#full of conservative dogwhistles

[chrysaorthegolden]

my boss just said I look like someone who'd be into country

never been so offended tbh

[ceilidhtransing]

If you're eligible to vote in the upcoming UK general election, please for the love of god vote against the Tories

The 2024 Conservative manifesto is a total disaster for LGBTQ rights, particularly those of trans, nonbinary and intersex people.

A smattering of fun things they plan to do if elected:

Change the Equality Act such that the “sex” category only means “biological sex”, thus removing discrimination protections for trans and nonbinary people

Codify that an individual “can only have one sex in the eyes of the law”, denying nonbinary people the right to have their gender legally recognised

Force teachers to follow recent government guidance that bans discussion of gender identity in schools and outs gender-questioning kids to their parents

Ban gender-neutral healthcare terminology like “chest-feeding” or “birthing parent”

Legislate to permanently prevent the private prescription of puberty blockers for trans, nonbinary and questioning youth

That last one is a biggie. You read it right - they have already banned any new prescriptions for puberty blockers on the NHS; now they want to make it illegal to even access them privately, through services like GenderGP or YourGP or GenderCare or any other non-NHS provider. I'm sure I don't need to detail at length how devastating this would be to so many young people and their families.

And aside from these specific promises, this section of their manifesto is full of transphobic dogwhistles like “biological sex is a reality” and that a ban on conversion therapy is a “complex issue”.

So please, if you're eligible to vote on 4 July, go and vote against the Tories. No, I'm not saying you therefore “have to vote Labour”; there are plenty of valid reasons you might not want to vote for that party either, and you may well live in a constituency where Labour is not the primary competitor to the Conservatives anyway. But if you don't want to vote Labour - totally fair - at least go vote Liberal Democrat. Or Green. Or SNP. Or Plaid Cymru. Or something else that isn't this flaming binbag of rabid transphobes. I have a whole election masterpost pinned to the top of my blog that directs you to registering to vote, making sure you have the right ID, and finding out about anti-Tory tactical voting if that's something that you're interested in. If you're not already registered to vote, you have until midnight on 18 June to do so.

And I know that everyone is already saying with certainty that the Conservatives will face electoral wipeout this year. But it's a genuine risk that too many people will just take this for granted and not bother to vote because “the Tories aren't going to win anyway”, so they end up sneaking through with far more seats than expected because of crashingly low voter turnout. We can't just rest on our laurels here. Please do your small part to deny any more power to this hateful nightmare of a political party.

[butchbarbieagainstterfs]

More and more TERFs are going full mask off with their conservative, sexist views now.

It’s good you were able to make the choice to keep your daughter, Sarah. That doesn’t mean you should be the one to make that choice for other people.

“sHe ISn’T A rAdICaL—“ she literally has one of your dogwhistles in her bio, as I highlighted. These are the kind of people you are giving platforms to and who are in agreement with you. She’s also giving money to Elon fucking Musk.

Your so called feminism is fucking dog shit.

[longwindedbore]

**Hey Libertards**

Are you plagued by family/pastors/ co-workers calling Kamala dumb?

Arguing that, as males, or whites, or whatever dogwhistles, they are smarter than Kamala?

Do you ask yourself “Is there no way I can silence these dumbfukks?”

Here’s a simple and free way for you to have them examine the veracity of their dumbfukk assertions. Give them this link…

https://www.testprepreview.com/lsat_practice.htm

Kamala Harris at age 24 passed the time-limit version of this test. Then passed all of her classes in law school for the next three years. Then passed the California Bar exam.

The mission, if the Trumpers chose to accept it, is to pass this exam to demonstrate they are at least as smart as Kamala.

PSA: Some conservative males lack any emotional self-regulation. As satisfying as it might be to go to the loudest jackass with this challenge…the physically safest choice would be someone in their group they would accept as ‘clever’ at least.

Full disclosure: at age 24 I thought, “yea I’m smart. Why don’t I become an attorney?” (Some friends were making that choice).

Well…I was half way through when the time ran out. The part where you figured out how a judge would rule in a case - I got all examples wrong.

Kamal Harris is definitely not dumb. Certainly smarter than I am in how the legal system works.

As were those friends who later helped me with legal issues.

[redheadbigshoes]

Sorry, I am not calling names, you can go to any "bi lesbian positivity" blog and find plenty.

That being said, the post that I tried to use as a block list was about how "lgbts are trying to persuade lesbians into fucking men" is a transmisogynistic dogwhistle.

