In 1981, RNC committeeman gave an interview describing the evolution of race-based appeals in which he said:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can't say “nigger” — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”A similar process happened in the anti-Israel appeals for support. From the start of the Palestinian national movement in the 1920's at least until the riots following the UN Partition vote, the refrain of those opposing the rise of Israel was
Filastin bladnaIn English,
W'al yahud klabna
Palestine is our landBy the 1960's, the Arabs started to recognize that explicit expressions of Jew-hatred were counterproductive. So they started making appeals based on addressing the Palestinians' dispossession. By the 21st century, the message morphed again into saying that all that is needed is enforcement of international law. Essentially, calling for adherence to international law is more abstract than calling for alleviation of the Palestinians' "dispossession" which is more abstract than calling the Jews dogs.
and the Jew is our dog
Why is it that the Left can easily recognize the Right's racially coded dog-whistles beneath the facade of neutral sounding language, but see nothing wrong when the Arabs' advocates use the same tactic of dog-whistle appeals to Jew-hatred couched in the noble language of international law? That is what we need to call them out on.
Brilliant insight.
ReplyDeleteI hope that I will have more to say later.
When trying to bring up the standard fare dog-whistle BS when it comes to Jews, many on the left don't want to listen. Because it goes against their "poor palestinian mantra".
ReplyDeleteThe left employ dog whistle politics all the time. They use it more than anyone.
ReplyDeleteThey like to hallucinate racism in any thing or anyone that is even vaguely critical of their position. It's not that they don't recognise the inherent racism in the Arab's advocates' language, it's that they are fine with it. They use the same coded language themselves.
Obama: "Donors or others.."
The left have access to the internet. They can check out the MEMRI archive anytime they want. Maybe they do. Who knows. What we do know is that no broadcaster or mainstream news outlet has thought it might be helpful for the general population to be exposed to that material. Ever. They are choosing this.You can't call people out on what they don't feel is wrong.
Great post !
ReplyDeleteWith "friends" like David Harris Gershon who needs enemies....
DeleteTwo meanings in this cartoon, guess why I'm mad
And of course there is a comment for me there as a previous cartoon like this set me off.
They think it's funny I found the first cartoon offensive