Matthew Yglesias » The Dread Quaker Lobby

Sep 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm

The Dread Quaker Lobby

Jamie Kirchick accuses the “Quaker Lobby” of being soft on Iran. I think those guys may be pacifists or something.

Comments
57

57 Responses to “The Dread Quaker Lobby”

joejoejoe Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
How does the Quaker Lobby buy access? Oats and nice furntiture?
nobi yuno Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
That was one of those posts that, 4 words into it, I knew was by Kirchick, and I skipped it. At first I’d get sucked in like 50% of the time, but I’m now able to avoid close to 90% of Kirchick posts before the end of the first sentence.
Marshall Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Kirchick has a very weird anti-Quaker bias. Remember when he used the term “Friends School liberalism?”

Because Ivy League Liberalism has left us in such good shape.
Francisco The Man Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Fuck Kirchick.
Poster Nutbag Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
no one disses the quakers! as a native philadelphian, i feel it is my duty to defend their honor!

our sports teams haven’t won a championship since we built taller than billy penn’s hat…i wouldn’t mess with the quakers if i was this kirchick fellow.
Petey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
“That was one of those posts that, 4 words into it, I knew was by Kirchick … I’m now able to avoid close to 90% of Kirchick posts before the end of the first sentence.”

Ditto.

Someday there ought to be a Kirchick/Sullivan crazy-off on pay per view.
Peter K. Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Aren’t the Quakers the guys who don’t believe in modern appliances and who throw picnic parties to “put up” a house? Like that guy Ishmael in Kingpin?
blah Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
The Shakers are even worse than the Quakers. Good thing they didn’t believe in reproduction.
David Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
They are selling their oats to Tehran! Shut ‘em down!
Petey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“Aren’t the Quakers the guys who don’t believe in modern appliances and who throw picnic parties to “put up” a house? Like that guy Ishmael in Kingpin?”

No. You are confusing Quakers with bald people with bad combovers.
brian Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Those guys are totally under the thumb of Big Oatmeal.
Petey Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
“The Shakers are even worse than the Quakers.”

And the Lakers are worse than either.

(Kobe is a quasi-rapist, y’know.)
Njorl Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I particularly enjoyed this bit of crazy.

Graham told me that, “What we hope for with this event, like with others, is that we will help to understand each other a bit better. We will have more precedent for open questioning and a two-way dialogue that’s open and honest.”

There will be a protest of this Quaker Meeting. Details here.

–James Kirchick

Understanding, open questioning, two-way dialogues and honesty are, after all, the four horsemen of the apocalypse. I can understand people thinking that meetings with Ahmedinijad deserve protest, but it’s like he’s going out of his way to make himself look nuts.
kafka Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
That’s why we’ve got the AIPAC lobby. To counter the grave threat to national security (= Israel) posed by the Quaker lobby
Njorl Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Aren’t the Quakers the guys who don’t believe in modern appliances and who throw picnic parties to “put up” a house? Like that guy Ishmael in Kingpin?

That would be Amish or Mennonites. I think the Quakers are fine with high tech. The only odd thing I remember about quakers is the disdain for decoration. You can have a 2 pound, solid-gold pocketwatch, but it can’t have decorative engraving on the back.
joejoejoe Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I’m not sure how 501(c)4 organizations work but can this blog take up a collection to hire a steroid-adled drifter, dress him up in a Quaker costume, and then have him pummel Kirchick? Is opening a can of whupass non-partisan and educational?
Seliniaka Nychterida Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
The US has only had one Quaker president, Nixon.
joejoejoe Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Big Oatmeal

Thanks for the best laugh I’ve had in a long time.
Njorl Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
I’m not sure how 501(c)4 organizations work but can this blog take up a collection to hire a steroid-adled drifter, dress him up in a Quaker costume, and then have him pummel Kirchick? Is opening a can of whupass non-partisan and educational?

This would be fine. If you were using a Mennonite, though, you couldn’t use store-bought canned whuppass, since they only use whuppass they’ve canned themselves in glass jars.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
There will be a protest of this Quaker Meeting.

While the Quakers might disapprove, I’d be tempted to go there just to punch Kirchick several times in the face.
Sean Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
The Quakers worked like hell before WWII to address the growing refugee problem, particularly the Jewish refugee problem.

Read “Human Smoke” by Nicholson Baker.
whoanow Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:47 pm
I wouldn’t discount the Quakers ability to raise hell during war time…without a doubt the US would still be part of the United Kingdom without Nathanael Greene.
Peter K. Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Big Oatmeal

Thanks for the best laugh I’ve had in a long time.

