Synagogue Shooting in Pittsburgh

[Goodfella]

Goodfella, I see. Still, it isn't very logical to attack someone just because they help refugees and are Jewish. The synagogue still probably had nothing to do with funding the caravan, and he had no evidence of it.

Quite true. I was just fact-checking.

 

[Stewniversity]

Birdjaguar: Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to say they don't listen to him anymore either. They now consider Alex Jones someone who says obviously false things that are shocking to get attention.

Goodfella: That's good, I missed that when I read their page. Thanks for checking!

 

[Lexicus]

Lexicus, peddling George Soros conspiracy theories is not anti-Jew, it's anti-George Soros

No, it's anti-Jew. Period.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm not sure there is going to be real hay to be made over this recent 'anti-Soros is anti-jew' thing. But I've been using a different tack, where Soros is the liberal equivalent of the Koch (Charles Koch is 6x richer than Soros, even). Anti-jew is better reserved for hatred of the FED, and you can easily get people to look into how Soros was able to insanely profit from countries that tried to peg their dollars. I use 'Soros' to get the gold-bugs to shut up.

But we'll see in the longer run. I've never seen anyone really accept the Soros=Jew thing who wasn't already anti-Trump. It's not a wasted effort, but I don't know if it is going to be worth putting time into.

with luck, Trump et al will have/is destroyed the Republican party/brand for a decade or more.

You'll need more than luck. The centrist American isn't really resisting what Trump is doing sufficiently.

I'm well-into the camp of 'with luck, there will be a viable Democratic Party' in the next decade. Like, we'll be lucky if that happens.

 

[Lexicus]

But we'll see in the longer run. I've never seen anyone really accept the Soros=Jew thing who wasn't already anti-Trump. It's not a wasted effort, but I don't know if it is going to be worth putting time into.

This is about recognizing antisemitism, not Trump.

 

[Arwon]

The Soros conspiracy theory is literally the latest version of an old anti Semitic trope. Many eras of visible anti-Semitism have a figurehead evil rich Jew pulling the strings, be it a Rothschild, Max Warburg, whatever. Others just settle for making socialism a Jewish conspiracy instead.

The mainstreaming of what was originally a fascist canard, one that's been peddled for years, doesn't change its origins. Recycling stuff the Daily Stormer has been pushing for a decade or more doesn't stop that claim from being a nazi dog whistle. It just makes the more mainstream regurgitators of the conspiracy theory into accomplices and dupes of the far right.

And if "nobody who supports Trump" will accept the nazi origins of their anti Semitic conspiracy theory, then that literally just cements them as, at the very least, entirely comfortable with being fellow travelers helping to promote anti-Semitism and strengthen the far right.

But then, we already knew that degree of comfort was a thing. There is, at this point, a well worn path by which nazi conspiracy theories and propaganda work their way into the rightmost elements of the political mainstream.

It's why literal neonazis can get an uncritical airing on cable news, why government senators in Australia can vote to support a motion condemning anti-white racism and affirming that "it's okay to be white". It's why old concocted nonsense like "the genocide of white farmers in South Africa" is getting a run with Fox and Trump.

 

[Berzerker]

No, it's anti-Jew. Period.

So when MSNBC tells us about the evil Sheldon Adelson they're anti-Jew PERIOD?

 

[Lexicus]

So when MSNBC tells us about the evil Sheldon Adelson they're anti-Jew PERIOD?

"I don't like Sheldon Adelson because he funds a variety of political causes I find objectionable" is not "peddling conspiracy theories about Sheldon Adelson".

Similarly, "I don't like George Soros because he funds a variety of political causes I find objectionable" is not "peddling conspiracy theories about George Soros".

 

[Berzerker]

When MSNBC hosts are on the air telling us about his unlikable politics they're doing it while peddling 'news' about him. The fact he's a Jew is irrelevant, if he was funding the Dems MSNBC would defend him. Thats a double standard - when Republicans criticize Soros its anti-semitic but when Democrats criticize Adelson its politics. Its politics in both cases, if Soros was funding the GOP he'd be worshiped on Fox News.

 

[Lexicus]

Thats a double standard - when Republicans criticize Soros its anti-semitic but when Democrats criticize Adelson its politics.

