Netflix Movie “You People” Laughs off Popular Antisemitic Conspiracy Theory
In the new Jonah Hill and Kenya Barris hit, little clarity is given that Jews did not, in fact, secretly play a role as the architects of the Atlantic Slave Trade.
Spoilers ahead, obviously.
If, like me, you were to check out Jonah Hill and Kenya Barris’ “You People” on IMDB before deciding to watch it, you would see that it describes the film’s synopsis as such:
“Follows a new couple and their families, who find themselves examining modern love and family dynamics amidst clashing cultures, societal expectations and generational differences.”
This is partially true. The film does explore those themes. But like most summaries of this film, it buries the lede. There are two main points of friction between the families in this Rom-com. The first is just that, a cultural divide between an Ashkenazi American family (personified through its matriarch played by Julia Louis-Dreyfus) and a Muslim African-American family (personified mostly through Eddie Murphy’s character). The second is that Murphy’s family are extremely antisemitic, and followers of Louis Farrakhan’s vision for the Nation of Islam, one that treats the demonetization of Jewish people as a necessity.
Although in the film, Jewish (namely Ashkenazi) and white American identities are conflated, a key part of Farrakhan’s message is not that white people are responsible for historic evils towards Black people, but that Jews, specifically, are the root of the problem. Farrakhan has referred to Jewish people as termites. He platforms Holocaust deniers as keynote speakers at Nation of Islam’s Saviour’s Day conferences, where in recent years he’s proudly stated, “Jews are my enemy”, and has doubled-down on claims that Jews are all Satanic.
I don’t have the qualifications to properly speak to the harm caused by conflating antisemitism as part of African American identity. More qualified people than myself have pointed out the harm caused by this.
Instead, I want to elaborate on one specific antisemitic references that has gotten little-to-no coverage in the conversations surrounding this film’s controversy: The theory that Jews created, controlled, and were the key beneficiaries of the Atlantic Slave Trade and who made up most slave owners in America at the height of slavery.
Despite the elephant in the room, only a couple scenes outline clearly that Murphy and Nia Long’s characters —parents of Hill’s romantic interest played by Lauren London — are themselves antisemitic. In one instance, they jump quickly into it by proudly retelling the story of how they got to spend an hour with Louis Farrakhan, before Louis-Dreyfus’ character is interrupted as she mention’s Farrakhan’s antisemitism.
Another time is somewhat more subtle. In this, Nia Long’s character directly accuses the Cohens (Hill’s character’s family) of being responsible for slavery. The claim comes to fruition after the family’s compare historic atrocities, namely slavery and the Holocaust. Eventually, Louis-Dreyfus’ character says “All I’m saying is that our people [Jews] came here with nothing like everybody else,” to which Long’s character replies “Actually, you sort of kind of came here with the money that you made from the slave trade.”
At a glance, this might look accurate: Obviously, the typical slave owner in America was white. However, under Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam published The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews Volume 1, a conspiratorial book that uses fraudulent evidence to claim that specifically Jews, not white people, were responsible for the slave trade. The book alleges that the Jewish people as a unified group have covered up their role in the slave trade, hence the “Secret Relationship”. With this context in mind, it’s reasonable to assume the line was supposed to be commentary on Jews, not whiteness.
Furthermore, Murphy’s character applauds the call-out, implying that it may be more controversial than an accurate and common observation on the history of slavery. Afterwards, Long’s character then promises to bring show the “sources” of her claim, which is in her purse.
Likewise, this wouldn’t be problematic — just uncommon — were it not for Farrakhan’s stance on slavery. But, in addition to blaming slavery specifically on the Jews, Farrakhan has stood by the debunked pseudo-scholarly evidence presented in The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews and subsequent publications in its series. (Among them, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews Volume III claims the Jewish people orchestrated the Ku Klux Klan, despite the fact that the Klan is historically extremely antisemitic.)