Yeah he wins all of today’s threads.
bobbo Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
And I will have some very pointed questions for representatives of organizations who do not attend the anti-Quaker protest.
Paula Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Hi, I’m actually a Quaker. My family has been Quakers for almost three hundred years. I never have any trouble getting lively cocktail party chatter going, because everyone seems to have an opinion on the subject. And I’m from Alabama, so that adds to the shock value.
First, there have been two Quaker presidents, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon. Both were Evangelical Friends. They are like Southern Baptists, but in theory, with the exception of Nixon, they are pacifists. Most activist Friends are from the unprogrammed tradition. No preacher. But Pacifism is not the sum total of what we are. We are supposed to find “that of God in every man.” So I guess that slows down the rate of killing.
And, in regards to Quakers and banking (Banking?) the story goes that the first banks America started in Philadelphia because Quakers had to present all of their financial dealings to the clerk, which provided transparency, thus trust, and is a large part of the financial success of the United States.
The only reason it seems odd to be a Quaker now is because people look at pictures of William Penn and think think we still dress that way. In the eighteenth century about forty percent of European settlers were Quakers. Even George Washington attended meeting.
I never post because I feel shy when I don’t have a face in front of me. But I read you guys all the time.
And if you read this Matt, I think my husband and I are coming Thursday night. Ciao.
nobi yuno Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Reminds me of that bloggingheads deal Matt condescended to several months ago, the one with Kirchick. What struck me then was some of the curious phrases Kirchick deployed that shed an interesting light on his psyche.

At one point, he told Matt something along the lines of “Don’t worry, don’t be afraid, I’m not going to question your patriotism.” He meant it as a joke, which it was, but then at least one or two other times he told Matt not to worry or be afraid because the big guns he could deploy were, in fact, not going to be deployed.

It was the mein of a bullyboy. I could kick your ass, Yglesias, but don’t worry – I’m not going to. Not today.
rea Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I wouldn’t discount the Quakers ability to raise hell during war time

If it weren’t for Admiral Penn, we’d all be speaking Dutch.
myglesias Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
First, there have been two Quaker presidents, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon. Both were Evangelical Friends. They are like Southern Baptists, but in theory, with the exception of Nixon, they are pacifists. Most activist Friends are from the unprogrammed tradition. No preacher. But Pacifism is not the sum total of what we are. We are supposed to find “that of God in every man.” So I guess that slows down the rate of killing.

Sounds like a good doctrine, to me, but not really our finest presidents…
Peter K. Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
If it weren’t for Admiral Penn, we’d all be speaking Dutch.

I’m not prejudiced against anybody except the Dutch. And the Amish. And the South Ossetians. And those assholes in Uzbekistan.
Lon Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Are there really no jews in “Religions for Peace” as Kirchick suggests? This seems unlikely, and something that would reflect poorly on jews. Actually it seems unlikely precisely for the reasons that it would reflect poorly on jews.

I notice the non-partisan speech that Palin was going to give gave as its most important point for standing up to Ahmadinejad that we have a permanent presence in Iraq until it becomes stable (which is to say a permanetn presence in Iraq).

It also contained misrepresentations of some things that Ahmadinejad has said. But sadly that probably does count as non-partisan.
Paula Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Yes, how embarrassing for us to have two of the worst. I think Herbert Hoover was an honest man without the imagination to deal with the problems in front of him. And Nixon was universally despised by other Quakers. But he did start the EPA so he’s one up on George Bush.
Edward, the mad shirt grinder Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
In Hoover’s defense, he organized the massive relief campaign in Europe that saved a really large number of people from starvation after WWI. That was certainly consistent with his Quakerism.
David Houghton Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
I’m speaking up as another representative of the silent Quaker minority — I’m solidly lapsed but was raised Quaker and have lots of non-lapsed relatives.

First of all, oats have nothing particular to do with Quakers. As I understand it, long ago when General Mills was forming, one of the mill owners who participated was a Quaker of the old school. They thought his style of dress was quaint and Quakers had a good reputation for honesty, so they made him the mascot for their oats. That Quaker guy has about the same status among Quakers as Uncle Ben does among African Americans. He’s probably the single reason people still confuse the Quakers and the Anabaptists — Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites.

The non-evangelical Quakers are solidly liberal and they are not proud of either Nixon or Hoover. Well, perhaps Hoover’s charitable work after WWI, but not so much his economic policies.

Also, there’s a pretty large percentage of Quakers who also consider themselves Jews. A Jewish guy I met at a wedding told me a joke relating to this. I don’t remember it too well. There was a Rabbi who protested that “some of his best Jews were Friends.” You can ad lib the rest. I didn’t get the humor at first because I though, “Yeah, I know some of those folks.” Then, after a moment of awkward grinning that thought was followed up with, “Oh, yeah. Joke. ‘Some of my best friends …’ Right.” And more awkward grinning.

These Jewish Quakers like the Quaker community and style of worship. I don’t know to what extent they practice Judaism as well. Even among the non-Jewish Quakers there’s a pretty large contingent of non-Christians of one sort or another. I’ve known a good number of people who have worked at FCNL over the years, including my mother. She wasn’t Jewish, but I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the others were.

I’m disgorging all of this trivia only because I’m sick of the oat and buggy jokes.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:57 pm
wouldn’t discount the Quakers ability to raise hell during war time

The original 17th century Friends were hardcore. In a way that’s pretty impressive.
aleks Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I wish I could think of a metaphor to describe just how soft and bland these people are on Iran!
whoanow Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Peter K. Says:

If it weren’t for Admiral Penn, we’d all be speaking Dutch.

