Leaders of Women’s March get pushback for osculating anti-Semite and homophobe Louis Farrakhan

As I’ve mentioned before, three of the leaders of the Women’s March—Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour, and Carmen Perez—have sucked up to the vicious anti-Semite and homophobe Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, otherwise known as the Black Muslims. On February 28, Mallory attended a speech Farrakhan gave, and the link above shows some of his of ravings about the Jews at that meeting. These were courtesy of CNN anchor Jake Tapper, one of the few mainstream journalists to call attention to this.

Still, Minister Farrakhan continues with his anti-Semitism, as he has for decades. Here’s a recent tweet:

And yet, after years of spewing such garbage, Farrakhan has the temerity to ask this question! (He’s serious; this isn’t ironic.)

Given that most of the Left-wing media simply won’t report on the connection between the Women’s March and Farrakhan—a connection that shouldn’t exist if Sarsour, Perez, and Mallory are true intersectionalists—you’ll have to read about some of this at the National Review. (Bari Weiss also discussed it at the New York Times, which of course further demonized her in the eyes of the Left).

The NR reports Mallory’s usual gushing over Farrakhan, e.g.:

But also, to defend herself against anti-Semitism after her presence at Farrkhan’s ranting (and her refusal to criticize it), she quoted Mysonne, a New York rapper:

Unfortunately, Mysonne adheres to the anti-Semitic views of Farrakhan, whose name he can’t seem to spell:

Finally, Mysonne uses the old canard, “Some of my best friends are Jews.” I wonder what he’d think of someone who was racist but said, “Some of my best friends are black”?

Mallory damaged herself further by asserting that Farrakhan had credibility as a leader because the Jews hate him!:

Realizing that she screwed up, Mallory tried to walk that statement back the next day. But who were “the enemies of Jesus” but the Jews? Or was Mallory calling out Romans?

Jack Tapper wasn’t fooled:

Let us remember again that both Mallory and Perez posed with Farrkhan, showering him with encomiums (“GOAT” means “greatest of all time”); note that Sarsour chimes in in the third Instagram post with good wishes and blessings for Farrakhan: 

Perez and Mallory:

Sarsour, Perez, and Mallory all give encomiums:

Finally, after enough criticism had accumulated, the Women’s March issued a disclaimer, saying that “Minister Farrakhan’s statements about Jewish, queer, and trans people are not aligned with the Women’s March Unity Principles”, but also asserting that “we love and value our sister and co-President Tamika Mallory” and that both the March and Mallory do not “shy away from the fact that intersectional movement building is difficult and often painful.”  Well, Mallory doesn’t look like she’s in pain when she’s cozying up to Farrakhan!

Too little and too late. Now Planned Parenthood has disassociated itself from Mallory.

Even the Left-leaning Toronto Star is calling out the Women’s March co-Presidents for anti-Semitism (click on screenshot to see article:

An excerpt:

In a sense, this is the left-wing equivalent of Donald Trump condemning anti-Semitism while winking at anti-Semites.

It’s infuriating because Mallory and Sarsour are activists who would argue in any other circumstance that intersectionality demands the condemnation of all forms of bigotry — and that big-tent feminism does not tolerate intolerance.

But it’s clear that when the wronged party in question is Jewish and the wrongdoer is a gentile leader of colour, the opposite is true. Suddenly intersectional feminism demands (as many members of the alt right do) that all perspectives deserve a fair shake, even odious ones. We must tolerate intolerance in the name of togetherness!

This is hypocritical BS at its stinkiest. But it confirms what I’ve suspected for a long time now.

Jews are unwelcome on the feminist left.

But others, including the prestigious Mt. Holyoke College (one of the few all-women schools left in America), will be having all three—Perez, Sarsour, and Mallory—speaking at its 2018 Women of Color Trailblazers Leadership Conference in April. That would be a good time for them to publicly rebuke Louis Farrkhan for his anti-Semitism. For make no mistake about it: Farrakhan is the black equivalent to any white racist like Richard Spencer.  I can’t imagine Mt. Holyoke inviting three speakers who had cozied up to and extolled Richard Spencer, but of course it’s okay to invite speakers who make nice with Jew-haters. This is the hypocrisy of intersectionalism.

As the Washington Examiner reports:

Erika Croxton, vice president of development for Planned Parenthood Northwest and Hawaii, sent an email informing supporters of the abortion provider that Mallory would no longer be the keynote speaker for the annual Seattle luncheon on April 5.

In the email, Croxton said Planned Parenthood rejects all bigotry of those whose intentions are to “undo the progress of the last half century.”