Honestly, that's not very PC of me, but it feels like there is an actual war over this line. Some of the popular lesbian bloggers are all about "trans women are cool" and then go on talking about how transitioning is misogynistic, how badly they want to fuck trans men, organize hate campaigns on trans women and only on trans women (I saw one post accusing a trans girl of fetishizing black people, went to her blog, and turns out that she leaves sexual remarks on every fucking post. Not saying that it's cool, but it's definitely a different thing, and of course notes were full with transmisogyny) and so on.

And the entire circle of transmisogyny bloggers seems to embrace the idea that excluding men from lesbianism is a TERF thing. Like, they say that "of course it's lesbophobic to imply that lesbians are TERFs" and then proceed to talk only about cis lesbians being transphobic or "transphobic". I am already blocked by some popular ones probably for disagreeing with one "bi lesbian".

Yeah it do be like that. "Bi lesbians" are not yet a thing where I live, but a) they will be soon, b) it's still full of bullshit. I don't ever want to go into irl spaces

I don’t think I’m mentally stable enough to search for “bi lesbian positivity” blogs lol I’ve probably blocked most of them or am blocked by most of them anyways.

You know what’s ironic? That 99% of “bi lesbians” also believe in transandrophobia and usually don’t care at all about transfems. They’re obviously only using transmisogyny to attack lesbians somehow.

Seriously people need to start being more clever. A lot of people see terms that involve any prejudice and they instantly believe the person who’s talking about that. “Lesbians not being attracted to men is transphobic” and they genuinely believe that without questions. This is not only frustrating, but also sad. It’s ironic because the mindset of “I’ll fully believe something without any explanation or proof” is such a conservative thing to do…

You ask them to explain why they think what they think and suddenly they have no arguments, at least no logical ones.

I think those lesbian blogs you’re talking about are mostly not owned by lesbians. If they’re attracted to men they either aren’t lesbians or they don’t see trans men as men.

If you try asking any of those people about why they think it’s terf rhetoric to exclude men from lesbianism prepare yourself for either the most stupid shit you will ever see or for absolute silence lol

Most of the time whenever I comer across either terf blogs, “bi lesbian” blogs or any of those kind of people I usually just block them because it’s worthless wasting your time with someone who clearly doesn’t want to actually listen, they just want attention and by wasting your time with them you’re giving them exactly what they want.

That’s why I usually only block them and move on by still posting the things I like to talk about and fight against prejudice in other ways besides joining discourses.

[qqueenofhades]

Fun fact that’s not actually fun at all: my grandparents had to go to Illinois to be married because Indiana wouldn’t marry them because one was Japanese and the other white.

See, this is why the argument for "states' rights!!!" is always just a thinly (VERY thinly) veiled dogwhistle for racism, misogyny, homophobia, etc. What do states want to have the "right" to regulate on their own? Slavery? Interracial marriage? Abortion? Gay marriage? Why do they think that the federal government has no right to universally legislate these things (that is, if it's a Democratic/liberal government; they're fine with full-on federal tyranny if it's from Republicans) and that their "right" to discriminate should be legally preserved? This goes all the way back to the arguments at the drafting of the Constitution in 1787 and the question of broad-reaching federalism vs. the "rights" of slave states, and the rickety compromise they had to put in to make it work at all, which obviously came to a head during the Civil War.

Likewise, "states' rights" are only the conservative argument until they're not. After all, two months after SCOTUS overturned Roe by arguing that abortion "should be left to the states," Senate Republicans introduced a NATIONAL abortion ban, which they tried to soften up by calling it a "late-term" ban. First of all, 15 weeks isn't "late" by any stretch of the imagination, and second, what happened to letting "the states decide?" Nah. Turns out that was only ever a lie meaning "states can do what they want only as long as it's exactly what we want them to do, and actually we love universally and draconically imposing our rules on everyone. Whoops."

[incarnateirony]

That tiny little silly RT misstep is a funny representation of them not realizing. Lu may be the real queen of the cult or whatever, the one a few dozen soldiers will literally run out the door to beat your ass over, but that's just it. There's dozens of soldiers and hundreds of crows, some are just quieter than others and will never attach themselves in view of where 2po can doxx them. I mean Kelios literally RAN INTO one of my agents at this con and never blinked. Full on body to body contact. Never knew. When I posted my NOT KELIOS IN THE FLOWERS IN THE IMPALA SHIRT.

If it's not a name they personally know and recognize, it's not safe for them, and they're going to realize that real quick. And frankly, a few dozen names they think they recognize and are safe for them are, quite literally, not, but that'll catch up in time.

Remember what I said about the new kids bringing new energy, new audience, new vibes? What was the reports about this con? Basically jib level energy all around, great vibes, great times, really full greets for new kids, adoration, and frankly direct person to person contact outside of ops the older stars walled the crazy away from long ago. I don't even know how many pictures lu went viral for basically chilling with miscellaneous casts in hallways or side rooms this con.

Those full greets, that energy shift scares these people. It's exactly what I warned them about. To put it in terms their conservative, dogwhistling, hysterical asses might understand, this is The Great Replacement, and the idea of their Silent Majority burned itself out years ago. (And they literally made a whole movement using that particular republican branding around S8, not even kidding.)

God I love the future.

[schraubd]

Why the GOP Can't Quite Quit Kanye and Co.

It's been a month and this tweet is still up:

Kanye. Elon. Trump.

— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) October 7, 2022

Why? Why, after spending countless hours railing against "Black antisemitism", is the GOP not interested in repudiating Kanye West?

At one level, the answer is obvious: As I talk about in my latest Haaretz column, the GOP has gone full Jeremy Corbyn this cycle, up to and including the antisemitism. The GOP won't condemn Kanye because the GOP is antisemitic.

At another level, the answer is still obvious: fair weather opposition to antisemitism is hardly a rare phenomenon, and the GOP has hardly shown much in the way of moral fortitude when it comes to denouncing hatred from their "side". The aforementioned "countless" hours attacking "Black antisemitism" were, as any half-awake political observer could tell you, not about genuine solidarity with Jews but a cynical way of living out the GOP's favorite hobby (trashing Black people).

But at still another level, there is something at least a little less obvious, and perhaps more provocative, that can be said. Namely: antisemitism may be a quick and easy way for the GOP to make inroads among Black voters. More than any other issue, antisemitism is a growth opportunity for the Republican Party.

Now I want to be absolutely clear: antisemitism is not a way to actually win a majority of Black voters, or anything close to it. Most Black voters are not antisemitic, most are not interested in antisemitism and are actively turned off by it.

However, the Republican Party doesn't need to win Black voters. It just needs to increase its margins from the currently abysmal levels to the merely horrible. Going from a 10% share to, say, a 25% share still objectively means they're getting absolutely crushed among Black voters -- but it also would make a huge difference in swing-y states like Georgia or Virginia.

So the operative question is not whether antisemitism is popular amongst Black voters, generally. The question is whether it is appealing to the particular tranche of Black voters who are most amenable to being picked off by GOP appeals. And there's good reason to believe the answer is yes. Or put differently: If you're a political strategist trying to flip even a few Black voters to the GOP, the small but not utterly trivial Black antisemites represent the lowest hanging fruit.

Kanye himself is evidence of this, of course, as is Candace Owens, recently spotted boosting far-left antisemite extraordinaire Max Blumenthal on their shared hatred of the ADL allegedly inventing contemporary antisemitism. Indeed, the dirty secret of contemporary data on antisemitism in the US is that there is a spike in minority communities -- but that spike is clustered along the most conservative tranche of the community. So it is entirely plausible that this subclass of Black voters -- likely the most natural target of conservative political appeals generally -- could be particularly attuned to emergent GOP rhetoric relying on antisemitic dogwhistles about Soros, about "globalists", about the ADL, and so on.

When one thinks about it, this isn't really anything unique to African-Americans. Similar dynamics are also playing out in Latino communities, for similar reasons. And if it weren't for the fact that White antisemites already vote overwhelmingly GOP, this strategy would work on them too (indeed, such appeals probably are part of what makes the antisemitic alt-left -- including folks like Max Blumenthal or Jimmy Dore -- at least MAGA curious). Antisemitism appeals to conservatives, and that includes conservatives who -- for either idiosyncratic personal or communal historical reasons -- haven't voted Republican in the past. It so happens that in the Black community that there are more conservative individuals who haven't voted Republican, but the underlying dynamic is little more complex than "conservatives are attracted to antisemitism."

So this perhaps completes the answer of why the GOP can't quite quit Kanye and company. It's not just or exactly that they agree with him, or even pure partisan tribalism. Kanye is symbolic of a particular political opportunity conservatives have to win over, not the majority of Black voters or even a sizeable minority, but a large enough cohort of the most conservative group members.  Kanye represents an incredibly tempting future where the GOP again does not "win the Black vote" or come anywhere close to doing so, but does grab an additional 10% or so that might make all the difference in some crucial races. But the point is that, in terms of that opportunity's content, antisemitism is not just an unfortunate hanger-on. It is central to the appeal.

via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/5q1iAtm

[platonicfrendswithsocrates]

bro why tf is my for you page full of conservative dogwhistling bootlickers??? tumblr algorithm i will never support israeli fascism idk why you’re even trying.

[tealovingmutt]

that country guy singing video about rich men or whatever is full of conservative dogwhistles and blatant fatphobia and wasted posted by a blog that talks about antisemitic shit like "the new world order"

my bad on that, I deleted the post

[ilhoonftw]

sloan is a fully unethical journalist cosplayer who cares about profit way more than fact checking... he has history of using dogwhistles, seeing demons everywhere, alleging celebs do "rituals". ofc he milked the 'miley cyrus is in a cult' story when it has been debunked by the 'anti self care scammer' side of youtube. his podcast is horrible like that man is unable to ask decent questions and control the flow. he went from gossip channel to 'please pray for my safety as i report about dangerous stuff'??? dude could be on someone's payroll while faking being independent and you wouldn't know. no shit it's easier to clickbait made up human sacrifice bullshit than report on things that matter, like tax evasion or ppt loan fraud. no way in hell he's able to do enough research for each video as he posts like daily. 'oh he went mask off when he promoted that awful conservative movie recently' he was always like that. he wasn't subtle about it ever. his comment section is full of weirdos. like if your audience overlaps with certain demographic then you have a problem, you need to look into what you are doing and stop doing it. do you really think he cares about those people he reports on beyond 'oh this news will get clicks!'. especially his britney videos are gross, i don't understand how he keeps saying he supports her while he keeps on using the same ableist arguments on why she's not "okay"... let her live. she's not bothering anyone. oh and sloan uses tmz as a source when tmz keeps getting paid by britney's ex handlers to "break stories" that defame her

[rainsnires]

tfw you find an absolute BANGER (zombified) by a band you like (nothing more) but then you read the lyrics and the song is full of the horrors (four hundred thousand conservative dogwhistles)

[babybsweettea]

Interesting story from when I was talking to a new-ish friend I made through music production last night.

He’s a very christian dude, as is his girlfriend. We were talking on discord, and I mentioned how I hadn’t really seen much of Lil Nas X being promoted since his album drop. I was alluding to what the reasons for that may be (black queer artist), when they both very confidently said it’s because he “used his political identity as a marketing ploy.” As outwardly insane and full of dogwhistles as that statement was, I wasn’t going to get anywhere just calling it out so I asked for more information, about what they felt was political about Nas where other artists aren’t, and what “agenda” they felt was being pushed (for context, my friend’s girlfriend has an 8 year old).

She said she wanted the opportunity to “introduce those kinds of things to her daughter at her own pace” so she would “not be swayed one way or the other.” I asked what kind of content would be attempting to “sway” her one way or the other, and she immediately went to drag queen storytime and the concept of strippers comings to schools (with no real examples, just what she said). I then asked her if she felt that artists like Ice Spice, The Weeknd, or really any other number of artists in the same space as Lil Nas X would be “swaying” or “political” in their eyes, and at that point they said yes, and that ANYTHING that showed romance or sexuality was the problem.

Okay, fine, new stance. Continuing, I asked for some of the shows and artists that the daughter was into. The answers weren’t super uncommon; Frozen, Aladdin, Finding Nemo (and a few others I can’t remember at the moment), and I expressed to her that all of these depict heterosexual relationships as a default norm. They kind of waffled for a bit about it being “different” (I wasn’t able to pin them down on what they meant but it wasn’t productive to ask the same thing over and over again), so I tried to switch to an angle of what kind of impact they think these kinds of expectations from cultural media have on kids. Immediately, they start talking about a cousin who they all know is gay but came from a religious and homophobic upbringing and will never come out. I told them about how that can feel from my own homophobic and religious upbringing; about how even KNOWING that things like bisexuality and being transgender were options helped me so much in coming to terms with who I am, what conversion therapy is like (been twice personally), that kind of conversation.

At this point, my friend circled back to Lil Nas X, and started questioning the demonic imagery and how that’s “supposed to accomplish anything” as he’s a very serious christian and takes that kind of thing seriously. I’d like to point out that he and I both run a Guild called “Highway to Fel” in world of warcraft so it seems the demonic imagery you take issue with is sort of a pick and choose mentality, but I digress. He then started talking about tweets where he felt Nas had openly talked about how he used his sexuality as a marketing ploy. I found the tweets:

And tried to explain that they’re very clearly jokes he’s making ABOUT people who think that it’s just a marketing or “agenda” ploy. From there the conversation kind of spiralled into other things and I figured at that second it’d be best to table it and try to chip away later when it was relevant and they had sat with the information for longer.

All this rambling to say: Sometimes being nice and understanding doesn’t actually work! If this was someone I was less familiar with, I think I would have been far more blunt in my questioning. This ALSO shows an incresibly clear link between “sex bad” and “being queer is bad” wherein conservatives will just happily ignore any heterosexuality in media to pretend they’re consistent. It’s also also a reminder than people YOU KNOW, real flesh and blood people, are scared of pentagrams and 666!!

[luvvsbian]

if you don’t live in canada, just know that this election season is wild

[jewish-privilege]

(...)

I was a 12 years old when I was attacked by a mob of children and called "Christ killer" — the same age Jesus was, according to the Gospel of Luke, when he lingered in the Temple of Jerusalem and impressed the elders with his intellect — so this issue is undeniably personal. That wasn't the first or last time I was bullied for being Jewish, but it was the only time I nearly died because of it: Those kids held my head underwater, chanting, "Drown the Jew!"

This incident sprang back to mind  this month as Republicans tried to figure out what to do about Greene, a particularly obnoxious Christian right-winger who has suggested that a "space laser" affiliated with Jewish banking families caused the 2018 Camp Fire in California, expressed sympathy for the anti-Semitic QAnon fantasies, promoted a video that claimed Jews are trying to destroy Europe, posed for a picture with a Ku Klux Klan leader and liked a tweet linking Israel to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

(...)

None of this is surprising for anyone who is familiar with the history of American anti-Semitism. Greene is not an aberration, some inexplicable pimple of hatred that blemishes the American right's otherwise Jew-friendly visage. The American right has long had an anti-Semitism problem, and she's just the latest symptom.

This history of hatred "tells us much more about the anti-Semite than it tells us about Jews," Dr. Jonathan Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, told Salon. After citing an Israeli historian who refers to anti-Semitism as a "cultural code," Sarna explained that beliefs that vilify Jews as malevolent plotters who secretly control the world have a long history in American political life. "These ideas, which I think many on the left frankly had thought were done and over with, we suddenly see them full blown," he said

Before the 19th century, Sarna explained Jews were stereotypically depicted as being cursed: They were "wandering Jews" for their supposed role in killing Jesus Christ. In the modern era, however, the stereotype emerged that Jews secretly controlled the world and were responsible for everything that a given anti-Semite might regard as sinister. During the Civil War, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant blamed the Jews for cotton smuggling and expelled the entire Jewish community from areas he controlled in Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi. When the populist movement arose to address agrarian economic concerns in the 1890s, Jewish bankers like the Rothschilds were a frequent target among ideological leaders like William Hope "Coin" Harvey.

(...)

There's a direct line between those conspiratorial fantasies ideas from previous decades and the anti-Semitic attacks of the 21st century. "Conspiratorial thinking, by its nature, argues that everything is connected," Sarna explained. "There are no coincidences and it eschews complexity. It believes there are simple explanations based on sinister individuals who are manipulating the universe. Unsurprisingly, in a Christian setting, those are Jews."

Those ideas can evolve — Sarna pointed out that the QAnon belief in a giant child abuse ring run by Jews is analogous to the "blood libel," the medieval myth that Jews used the blood of Christian children for rituals — but the underlying assumptions have been consistent. It just so happens that, in the modern right-wing incarnation, Donald Trump's cult-like following believes that "all the enemies of Mr. Trump are now child molesters."

(...)

[Jewish comedian Larry Charles] brought up community organizer and political theorist Saul Alinsky, a favorite target of the right. "He is almost like the devil in a way," Charles observed. "He's like this radical leftist Jew, he fits all the categories. He checks all the boxes."

"Shooting some of these movies, we would see reasonable people who have this blind spot," Charles said. "They have this crazy belief, and there were all different applications and manifestations of it, that the Jews control everything. That is like a mantra amongst a certain segment of the population."

(...)

With the election of Trump in 2016, those ingrained belief systems — which for many years had been kept outside the American political mainstream — became more prominent, and their adherents more emboldened. David Weissman, a military veteran and former conservative Republican who stopped being a self-described "Trump troll" after a 2018 conversation with comedian Sarah Silverman, told Salon about his encounters with anti-Semitism on the right.

Back when he still supported Trump, Weissman recalled, he got into a "little spat" with an alt-right commentator who calls himself Baked Alaska, who was recently arrested after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Ultimately they moved past it, Weissman said: "We both realized we were Trump supporters" who believed "Democrats were the bad guys." Once he left MAGA world, however, Weissman said "the anti-Semitism definitely escalated" in interactions with his former allies.

"When I became a Democrat, I was called 'the k-word'" and targeted by "anti-Semitic slurs and tropes," Weissman said. Trump supporters sent "memes of me being Jewish in the oven," and "put my name in parentheses," a common tactic used by the far right to target someone for being Jewish.

(...)

"Anti-Semitism certainly did not start with Marjorie Taylor Greene, nor did it start with Donald Trump, but we have seen an exponential increase in violent anti-Semitic incidents during Donald Trump's presidency," Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, told Salon. "That is no doubt related to the fact that he emboldened and aligned himself with white nationalism." She mentioned Trump equating the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville with the peaceful protesters by "commenting that there were very fine people on both sides," refusing to denounce white nationalism and telling the right-wing Proud Boys during one of the campaign debates to "stand back and stand by."

"White nationalism had existed in our country prior to that, and anti-Semitism as an element of it, but white nationalists had never had an ally in the White House until Donald Trump," Soifer said.

(...)

Donald Trump's supposed pro-Israel policies were closely aligned with those of Benjamin Netanyahu, and did nothing to correct for Trump's history of anti-Semitic words and actions. He accused Jewish Democrats of "great disloyalty" toward Israel (feeding into the stereotype that Jews have dual loyalties), removed any specific reference to Jews from a 2017 State Department statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day and has frequently used anti-Semitic dogwhistle terms by opposing "globalists" and describing himself as a "nationalist." When I interviewed Charlotte Pence, the daughter of former Vice President Mike Pence, she talked about her family's love of Israel but refused to answer a question about whether she believes Jews are going to hell — or discuss the creepy messianic theories underpinning the Christian right's support for Israel.

When I asked Larry Charles whether, based on his experiences, there's an opportunity to build bridges with anti-Semites, he was skeptical. "I have not seen a lot of opportunities for bridge building in the situations that I've been in," Charles explained. "The people that I've met through Sacha [Baron Cohen] were very rigid and dogmatic in their prejudices. There was no crossing that gulf with them. There might be tolerance, temporarily. There might be patience, temporarily. But there's no changing that belief."

I hope that Charles is wrong but suspect he is right, which raises the question of how American Jews should react to the Marjorie Taylor Greenes of the world. For want of a better alternative, I think the only solution is to be intolerant toward intolerance. House Democrats were right to strip Greene of her committee assignments, but that is not nearly enough. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter need to do more to limit hate speech, even if conservatives cry foul in bad faith (the First Amendment only protects people from government censorship, not consequences from private corporations). Right-wing politicians who attack prominent Jews in ways that can be plausibly construed as anti-Semitic, or by denouncing "globalists," need to lose their funding. People who oppose anti-Semitism must lead boycotts against right-wing media figures who cover for people like Greene, such as Fox News' Sean Hannity.

On a broader level, critics of anti-Semitism must recognize that this form of bigotry is part of America's long history of hate — a history which holds that only white, straight Christian "manly" men have a right to rule — and recognize our responsibility to be allies to African Americans and the Latinx community, Muslims and the LGBT community, women suffering under the patriarchy and the poor struggling to make ends meet. If we limit our empathy merely to other Jews, the implicit message is not that systemic oppression is wrong, but only that we happen to dislike it when our group is targeted. The Jewish tradition at its best instills a moral responsibility to see all the layers of oppression, and align ourselves with its victims.

[Read Matthew Rozsa’s full piece in Salon]

[fireolin]

Can we please get this election over with? The campaign only started last week, and its full of toxic transphobic dog-whistling that I've never seen in an Australian federal election campaign before. Every day there's some new mainstream press article over a trans exclusionary candidate that our PM hand-picked for the seat of Warringah in NSW. The idea, apparently, is that while she won't win that seat, the dogwhistle will gain party votes in more conservative areas in Western Sydney. She's been forced to apologise for her extreme language, but has gained massive publicity for her views.

Meanwhile issues like the government's refusal to establish an anti-corruption commission (which they promised) and their numerous failures in practically every area in the last three years, go undiscussed.