In recent years, Farrakhan has promoted conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines. Like his antisemitism, You People includes reference of this, but it is unclear the good it does, as it isn’t dissected enough that it’s understood by the audience. Murphy’s character blames Hill’s character’s people on making him get a vaccine in order to go to a Casino. But, it’s unclear if he means that he blames white people or Jewish people specifically for coercing him into getting a Covid-19 vaccine.
As film reviewer Rendy Jones noted: “Murphy’s Akbar is a Louis Farrakhan-supporting anti-vaxxer. If you don’t know who Farrakhan is, Google him and then ask yourself if you’re supposed to laugh at this character.”
Though I was familiar with some of Farrakhan’s articles on vaccines before I saw this scene, I’m still asking asking myself if I’m supposed to laugh at it.
There is serious danger caused by treating extreme antisemitism as a quirky cultural difference that families can look past. Worse still, said cultural difference remains seemingly unresolved. You People engages with this by lumping it in with a reconciliation speech Hill’s character gives broadly about Black and white cultural divides in America.
Allison Josephs, who pointed out the Jewish slavery theory references where most film writers did not, noticed this as well. “Only by the end does Jonah’s character start to stand up for himself, but there’s no defence of his Judaism, or his people really, at all,” Josephs told Newsweek in a recent summary they published on the controversy.
In fact, a worse scenario is created, in which Louis-Dreyfus’ character apologizes to Murphy and London’s characters “on behalf of” both white people and Jewish people. As there is little mention of what to blame on Jews between the allegations made in the much earlier scene, in which the Cohen family’s ancestors are accused of owning slaves, this almost looks to the audience like the apology is made for owning slaves — a fact that is not established as truth and one that came out of the promotion of a conspiracy theory.
Following the apology “on behalf of the Jewish people”, the audience is treated to one somewhat charming moment that implies Murphy’s character may have risen above his past prejudices. This happens when Louis-Dreyfus’ character calls the newly-wed children “Mr. and Mrs. Cohen”, and Murphy responds “Mr. and Mrs. Mohamed-Cohen”, with a smile on his face. A happy ending, certainly, but one that was achieved inorganically. Murphy’s character was not actually shown on screen resolving his antisemitism. Worse still, as a more minor character, Nia Long’s character, who brought up the secret Jewish slave trade myth, wasn’t even given a line like this. I suppose the expectation is that, because Long’s character had very little development but very strong beliefs, and because those beliefs mirrored her more on-screen husband, that we’re expected to assume she followed a similar character arc where she overcomes internalized antisemitism off-screen.
There was a lot of criticism to be made about this movie. I don’t mean for this blog about one problematic element to overshadow other issues, such as the parallel problem with how Louis-Dreyfus’ character treats her new Black family members as tokens and — like Murphy’s character — seems to overcome her internalized racism very inorganically. (Louis-Dreyfus’ character apologizes for objectifying her daughter-in-law, but no real investment in Lauren London’s character’s career, hobbies, or personal interests is demonstrated by the film’s conclusion.) Or, for example the film’s reliance on the stereotypes of a nagging Jewish mother and an angry, overprotective Black father.
If this was a B-list film with little potential, it might be easier to shrug off its irresponsibility by adding Farrakhan’s antisemitism to a catalogue of stereotypes and comedic tropes. Unfortunately, the film is one of Netflix’s top movies right now, leaving the door open for future films to treat extreme antisemitism as a comedic crutch.
Some content that addressed other issues with You People:
As cited earlier, Rendy Jones of Rendy Reviews wrote a review of the film that I’m a big fan of and one that I think makes great points about a variety of its other problematic themes.
CTV News’ Radheyan Simonpillai’s commentary on the movie touched on Hill’s character’s relationship with Black culture in the film, something I hadn’t seen discussed much.
Allison Josephs of Jew in the City’s now-viral review of You People looks at Jewish stereotypes in the film.