After declaring the nonprofit’s support for the Women’s March, Coxton said the group has decided to “part ways with Tamika Mallory.”

Well, I’m not a big fan of deplatforming, but, in line with what Authoritatarian Leftists do, I’ll issue a set of DEMANDS:

I DEMAND that Perez, Sarsour, and Mallory personally condemn anti-Semitism and disassociate themselves from the anti-Semitic Louis Farrakhan.

I DEMAND that if these women don’t do that, they be replaced as leaders of the Women’s March

I DEMAND that Women refuse to participate in future Women’s Marches unless their leaders explicitly repudiate Farrakhan’s anti-gay and anti-Semitic views, and cut their ties to him. Women who march are otherwise endorsing anti-Semitism.

I DEMAND that Sarsour, Perez, and Sarsour be given mandatory sensitivity training, with special emphasis on the oppression of gays and Jews

In fact, it’s a sign of the times that the Women’s March chose as leaders three women who have either overtly or covertly expressed anti-Semitic views. Although Jews should be pretty high on the oppression scale based on their historical treatment and their status as the main American target of hate crimes, I’ve realized that historical treatment does not overcome the fact that Jews have largely been successful in their vocations, and so can be seen as oppressors rather than the oppressed. But, of course, Asians have also been successful, yet they still get to claim oppression in America.

It’s all a big mess, and one of the problems with identity politics. Exactly who has been oppressed, what is their ranking, and are there individuals among the oppressed (e.g., Ben Carson) who are rejected by Intersectionalists despite their status as people of color? As for the Jews, well, they’ll have to rely on themselves and people like Jake Tapper and Bari Weiss to push back against anti-Semitic bigotry.

h/t: Diana MacPherson


  1. Richard Sanderson
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    You should check out Shaun King’s incredibly dumb defence of people who “love” Louis Farrakhan.

    He is claiming their “love” for Farrakhan can be made distinct from his antisemitism. Which is like saying people can “love” Hitler because they love his vegetarianism or love of dogs.

    Shaun King is an enabler of antisemtism and is a bigot.

    • Posted March 11, 2018 at 9:52 am | Permalink

      Oy! Can you post or send me a link to Sean King’s piece on Farrakhan. His stance goes against the Authoritarian Leftist trait of demonizing someone if just a single thing they do or say is “offensive.” But of course, they themselves do what they condemn in others.

      • Richard Sanderson
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:19 am | Permalink

        It is from his Twitter account that I am seeing all this.

        Some of these tweets are listed here: https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/03/10/brace-yourselves-for-shaun-kings-hot-take-defending-the-defenders-of-louis-farrakhan/

        He seems to be arguing that people can justifiably love and respect Farrakhan despite his obvious antisemitism, while retaining their “anti-racist” social justice credentials.

        It is absurd.

        • glen1davidson
          Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:30 am | Permalink

          But Hitler’s good for the economy! And he’s boosted German pride.

          I mean, nobody’s perfect😉

          Glen Davidson

        • BJ
          Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:40 am | Permalink

          Crime was lower, government more efficient, and the economy better (until the boycotts) under the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Shaun King must surely think one can support Apartheid without losing their social justice cred just because that regime brutally segregated and suppressed its black population.

          • Diane G.
            Posted March 12, 2018 at 3:33 am | Permalink

            And Mussolini made the trains run on time.

            (Actually, he didn’t.)

  2. Posted March 11, 2018 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    Excellent post – thanks for your articulate reflection about this pink elephant in the living room!

  3. GBJames
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 9:50 am | Permalink


  4. Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    That first tweet from @Mysonne isn’t even comprehensible. It’s just a jumble of words.

  5. Historian
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    Just this morning, Adam Serwer, who describes himself as biracial and Jewish, has posted at The Atlantic site an essay that attempts to explain why some black leaders can’t condemn Farrakhan for his anti-Semitic statements. Serwer argues that many black leaders recall the good that the Nation of Islam has done for their communities and thus are allowing Farrakhan to slide. Serwer concludes:

    “From the perspective of her critics, [Tamika] Mallory’s refusal to denounce Farrakhan or the Nation appears as a condemnable silence in the face of bigotry. For her supporters, Mallory’s refusal to condemn the Nation shows an admirable loyalty towards people who guided her through an unfathomable loss.”

    “But watching Farrakhan bask in the media attention, as yet another generation of black leadership faces public immolation on his behalf, it is impossible to see him as worthy of her loyalty.”



    • Doug
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

      Another anti-Semite was in the news recently–Billy Graham. How many whites disassociated themselves from him after his bigotry was revealed?

