Reported for "Cabal" being an anti-Semitic dog whistle, which it can be:
https://www.ajc.org/translatehate/cabal
But that doesn't appear to be the use case here.
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
87 points (86.6% liked)
politics
19116 readers
3788 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It does appear to be the case. This article is peppered excessively with antisemitic dog whistles. One or two could be a coincidence but this is something else entirely.
- "Cabal"
- "billionaire class"
- "Santa Claus" (depicting a literal war on Christmas)
- "imaginary surge in “campus antisemitism.”"
The entire premise of the article is that evil Zionists sabotaged the American left and manipulated the election, which is itself an antisemitic trope.
The whole point of using dog whistles is to create a sort of plausible deniability. I'm sorry, but in this case it seems like they slipped one by you.
Whenever these kinds of reports come in, I always just assume it’s bad actors who know full well that in context the word being used is perfectly innocent, but they want to muddy the waters.
From your own link it's not an inherently antisemitic word, nor is it often used that way. On top of this, I wouldn't trust a genocidal hate group to define words properly. Get a better source.
Thumbnail has the same energy
Exactly the same picture.
From the Article
Many of the purge’s casualties were honorable Americans whose revulsion toward the genocide of the Palestinian people had professional costs. The first publicized victim came on October 8, 2023, when Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant announced he was cutting off all food, fuel, and electricity to the “human animals” of Gaza, and a website owned by the daughter of a centimillionaire New Jersey developer fired its NBA blogger for posting, “Solidarity with Palestine always.”
On social media and group chats, the billionaires raised funds to hire a private detective team to assist the NYPD crackdown on pro-Palestine protesters and reward the gang of thugs who violently attacked peaceful protesters at UCLA with sticks, clubs, chemical sprays, and a backpack full of poisoned mice. International humanitarian organizations with operations in Gaza suffered as well, with the World Food Program reporting a near halving of its fundraising haul in 2023; a colleague who works in fundraising for UNICEF told me the group’s most loyal mega-donors would not touch “anything Gaza” with a ten-foot pole.
This was nominally about Israel, but it also always seemed obvious that it wasn’t principally about Israel at all. At its heart, the billionaire revolt was the expression of a broader dissatisfaction with Joe Biden that was most surely rooted in the real, substantial, and (in the post–Cold War neoliberal era) unprecedented things his administration was quietly (too quietly!) doing for working people, small-business owners, and the proliferating subsistence entrepreneur class that falls somewhere in the middle. It sued Amazon for squeezing sellers to the bone while manipulating prices ever higher, Albertsons and Kroger for conspiring to gouge shoppers by littering the country with dead strip centers where supermarkets once stood, Live Nation for indenturing a generation of young musicians and turning tickets to concerts and sports events into luxury goods, Welsh Carson (the most powerful private equity firm in health care) for gouging hospital patients and suppressing the wages of anesthesiologists in multiple states, and more. It even got a court to label Google a monopolist.
This stuff was extremely popular, and Democratic leaders never talked about it, likely because it pissed off the donor class—which is of course the very reason they should have been talking about nothing else.
Also they weren't very careful with that donor money. They could afford to lose it, if they'd cut spending on various kinds of stupid advertising. Half the media would turn against them, but that'd have upsides too - in the exact area of swaying Trump votes, both those voting contrarian and those voting for destructive change.
The Harris campaign made the decision to not break from Biden on Israel, at the cost of a +6 points gain. That's the fault of the campaign's calculations to ignore those voters, take them for granted, and instead run to the right with Liz Cheney and having the most lethal Military.
I voted for Harris and told others to do the same. It's still on the campaign. Blaming voters is just sowing division when we need unity and solidarity to fight against Fascism.
Quote
Our first matchup tested a Democrat and a Republican who “both agree with Israel’s current approach to the conflict in Gaza”. In this case, the generic candidates tied 44–44. The second matchup saw the same Republican facing a Democrat supporting “an immediate ceasefire and a halt of military aid and arms sales to Israel”. Interestingly, the Democrat led 49–43, with Independents and 2020 non-voters driving the bulk of this shift.
- Split Ticket (July 2024)
Quotes
In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withhold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they’d be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they’d be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely.
- New Poll Suggests Gaza Ceasefire and Arms Embargo Would Help Dems with Swing State Voters (Full YouGov Report) (May 2024)
Quotes
- Data For Progress Poll (May 2024)
Quotes
Quotes
Majorities of Democrats (67%) and Independents (55%) believe the US should either end support for Israel’s war effort or make that support conditional on a ceasefire. Only 8% of Democrats but 42% of Republicans think the US must support Israel unconditionally.
Republicans and Independents most often point to immigration as one of Biden’s top foreign policy failures. Democrats most often select the US response to the war in Gaza.
This is exactly why dems are just as bad. They chose a genocide over winning. Now they're congratulating Trump and inviting him over for dinner, etc. Fascists can't maintain power when people actually resist, but allies don't resist.
She didn't choose a genocide, Harris repeatedly called for a cease-fire. Trump, on the other hand, encouraged Benny to wipe Hamas out.
I am copying a reply I made to another post:
…no.
The DNC brain trust thought they could get away with ignoring an absolutely fucking HUGE part of their base. And they were fucking WRECKED for it.
Trump got just about the same number of votes as he did in the last election. Harris got 11M less votes than Biden got. ELEVEN. MILLION. PEOPLE. STAYED THE FUCK HOME. BECAUSE THEY SAW THE ESTABLISHMENT CIRCLEJERK. AND HARRIS FUCKING LEANED INTO IT. AND IGNORED THE VERY FUCKING REAL LIVED EXPERIENCE OF THE MIDDLE CLASS GETTING HOLLOWED OUT, AND THE LOWER CLASS CONTINUING TO GET CRUSHED TO DEATH.
And now we get to listen to pundits and DNC leadership and Biden admin people and Harris campaign people circlejerk themselves about how it wasn’t their fault, it was those goddamn progressives and the stupid Arab Americans who cared about Gaza too much.
Genuinely: fuck all the way off with that narrative. the Democratic Party snatched this defeat from the jaws of victory. There was a path to victory. They simply didn’t fucking take it.
I don't like the phrasing here. The Democratic party could have done better. They weren't forced not to. They chose to support genocide, they chose to run a dementia patient, they chose to appoint a wildly unpopular candidate, they chose to appeal to the center right, and they chose to run without clear economic policies. I genuinely believe they could have won while still supporting genocide if they didn't do everything so awfully. I mean seriously, the Cheneys? Ffs
This is severe cope. The democrats are not being controlled by big money they are big money, they chose this and failed us. We don't need to continue apologizing for them and pretending they have our best interest at heart. We need to abandon them just as they abandoned us here.