An important step on any path to unity is a requirement that we all believe that the inherent value of human life does not vary by national origin. Demanding that our politicians do better, and stop misusing language in this consistent pattern to minimize perceived suffering of The Other - that’s unity. “Israeli families” vs. “the people of Gaza” - isn’t it self-evident, that is the wedge? Once you know to look for it, you see it used everywhere.
I don’t want unity with people who aren’t willing to make the above commitment. When demanding just minimal lip service to such an ideal from a public figure is “driving a wedge”, I think you have some serious soul searching to do.
If you’re not aware of the subtle but pervasive linguistic technique here, you need to educate yourself. The supposed sympathetic party is always described in human-sounding terms, the supposed adversary is always dehumanized, using sterile language. And it works, it nudges those who don’t think very critically into framing their subconscious opinions that way.
Your personal reaction to one incident of such isn’t very relevant. It’s a thing and it’s nasty.
“Families” is absolutely more warm and human than “people” and while I see what you’re saying that “people of Gaza” could be interpreted as more inclusive than saying “Gazan families”, that would be an excessively literal reading, it is really not what’s going on here.
Again, this is just one instance of a consistent pattern among media and public figures in general. Not interested in splitting hairs with you over your personal interpretation of the one specific phrase. It’s like a dog whistle, once you know what it sounds like, you can hear it, but it will escape your notice until you learn about it.
Obama has never been an ally considering how many innocent families he’s responsible for bombing and has never done anything to even hint at remorse for those actions. He got a damn Nobel Peace Prize for doing so.
But IS HE an ally if he deliberately chooses to use this dehumanizing language for the victims of a brutal genocide? If he’s not allied with the victims, who the fuck is he allied with?
He was a lot less shitty than alternatives, and I do think he’s got plenty of redeeming qualities. And that’s not enough, he’s no ally if he dehumanizes suffering victims, and many of us have fucking had it making excuses for nasty shit we can’t tolerate.
Obama isn’t some good guy. Deportations under him were VERY active, for one thing. Telling him to do better isn’t driving a wedge, it’s begging the few people we have closest to our side to actually commit. But he won’t, he’ll stay who he is, just yet another member of the abusive power class. Admittedly better than most of his colleagues.
An important step on any path to unity is a requirement that we all believe that the inherent value of human life does not vary by national origin. Demanding that our politicians do better, and stop misusing language in this consistent pattern to minimize perceived suffering of The Other - that’s unity. “Israeli families” vs. “the people of Gaza” - isn’t it self-evident, that is the wedge? Once you know to look for it, you see it used everywhere.
I don’t want unity with people who aren’t willing to make the above commitment. When demanding just minimal lip service to such an ideal from a public figure is “driving a wedge”, I think you have some serious soul searching to do.
For me it felt like the exact opposite of your take.
The people of Gaza is everyone in Gaza.
“Israeli families” feels more limited.
If you’re not aware of the subtle but pervasive linguistic technique here, you need to educate yourself. The supposed sympathetic party is always described in human-sounding terms, the supposed adversary is always dehumanized, using sterile language. And it works, it nudges those who don’t think very critically into framing their subconscious opinions that way.
Your personal reaction to one incident of such isn’t very relevant. It’s a thing and it’s nasty.
You think “people” somehow doesn’t sound human?
“Families” is absolutely more warm and human than “people” and while I see what you’re saying that “people of Gaza” could be interpreted as more inclusive than saying “Gazan families”, that would be an excessively literal reading, it is really not what’s going on here.
Again, this is just one instance of a consistent pattern among media and public figures in general. Not interested in splitting hairs with you over your personal interpretation of the one specific phrase. It’s like a dog whistle, once you know what it sounds like, you can hear it, but it will escape your notice until you learn about it.
It’s driving a wedge by calling Obama an Uncle Tom, in an effort to other an otherwise ally.
The post here, this com, not what Ms. Rachel said.
Obama is not an ally, fucking duh
Obama has never been an ally considering how many innocent families he’s responsible for bombing and has never done anything to even hint at remorse for those actions. He got a damn Nobel Peace Prize for doing so.
But IS HE an ally if he deliberately chooses to use this dehumanizing language for the victims of a brutal genocide? If he’s not allied with the victims, who the fuck is he allied with?
He was a lot less shitty than alternatives, and I do think he’s got plenty of redeeming qualities. And that’s not enough, he’s no ally if he dehumanizes suffering victims, and many of us have fucking had it making excuses for nasty shit we can’t tolerate.
Obama isn’t some good guy. Deportations under him were VERY active, for one thing. Telling him to do better isn’t driving a wedge, it’s begging the few people we have closest to our side to actually commit. But he won’t, he’ll stay who he is, just yet another member of the abusive power class. Admittedly better than most of his colleagues.