      Unfortunately, humans have a need for heroes. They put other humans on pedestals and excuse or ignore their flaws, and get angry at anyone who points out said flaws. It’s something we all have to watch out for.

      • Taz
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 8:17 pm | Permalink

        Mother Teresa.

  6. BJ
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    I think your demands are misguided here, Jerry. These people have made very clear that they will never change their views, so no apology will be genuine. They should not be given a way out of all this. An apology would never be good enough if their bigotry was toward any other minority. Most importantly, they should not be allowed to remain in their positions as organizers of the Women’s March and as leaders of left-wing thought just by saying they’re sorry, especially when they’ve made it clear they feel there’s nothing to apologize for and that they’re only defending minorities from evil Jews.

    I’m disappointed with other organizations who have continued to refuse to recognize what is going on here; hell, I’m still disappointed with Planned Parenthood for not simply condemning all three of them and saying they’ll never work with them again.

    I’m disappointed by the Women’s March, which would have expelled them and wrote the most blistering statement they could conceive if the hatred of these organizers was for any other minority.

    And it’s so very shocking and disappointing that the SPLC has not spoken up about this (can you feel my searing sarcasm?).

    What about all the feminist, intersectional, and “progressive” websites that continue to sing the praises of these people? What about college groups, media outlets, and politicians who have embraced them?

    If the language and activities of these people was toward any group but Jews, they would have their metaphoric heads on pikes outside the left-wing camps, and it would have happened the day after they became organizers of the March. There would be twenty thinkpieces in every major and minor media website and left-wing blog just today. Politicians who previously associated with them would be releasing statements condemning them and promising never to work with them again. Regressive left groups on every college campus would be protesting them, calling them fascists, and demanding they never be given a voice.

    But none of this happens and they remain heroes to most of the left. None of this happens because the hate they spread is for the Jewish people.

    Addendum: just a reminder of how antisemitism — including defense of and association with Farrakhan — is also tolerated in the highest ranks of the Democratic Party, as with Keith Ellison: https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/01/politics/kfile-keith-ellison-nation-of-islam/index.html

    • BJ
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:18 am | Permalink

      To clarify something in my first paragraph:

      I am not the type of person who believes and apology should not be accepted and a person given a second chance in most cases. The reason even the most groveling apology should not be sufficient here is

      (1) These people have been given many opportunities over the course of over a year to apologize, and have instead repeatedly confirmed or refused to disavow their antisemitism or that of others. This is not a case of slipping up and saying the wrong thing, but consistent expression of support for antisemites and antisemitism.

      (2) An apology for the collection of actions and words in which they have engaged would never be accepted by their peers, followers, and fawning media if their words and deeds were with regard to any other minority. I fear that, if an apology is accepted by the groups and people listed, it will just affirm the fact that antisemitism is tolerated by them, and is even supported by many of them.

      (3) We need to stop allowing for an entirely different standard to be applied to bigotry against Jews, and casting these three out into the desert completely would be the first sign that maybe such a thing is possible. But I won’t hold my breath.

      • Darrin Carter
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 2:01 pm | Permalink


      • Diane G.
        Posted March 12, 2018 at 3:38 am | Permalink

        I couldn’t agree more with both posts, BJ.

    • Posted March 11, 2018 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

      + 1

    • Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

      Those demands are, of course, satirical; I have no expectation they’d ever be met!

      • BJ
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

        Ah, well then. I feel silly 🙂

        • Diana MacPherson
          Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

          Ha ha! You make good points though. As soon as I read “intersectionalism” anywhere in anything anyone says about themselves, I run away like a triggered Evergreen student!

          • BJ
            Posted March 11, 2018 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

            You must be getting a lot of exercise these days!

            • Diana MacPherson
              Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

              Probably explains how I messed up my Achilles tendon.

      • Taz
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

        You forgot to give a deadline, along with vague hints of dire consequences if the deadline isn’t met.

  7. glen1davidson
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    The media “watchdogs” are where they usually are, on the popular side, rather than on the side of principle.

    That’s why we need free speech for the “haters” like Bari Weiss and NR, both de facto and de jure. NYT would never have bothered without Weiss on their staff.

    Glen Davidson

  8. Malgorzata
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:30 am | Permalink


  9. Posted March 11, 2018 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    It is distressing these women are granted credibility they do not deserve.

    I hope, too, that the good voters of the IL 7th Cong. Dst will do their duty this Nov and turf out Farrakhan supporter Danny K Davis.

    • Diana MacPherson
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Bullies too.

  10. John Black
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    How is it possible for the Women’s March to tout inclusiveness while simultaneously embracing hate-peddlers like Farrakhan? When is HuffPo going to explain this for us?

