t be doing this”? Would that have been me?’”

The conceit of the New Yorker article, however, is that writing all of this about Israel is brave and risky for Coates, with the always-insightful Peter Beinart declaring that, “Ta-Nehisi has a lot to lose.”

Spaeth writes, “what matters to Coates is not what will happen to his career now – to the script sales, invitations from the White House, his relationships with his former colleagues at The Atlantic and elsewhere. ‘I’m not worried,’ he told me, shrugging his shoulders. ‘I have to do what I have to do. I’m sad, but I was so enraged. If I went over there and saw what I saw and didn’t write it, I am f***ing worthless.’”

In certain circles, Israel is today’s most fashionable bogeyman. Taking rhetorical aim at the Jewish State while it is under physical attack from multiple directions, is likelier than Coates’s unmade movie scripts to bring him more of the accolades and attention to which he seems to have become accustomed — certainly more so than the chapter of the book on Senegal will. (Just look at how much of the New York essay discusses Senegal.)

The type of one-sided analysis that New York describes can appeal only to the most uninformed of readers. Time will tell whether there are enough of them to make Coates’ book the success he seems to be looking for.

Karen Bekker is the Assistant Director in the Media Response Team at CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis.

The post Ta-Nehisi Coates Jumps on the Anti-Israel Bandwagon Using Ignorance and Sympathy with Terrorists first appeared on Algemeiner.com.