I don’t want to get into my Quaker is better than your Quaker, but Nathanael Greene would of Bitch slap Penn and then pissed in his nice hat.
Peter K. Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Peter K. Says:

If it weren’t for Admiral Penn, we’d all be speaking Dutch.

I don’t want to get into my Quaker is better than your Quaker, but Nathanael Greene would of Bitch slap Penn and then pissed in his nice hat.

rea said it not me. IMHO all Quakers are religious fanatics.
24AheadDotCom Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
JK is about as sleazy as they get, but a search at my site for the full name of the group mentioned returns seven hits, and using their initials returns about fifteen hits. Now, of course, that doesn’t prove that I know more about these type of groups than MattY does, it just adds to the long list of me showing just how much more I know about those type of groups than MattY does.
Chris Brown Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Also, there’s a pretty large percentage of Quakers who also consider themselves Jews. ”

There are Quakers that are also consider themselves Buddhist, or any number of other religions. I won’t say it’s a “a large percentage”.

The more relevant trend is that Quakers have been historically supportive of Palestinian concerns, and thus have a super crappy relationship with AIPAC types.

Matt’s wrong to suggest Quakers aren’t worth Kirchick’s time to slander. While FCNL and AFSC aren’t influential in a traditional or mainstream way, they are very effective given their highly limited resources at doing things like creating dialogues with enemies of the America.
Chris Brown Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
“I wouldn’t discount the Quakers ability to raise hell during war time”

I would.

I’m a Quaker, and the last time we tired to raise hell we thought we were getting somewhere until ‘liberal’ bloggers started giving us a hard time and we got discouraged. It was very sad.
Stephen Bank Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I’m glad to see that James Kirchick is continuing the proud TNR tradition of speaking power to truth.
cd Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Anyone else want to throw up in their mouth when they read anything written by kirchick? Is that just me? Weird gag reflex i guess. Could be the leftovers i just ate. Who knows.
sam Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
The fact of the matter is, the Quaker lobby is disproportionally effective on Capitol Hill, considering how few Quakers there are in the U.S. They’re very good at grass roots mobilization, influencing key members on votes, and working behind the scenes. Most people outside Washington probably haven’t heard of FCNL, but most Congressional staff probably have. There’s reason to fear the Oatmeal.
David Houghton Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
I misspoke with “a large percentage”. Yeah, that’s way off, but my point is that some Jews quite likely will be present at this occult gathering simply because Quakers will be present. The folks not present will be the Kirchiks whose chief interest is in preserving grievances and fomenting trouble.

I see a lot of folks disparaging Quakers for their pacifism. Other folks lay into them for sympathy they show towards Palestinians. Quite a few knock the Quakers on both accounts. If you want to see the hidden agenda of the sneaky Quaker devils, try here or here.

In defense of pacifism, it’s not as though the U.S. is in danger of knuckling under to the pacifist agenda. I have no idea why non-pacifists are concerned about this. Even if you aren’t a pacifist, aren’t you glad *someone* is pulling hard the other way? And one would think that Matt’s blog is one place in the blogosphere where people would be familiar with the merits of speaking to parties to a conflict as rational actors.

One more thing about FCNL. To the extent that this organization has power it isn’t because of money or votes. No one caters specifically to the Quaker vote. They’re somewhere behind Buddhists, if only because there are fewer of them. There’s no state where they are a significant portion of the electorate. They don’t have money to throw around. To the extent that they’re successful it’s because their arguments are convincing and they are able to organize allies. I think this is about as benign a model for lobbying as you could hope for. And what do they lobby for? Native American rights. Reducing the defense budget. Nuclear disarmament. Civil liberties.

So give the oatmeal jokes a break.
Delicious Pundit Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Admiral Penn (William Penn’s father; Pepys hated the Admiral, I believe) was not a Quaker. William joined the group, much to his Establishment father’s displeasure.

For my reading project this year, I have had to read some about the Quakers. Voltaire seems to have admired them (here, and then there’s one of the first abolitionists, John Wollman, who also hated dyed clothing here.
aleks Says:
September 24th, 2008 at 12:18 am
David Houghton Says:
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:56 pm

In defense of pacifism, it’s not as though the U.S. is in danger of knuckling under to the pacifist agenda. I have no idea why non-pacifists are concerned about this. Even if you aren’t a pacifist, aren’t you glad *someone* is pulling hard the other way?

Yes, yes, O Lord yes.

Can anyone suggest a good book or two regarding Quakers during either the Civil War or WWII? I know the Friends were committed abolitionists, and I have to imagine they were no fans of the Nazis, so I’m curious about the struggle between pacifism and opposition to personified violence (the Nazis and the slave holders).
viagra Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 8:14 am
viagra
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cialis Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 9:33 pm
cialis
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
levitra Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:26 am
levitraI want to say – thank you for this!
viagra Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 6:29 am
Great site. Good info
tramadol Says:
March 17th, 2009 at 2:58 am
Incredible site!
tramadol
tramadol Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Matt Yglesias

The Dread Quaker Lobby

57 Responses to “The Dread Quaker Lobby”

Blogroll