  11. Jenny Haniver
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 11:36 am | Permalink

    Here’s a bit of buried history that I learned about only recently – Jewish academics who fled the Nazis became professors at historically black colleges https://timeline.com/jewish-professors-black-colleges-9a61d4603771. Many white colleges wouldn’t hire them.

    As for Farrakhan,I’m surprised that he hasn’t tweeted the video from 1993 of his performance of Mendelssohn’s Violin Concerto to ‘prove’ that he isn’t an anti-Semite http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4s44f.

    • Diane G.
      Posted March 12, 2018 at 3:44 am | Permalink

      Both your points are most interesting! (I had no idea Farrakhan was a musician…)

  12. Colin Foley
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    Dr Coyne, your comments about the “left-wing media” are not accurate. Both the Washington Post and a different writer, Bromwich, at the NYT reported on the connections between Farrakhan and the Women’s March organizers.

    Washington Post (denouncing Farrakhan): https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/03/07/louis-farrakhan-is-haunting-the-left/?utm_term=.b0c15e6f1a42

    New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/us/louis-farrakhan-facts-history.html

    I’ve also noticed your concerns about left-wing violence against conservative speech, and wanted to point out repeated attacks from the right-wing in Berkeley against a bookstore: https://www.berkeleyside.com/2018/03/07/right-wing-activists-target-berkeleys-revolution-books

    • Posted March 11, 2018 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

      I stand corrected about the reportage; thank you. I hadn’t known about the attacks on Revolution Books (I spoke at the Chicago store about two years ago), and I absolutely condemn the attackers. Violent or physical attacks on bookstores or speakers from any political arena is reprehensible and deserves to be called out and, if regulations or laws are violated, punished.

    • dd
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

      Here is the things…notice how it is reported, not merely that it is being reported. One is an opinion piece, the other a kind of FAQ on the nation of Islam.

      Now ask yourself…had the intersectional coordinates been different, If this was a prominent white person saying these things about Jews, Would either paper have approached it so chastely?

      You can sense there is neither editorial nor reportorial passion in these reports. Frankly they seem like make-do reporting, almost as if, “Hey, look, we did cover it”.

      You need to take note of where an article is placed, how long is it kept there, how many follow up articles…this, too, is needed to take a reading on where the passions and biases are in reporting.

      • BJ
        Posted March 11, 2018 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

        Not to mention that a single editorial and an article is practically nothing. If this was bigotry against a different minority — hell, if it was just a couple such comments — it would be on MSNBC, CNN, the 7 o’clock news, and every lefty news site, blog, and Twitter account. And the coverage would go on for a week.

        These two pieces might as well not exist at all.

        • Diane G.
          Posted March 12, 2018 at 3:47 am | Permalink

          I disagree! They are lights in the tunnel. That they stand alone is no reflection on the merit (or necessity) of the articles themselves.

  13. Jon Gallant
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    The discussion here overlooks the axioms of the contemporary pop-Left, which are as follows. (1) Whiteness = Privilege. (2) Racism = oppression of non-whites by whites. (3) Jews are white (except for Sammy Davis Jr. and those strange people from Ethiopia).

    If we plug these simple axioms into the rest of history, it follows that anti-semitism cannot be Racism (especially when voiced by non-whites, where it can be Progressive); the holocaust was either a case of workplace violence, something caused by Zionists, or a fiction invented by Zionists; and the NYT, CNN, Planned Parenthood, and everybody else who is bad-mouthing the Woman’s March leaders are fascists or white-supremacist alt-right demons.

    • BJ
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

      Their consideration of Jews as white is just a convenience. A middle-eastern Muslim with the same color skin would be considered a person of color and/or minority. And many genetic Jews do look different from caucasians. It’s not as if they can’t be picked out by sight for discrimination.

  14. dd
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

    In his weekly New York Magazine column, Andrew Sullivan has written about this issue…it’s toward the end of the link. Actually, the entire column is much worth reading.

    “But I have to say that, unlike Jesse, the alliance with Farrakhan doesn’t baffle me at all. Once you understand the intellectual roots of the social justice movement, you see how anti-Semitism must logically be intrinsic to it. The essential claim is that all differences in outcome between any racial groups or the two sexes is entirely a function of oppression. Therefore those at the top of the hierarchy are logically the most oppressive, and the extraordinary success and achievements and prosperity of American Jews are thereby deeply suspicious. The fact that the Jewish people have been subjected in living memory to the most brutal oppression known to humans — mass extermination — is largely irrelevant. What matters for “social justice” is their alleged power now in America — and the urgent need for resistance to it.”


