Is Glenn Beck After the Wrong Billionaire?

Good Fences

By J.J. Goldberg

Published November 24, 2010, issue of December 03, 2010.
  • Print
  • Share Share

If you’ve kept up with the outraged tsunamentary (“tsunami of commentary” — I made that up) following Glenn Beck’s televised sliming of billionaire currency trader George Soros, you might suppose there’s nothing left worth saying about it. But you would suppose wrong. There’s much more to say.

Beck, the top-rated bloviator at top-rated Fox News, spent three consecutive evenings in mid-November depicting Soros as a megalomaniacal empire-builder who collaborated with the Nazis during childhood and now masterminds a vast left-wing conspiracy to destroy America. It was a baroque pastiche of manipulated quotes, half-truths and outright lies, skillfully crafted into a frightening admonition and, perhaps, a call to arms.

The part you’ve probably heard about, the part that’s got critics agitated, is Beck’s claim that Soros, a Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor, was a Nazi collaborator. He was referring to Soros’s own descriptions of survival at age 14 in Nazi-occupied Budapest. Posing as the “godson” of a non-Jewish local official, young Soros tagged along when his “godfather” inventoried confiscated Jewish property or delivered deportation notices. How did Beck put it? “Here’s a Jewish boy helping send the Jews to the death camps.”

It’s a horrible thing to say about any Jew trying to survive the Nazi nightmare, let alone a child, and Beck was rightly denounced. The Anti-Defamation League called it “horrific” and “repugnant.” Elan Steinberg of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and Their Descendants called it “a particularly monstrous lie.” The left-wing blogosphere had a field day with it. Even the right piled on. Reason magazine called the canard “appalling on a human level.” At Commentary magazine, executive editor Jonathan Tobin called it “simply inadmissible.”

Tobin took an essential next step that seemed to elude most critics: After condemning Beck’s collaboration slur, he went on to note the perverse combination of ignorance and dishonesty pervading Beck’s overall screed. For example, Beck illustrated Soros’s supposed lust for global domination by repeatedly reciting the financier’s record of undermining various regimes, and playing a clip of Soros boasting of his “subversive activity.” Beck’s audience, Tobin wrote, “had to assume that it was part of some leftist conspiracy that he [Soros] was funding. Beck left out the fact that what Soros was talking about was his Cold War-era funding of movements that sought to support anti-Communist dissidents in countries like Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and the Soviet Union.” Soros, he wrote, was “one of the good guys” there.

As tasteless as Beck’s victim-blaming and other distortions might be, though, his larger project is downright frightening. Throughout his three-hour philippic, he painted an all-too-familiar portrait, complete with grainy black-and-white images and scary horror-film music, of a demonic plot. At the center of it, he stated over and over, stood the almost supernatural figure of Soros, the malevolent, all-powerful and unmistakably Jewish financier bent on subjugating the world for his own profit. We’ve heard this bilge before. But Beck has millions of viewers who take him very seriously.

Nor is this global conspiracy merely metaphor to Beck. He warned of a five-step Soros plan for domination. “In country after country after country,” he told viewers, “we found that there are five steps to him gaining control.” Here is how Beck described them:

Step one: “Form a shadow government using humanitarian aid as cover.” This refers to a network of nonprofits Soros funds and “controls,” from to the Center for American Progress, as well as his own Open Society Institute, with its tentacles in quiet, unassuming places like Belarus and Georgia.

“Step two: Control the airwaves. Fund existing radio and TV outlets and take control over them or start your own outlets.” Soros does this, Beck explained, by donating to National Public Radio and the liberal watchdog Media Matters for America.

“Step three: Destabilize the state, weaken the government and build an anti-government kind of feeling in this country. You exploit an economic crisis or take advantage of existing crisis — pressure from the top and the bottom. This will allow you to weaken the government and build anti-government public sentiment.…

“Step four: You provoke an election crisis. You wait for an election. And during the election, you cry voter fraud.…

“Step five: Take power. You stage massive demonstrations, civil disobedience, sit-ins, general strike, you encourage activism. You promote voter fraud and tell followers what to do through your radio and television stations.…

“Do any of those sound familiar? This is the way George Soros takes a country down every time.”

It’s too easy to joke about this nonsense. A donation to NPR, even a hefty $1 million, hardly controls the nation’s airwaves. The last time Democrats cried election fraud was in 2000 in Florida, and they got over it pretty quickly. As for weakening the government, weren’t we worried about liberals expanding it? When did weaker government become the problem?

But wait a minute! Something does sound familiar. Didn’t we see anti-government demonstrators going wild in the summer of 2009? Chanting something about an illegitimate government and teabags? Yelling about election fraud and a bogeyman called Acorn? Wait — isn’t someone actually gobbling up the airwaves and telling people how to vote? And weren’t his broadcasters out there leading the chanting?

Of course! It’s kindly old Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp. He has six channels on my cable system alone. He actually pays Republican presidential contenders to pontificate on air. He owns The Wall Street Journal, The Times of London and a major Hollywood movie studio. But he doesn’t pull anyone’s strings, does he? Nah.

Beck can relax. We’ve got Fox guarding our chickens.

Contact J.J. Goldberg at and follow his blog at

The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.

Find us on Facebook!
  • The sign reads: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances.”
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • "It pains and shocks me to say this, but here goes: My father was right all along. He always told me, as I spouted liberal talking points at the Shabbos table and challenged his hawkish views on Israel and the Palestinians to his unending chagrin, that I would one day change my tune." Have you had a similar experience?
  • "'What’s this, mommy?' she asked, while pulling at the purple sleeve to unwrap this mysterious little gift mom keeps hidden in the inside pocket of her bag. Oh boy, how do I answer?"
  • "I fear that we are witnessing the end of politics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I see no possibility for resolution right now. I look into the future and see only a void." What do you think?
  • Not a gazillionaire? Take the "poor door."
  • "We will do what we must to protect our people. We have that right. We are not less deserving of life and quiet than anyone else. No more apologies."
  • "Woody Allen should have quit while he was ahead." Ezra Glinter's review of "Magic in the Moonlight":
  • Jon Stewart responds to his critics: “Look, obviously there are many strong opinions on this. But just merely mentioning Israel or questioning in any way the effectiveness or humanity of Israel’s policies is not the same thing as being pro-Hamas.”
  • "My bat mitzvah party took place in our living room. There were only a few Jewish kids there, and only one from my Sunday school class. She sat in the corner, wearing the right clothes, asking her mom when they could go." The latest in our Promised Lands series — what state should we visit next?
  • Former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror: “A cease-fire will mean that anytime Hamas wants to fight it can. Occupation of Gaza will bring longer-term quiet, but the price will be very high.” What do you think?
  • Should couples sign a pre-pregnancy contract, outlining how caring for the infant will be equally divided between the two parties involved? Just think of it as a ketubah for expectant parents:
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?

We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.