Different things are different

 

[Arwon]

For one thing, nobody in Australia accuses Sheldon Adelson, whoever he is, of funding and controlling activist groups and politicians. Whereas a senior government senator has in fact done that with Soros.

 

[Berzerker]

Different things are different

How are they different? Fox condemns Soros and MSNBC condemns Adelson, neither care that they're Jews. If Soros was funding the GOP Fox would love him and you'd be criticizing him.

For one thing, nobody in Australia accuses Sheldon Adelson, whoever he is, of funding and controlling activist groups and politicians. Whereas a senior government senator has in fact done that with Soros.

Here he's accused of various malfeasance because he funds the GOP

 

[Timsup2nothin]

How are they different? Fox condemns Soros and MSNBC condemns Adelson, neither care that they're Jews. If Soros was funding the GOP Fox would love him and you'd be criticizing him.

Maybe at the MSNBC/FOX level there isn't a lot of difference. Both are accused there, accurately, of using their wealth to influence politicians. But in the right wing echo chamber Soros is depicted as an evil anti-patriot bent on the economic destruction of America. Since they continuously harp on how he can't be locked up, or even investigated, because of his evil minions they create an atmosphere where killing him as an act of group self preservation seems the only recourse. There is little reason for a would be assassin who took out Soros to think that he wouldn't be hailed as a hero on Breitbarf, NewsMaxx, and The Daily (name) Caller and they are far more circumspect about things like that than other platforms out on the fringes.

 

[Arwon]

My point is only one of these people, the one I've actually heard of, is constantly vilified as the head of the new version of the global Rothschild Jewish banking conspiracy theory, in ways that started with nazis a decade ago but have now found their way to mainstream media, the president of the United States, and government figures in Australia.

 

[El_Machinae]

This is about recognizing antisemitism, not Trump.

That's fair. But I'm talkin practicality, I am paying attention as to whether anybody is influenced by the association of calling someone who is anti-Soros an anti-semite.

I'm not saying that it's pointless to try to make the association. It might work. But I'm skeptical that it will influence the center

The right-wing has been complaining about Soros for a while, mainly because Soros has been screaming about how terrible unfettered capitalism is for quite a while. I usually use Soros, as I said, to create wiggle room in the mind space of the gold standard Folk.

When I notice deliberate anti-Semitism in the right wing coalition, it's usually people that are against the Fed. It's such a weird Coalition, because a large portion of the evangelicals implicitly believe that the Jews are God's chosen people

 

[Arwon]

Sheldon Adelson is one of the richest persons in the United States.
Self-made, owns a whole lot of real estate in Vegas and Macau.
He's villified by the American left for funding all manner of corporate Republicans.

I actually consider you not having heard of him a fluke. I mean... you have heard of the Koch brothers and they are not active in Australian politics, are they?

I have heard of David Koch primarily because he shares his name with a media and football figure here, and gets spillover tweets from him as a result. Our bloke is actually a bit fash himself (once advocated reversing the burden of proof for terrorism suspects) but that's probably beside the point.

At the end of the day, the specific rich people backing the right wing party probably aren't terribly noteworthy in their own right. Billionaires backing self interest? It's all a bit dog bites man.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Sheldon Adelson is one of the richest persons in the United States.
Self-made, owns a whole lot of real estate in Vegas and Macau.

There is no such thing as a self-made billionaire.
If you amass this kind of wealth it means you haven't payed your employees enough.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

There is no such thing as a self-made billionaire.
If you amass this kind of wealth it means you haven't payed your employees enough.

Michael Jordan?

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Michael Jordan?

Is he billionaire ?
He's put his name on shoes, right ?
Does he make those shoes himself ?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Is he billionaire ?
He's put his name on shoes, right ?
Does he make those shoes himself ?

Yes, he is.
No, other people pay him so they can put his name on shoes.
No, the same people who pay him also pay other people to make the shoes. He does not employ any shoe makers, underpaid or otherwise.

I'll grant that he is a rare, perhaps unique, example, but for the most part he hasn't had much in the way of employees to pay so his accumulation of wealth does not result from underpaying them. Outside of sports I'm sure your assessment is probably accurate.