  15. Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    I agree with Jerry on this issue. But here is some nuance from the Atlantic for anyone that is interested. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/nation-of-islam/555332/

  16. Diana MacPherson
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

    Whenever anything happens people don’t like, I feel like the knee jerk response is “blame the Jews”. It’s like everyone suddenly becomes Mel Gibson. And I find it especially confusing when minorities who have suffered discrimination and even genocide turn on the Jews. You’d think they’d find some common ground. Any Canadians remember David Ahenakew? He was a Cree man who won the Order of Canada and then went on to publically praise Hitler for killing Jews and slammed immigrants, “especially the Jews”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ahenakew

    But, I’ve also met Jews who love Linda Sarsour and the whole BDS movement so, what can I say? People confuse me…this is why I work in IT.

    • BJ
      Posted March 11, 2018 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

      I’ve told this story before, but I went to a very left-wing college and had multiple professors who presented lies and conspiracy theories about Israel as if they were fact in their classes. Being young, idealistic, and assuming my professors were knowledgeable and respectable people, I believed them. It was easy for me to be persuaded that Israel was some evil regime oppressing others and deserving of the terrorism against them, and to believe being a good person required me to hate Israel. When I finally learned to open my mind and not believe everything I was told, I obviously found out I had been lied to systematically.

      My point is, I thought I was being a good SJW (we didn’t have such a term back then, but that’s basically what I thought it meant to be a “good person”) by hating Israel and believing it should be dismantled. Everyone around me, from peers to professors to college administration, had been telling me for years the same old conspiracy theories. So, I understand why there are Jews who support BDS and love Sarsour. I was called a “self-hating Jew” back then many times, and I didn’t understand why until I started thinking and researching for myself. All the Jews who you see supporting these things are invariably part of the social justice/regressive crowd, so most of them have simply bought into the lies of the people they believe to be their betters and the ones whose ideas they should follow.

    • darrelle
      Posted March 12, 2018 at 9:05 am | Permalink

      “People confuse me…this is why I work in IT.

      But you didn’t manage to get away from dealing with people even there, did you (you do PM these days, right?)? Too many damn people, can’t get away from them!

      I can’t say the prevalence of antisemitism surprises me anymore, but it still seems strange to me. Growing up I never encountered, or at least noticed, any antisemitism of any degree. Of course I was very aware of historical antisemitism, but I mean antisemitism in my culture in my time.

      It wasn’t until I was a young adult that I first began to encounter some antisemitism. It seemed just completely bizarre to me. On reflection I think I am surprised all over again at how antisemitism has risen so much in recent years. Or, more likely, how many antisemites feel uninhibited enough to let their antisemitism shine in recent years. Again, it seems bizarre to me that these completely unwarranted prejudices against a particular culture can be maintained for thousands of years, and even in current modern times. WTF is wrong with people?

      I think the current rise in antisemitism has been influenced by the current rise in Muslim “power” in Western countries’ societies.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted March 12, 2018 at 9:23 am | Permalink

        I do some BSA work, some PM work and some various other work right now. I have liked the type of person who works in IT but where I am now the environment is weird that way and there are a lot of more “feeler” people there. I find scrutinizing everything I say exhausting.

  17. Emily C.
    Posted March 11, 2018 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Louis Farrakhan’s also a misogynist. More openly so than even Trump, who at least thinks it’s okay for women to have jobs outside the home and wear what they want. And that’s where my brain keeps screeching to a halt.

    I can understand the Women’s March leaders associating with an anti-semite. It is utterly and completely and totally abhorrent and disgusting, but I can understand it. I cannot understand them praising someone who said, “Your professional lives can’t satisfy your soul like a good, loving man.” So my logic circuits get fried.

    The Nation of Islam has nothing to do with actual Islam, and Farrakhan even recently said that Arabs have no right to the Middle East. He is a dangerous cult leader who’s been cozying up with another dangerous cult leader. The NoI and Scientology are best buds these days.

    Malcolm X’s family also believes Farrakhan was behind his assassination. Which might explain a few things, actually. Social fear is one thing; physical fear is another.

    • Posted March 12, 2018 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

      I remember reading about one positive thing that Islam did for Malcolm X – he did the hajj and realized that Muslims were Muslims, regardless of race. I think that’s a good thing – even if it isn’t enough or it is outweighed by other things.

    • nicky
      Posted March 12, 2018 at 11:50 pm | Permalink

      How come your logic circuits weren’t burnt by the Wahhabist apologist Ms Sarsour being a leader of the Woman’s March?

%d bloggers like this: