J. D. Vance: “Alvin Bragg is bought by George Soros."
Donald Trump: "George Soros’ hand-picked and funded Manhattan DA"
Ted Cruz: "the Soros-funded Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg."
We get the point.
Guest Post author John Shutkin says there are two points. There is the denoted one, plus the subtext. The denoted one gives plausible deniability for the subtext. The overt purpose is to de-legitimize the indictment of Trump. The subtext is to tickle a suspicion and fear that remains deep in cultural memory.
"George Soros" is code. It is like a watermark on bond paper, there but not-there. Maybe there is a hidden plan to destroy Trump, led by global financiers. Maybe secret conspiracies are going on amidst us, pretending to be benign, but actually pathogens. Like tapeworms. Or termites. Or rats. Jews.
If someone outright said "Jews are tapeworms" most Americans would recoil. Some things need to be said indirectly. The people who like hearing it, hear it. The people who are offended by it don't hear it, or they hear it and dismiss it as just their imagination.
 |
| John Shutkin and wife, Kathie |
John Shutkin was a college classmate, shown here at a college football game. He is a retired corporate attorney who finished his career as General Counsel for two international accounting firms.
Guest Post by John Shutkin
I am a “cultural Jew” at best. No religious training, no Bar Mitzvah, and if I attend any religious service at all, it is likely to be an ecumenical Unitarian service at Christmas (which I have celebrated all my life) with my Congregationalist wife. And I certainly don’t blindly support everything that Israel does, particularly with Netanyahu trying to turn it into an autocracy as Putin and Trump wished to do in their countries.
But I am still a Jew, identified and comfortably self-identified as such. And, while I can be dismissive of some accusations of antisemitism as being a rush to victimization, like Justice Stewart and pornography, I think I know it when I see it. Indeed, I remember my father, who was as non-religious as I am, explaining to me years ago about the 10% Jewish “quota” in most medical schools when he went in the 30's. (That said, he decided to go to Northwestern despite knowing that he was part of that quota.) And I sure knew which country clubs would and would not accept Jewish members as I was growing up. (And, for that matter, I also knew which German Jewish country clubs wouldn’t accept Eastern European Jewish members, which I always found richly hypocritical.)
To be sure, antisemitism is less prevalent now than 50 or 100 years ago, so there is certainly that progress. And it is far less blatant – which in some ways is an improvement, but also means that frequently the antisemitism, like racism,* is in spoken and written “codes” which the more obtuse listener/reader might not catch. But, again, I know it when I see it/hear it.
And one such code is any reference to George Soros, someone who is frequently referenced by Trump and other Republicans in a disparaging way – most recently in the context of Alvin Bragg, the New York D.A, who just – and properly – indicted Trump. Given the fact that Soros only indirectly financed Bragg’s candidacy, and was one of many liberals to do so, and – for better or worse – D.A.’s run for office in New York and fund raise like crazy to do so, it is really a pretty lame point.
So why mention Soros by name? Easy, he is Jewish and this is just one way of sending a code to antisemites everywhere, much the same way as “financier” and “global elite” or “globalist” do. And Trump, McCarthy, DeSantis, Marjorie Taylor Green, Ted Cruz, Elise Stefanik and every other gutless antisemitic Republican who chooses to cite Soros by name know exactly what it means. https://americanindependent.com/republicans-antisemitic-attack-allegations-trump-crimes/
And so do I.
________
*As to racism, a racist code word Trump likes to use is "thugs." Put it this way, in MAGA World, the term does not conjure up visions of white “thugs.”
[Note: to subscribe to the blog and get it delivered by email every day, go to:petersage.substack.com The blog is free and always will be.]
10 comments:
What the heck is so bad about George Soros anyway? According to Wikipedia, he's pledged or given away over 3/4 of the $40 billion he's made. Name me one of his critics who's been anywhere near that generous.
And what has his money gone for? Mostly for democratic movements in Eastern Europe, pre and post Soviet Empire. Which is why he is hated by Vladimir Putin and by Viktor Orban in Hungary, where Soros was born. By his enemies you shall know him.
Peter Sage on behalf of Jim Stodder, a college classmate:
What the heck is so bad about George Soros anyway? According to Wikipedia, he's pledged or given away over 3/4 of the $40 billion he's made. Name me one of his critics who's been anywhere near that generous.
And what has his money gone for? Mostly for democratic movements in Eastern Europe, before and after the end of the Soviet Empire. Which is why he is hated by Vladimir Putin and by Viktor Orban in Hungary, where Soros was born. By his enemies you shall know him.
An old proverb is "Fear an ignorant man more than a lion", and it's more true now than when it was first spoken centuries ago. Anti-semitism is grounded in the same ignorance that fuels misogyny, bigotry and other forms of racism, and all are being flagrantly exploited by Republicans.
I watched Karl Rove on CSPAN last night and was astonished at the racism and arrogant patriarchal white privilege he exhibited as he expounded on how "how much worse political division was in the past" and "we shouldn't be so alarmed now". He was charming and assuring to a receptive audience who clearly did not realize how they were being hoodwinked by his folksy and scholarly eloquence, masquerading as a less hyperbolic but equally noxious version of Tucker Carlson, with a history lesson that glossed over inconvenient facts like slavery and suffrage.
Another thing that stood out was that he dismissed Trump as "too old to run again", which we are hearing from various quarters of the Republican punditry. This signals that they are confident in a compliant base that will support Trump 2.0 whether it's De Santis or some other aspirant who "less chaotic".
Don't fall for it.
There’s not really anything subtle or coded about it. When Trump’s base of “very fine people” were marching in Charlottesville with their tiki torches to protest the removal of a monument to slavery and treason, one of their chants was “Jews will not replace us!” This is the tail now wagging the mangy mutt that was once the Grand Old Party. Like their War on Woke, it’s about as subtle as a burning cross.
The antisemitism aspect is real. But also the fact that Soros has donated over $32 Billion to the Open Society Foundation, which supports liberal and progressive causes around the world. Obviously conservative and conservative religious types are not going to be fans of George Soros. Bill Gates (and the Gates Foundation) gets his share of hate and suspicion also.
Billions of $$$ + liberal/progressive causes + globalism = Very unpopular with those who disagree with George Soros and the Open Society Foundation
Also, let's not forget that the Republican Party (GQP) is the conspiracy theory party.
Some Soros haters are very pro-Israel. They hate Soros because he gives lots of money to liberal and progressive groups.
They also know that their hate speech appeals to anti-Semites.
Seems to me the Republicans have been openly bigoted for quite awhile now. It seems strange to me when republicans repudiate that they are bigoted when it’s so obvious. One of Trump’s charms is he hides it less.
I am also a Jew who was raised very secular. My parents threw a big bar mitzvah party for me, but it was purely for social/tribal reasons. I still have a photo album from the event, which includes a picture of me in front of a restroom door, proudly pointing at a sign that says “Men“. I support Israel, because given our long history, and especially our history in the 20th century, we Jews need a lifeboat that we can run to the next time something goes very wrong. I can’t imagine that there is any definition of “antisemitic“ that could be applied with validity to me.
As many around here are likely to already know, I do not like many aspects of progressive politics, and especially not the extreme versions of it that are currently so prevalent among cultural elites. In that context, I have a very negative opinon of George Soros.
John Shutkin seems to leave no possibility of expressing that opinion without being accused of antisemitism. It’s a tactic often used by progressives: call something a “dog whistle“ in an attempt to make it impossible to express that thought.
John Shutkin may not intentionally be doing this to shut down free speech, but many on his side are doing just that. I am sure it’s true that some people who denounce George Soros have antisemitic motives, but not everyone.
Two things can be true at once: there can be valid reasons for a negative view of George Soros, and some people who express that view might have antisemitic motives.
John Shutkin Says he “knows it when he sees it“. I wonder what he sees when he hears it from me. I wonder how he attributes antisemitism so confidently when he hears negative opinions about George Soros from anyone. I wonder how he he distinguishes between his negative feelings about antisemitism and his negative feelings about conservatism.
Republicans ragging on George Soros is a dog whistle that some apparently can’t hear, but their cult leader dining with Nick Fuentes and Kanye West, notorious antisemites, was blatant enough to draw widespread criticism – except from most Republican lawmakers. After all, Trump is the Imperial Lizard of the White nationalists they depend on for re-election. But even Trump can’t beat Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Jewish space lasers. It should be clear even to those deaf to dog whistles that antisemitism, at least by Republicans, is tolerated in the GOP. What they can’t tolerate is diversity, equity and inclusion.
On the one hand, someone might be deaf to dog whistles. On the other hand, someone might have dog whistle tinnitus, hearing dog whistles that exist only in their own head. It’s not necessarily easy to tell what’s going on in the current polarized and mistrustful political situation.
Post a Comment