5 ms·
Agreed. Statements like "On one side are the lords of technology ... and the unseen ones who control them." don't help, either. It raises an antisemitism caut
by brandmeyer 6y ago
Agreed. Statements like "On one side are the lords of technology ... and the unseen ones who control them." don't help, either. It raises an antisemitism caution flag whether the speaker intended to or not.
- J5892 6y agoI would argue that assuming by default that "unseen ones who control them" is referring to Jews is closer to antisemitism.
- vulcan01 6y agoThe OP is simply recognising language commonly used by antisemites. They're not assuming by default.
- loopz 6y agoIt's irrelevant to the parent post and discussion.
- wpietri 6y agoI wouldn't. For work I end up reading a lot of antisemitic text, and secret control is a major theme. This goes back a long way, including the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. [1] It has stayed solid through the years, as in the claims of secret control of the Federal Reserve. [2] There are notable QAnon elements that parallel classic antisemitic tropes, [3] so it's no surprise that a Q adherent also believes in Jewish space lasers starting forest fires. [4] In this case, I don't think the author is antisemitic. But when common antisemitic themes come up in a text, you can bet that some readers, me included, will perk up and start looking for other ones. [1] https://www.adl.org/news/op-ed/the-protocols-revisited-the-fantasy-of-secret-jewish-power https://www.adl.org/news/op-ed/the-protocols-revisited-the-f... [2] https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/jewish-control-of-the-federal-reserve-a-classic-antisemitic-myth https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/jewish-control-o... [3] https://www.adl.org/qanon https://www.adl.org/qanon [4] https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/jewish-space-lasers-funny-marjorie-taylors-antisemitism-is-real-657734 https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/jewish-space-lasers-funny-mar...
- shakow 6y agoBut you might be biased by your work. For me (and, probably, many other people), who doesn't daily work with antisemitic pamphlet, ‶secret control″ evokes more some shady secret service shenanigans (à la Hoover files or MK Ultra) rather than a nebulous international Jewish plot :)
- eru 6y agoI sometimes wonder whether the world would actually be better off being run by a secret Jewish Cabal.
- m463 6y agoWe already have silicon valley sucking up all the engineers, and wall street absorbing all the math guys. The last thing we need is a secret jewish cabal to take all the standup comedians off the market.
- webmaven 6y ago> I sometimes wonder whether the world would actually be better off being run by a secret Jewish Cabal. It might look something like: https://web.archive.org/web/20110106011917/http://internationaljewishconspiracy.com:80/ https://web.archive.org/web/20110106011917/http://internatio...
- sigstoat 6y agoanyone who could manage to secretly run the world would probably be better at it than the clowns we’ve got publicly running the world.
- oytis 6y agoThe very narrative of secret powers controlling the world is historically tightly connected to antisemitism. Sure, there are alternatives like reptiloids, pedophiles, freemasons, etc. but Jews normally arise at some point in these theories.
- jholman 6y agoIf all you can hear is a dog-whistle, you might be a dog.
- WarOnPrivacy 6y agoIf that's all you hear, I'm thinking tinnitus.
- lupire 6y agoAt that specific frequency, I'd think Tin-Tinitus
- marcosdumay 6y agoOr have some deep trauma with dogs. But either way, one should not go around accusing people at random.
- wpietri 6y agoWho do you believe made an accusation here?
- marcosdumay 6y agoThe people accusing the OP of antisemitism before the thread got rewritten and also, the people accusing back the original accusator. The exact names are not worth hunting down, it appears to be some overreaction caused by tunnel vision with no malice intended from any side. The important thing to note is that both one should not jump to conclusions based on a short bad behavior, and that just because you are hurt, it does not give you the right to go after innocent people.
- wpietri 6y agoI don't believe anybody accused the OP of antisemitism. What I see is, "It raises an antisemitism caution flag whether the speaker intended to or not." That's manifestly not an accusation. Do you see something different?
- mej 6y agoIt most likely just refers to venture capitalists or other absurdly wealthy investors, who do indeed exert quiet control, despite not doing any of the actual work. Not sure why you had to bring Jewish people into the discussion like that. To be honest, I find it quite rude.
- mro_name 6y agoreminds me of Umberto Eco's 'Foucault's Pendulum' and the measures of the Parisian newsstand that refer to the Cheops pyramid and the universe. If you look hard enough for clues, you will find some. However, they did not appear to me.
- Kye 6y agoAntisemitism is an ancient thing, so just about everything you could think of has been used as an attack. The point of coded language is plausible deniability. It's impossible to know without a pattern or a mask-off moment. This doesn't seem to represent either.
- wpietri 6y agoIf you're trying to imply that some language and concepts aren't more common in antisemitic writing, you're definitely wrong. I explain more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26245719 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26245719
- Kye 6y agoNo, I'm implying that the post doesn't have enough context to say one way or the other. That said, I do personally avoid language like that for exactly this reason. Avoiding ambiguity is just good writing, and I've had enough "[marginalized group], right?" encounters to not want to give horrible people any notion that I might agree with them.
- wpietri 6y agoActually, I think the post has plenty of context to make clear he's not going for anything antisemitic. Which is why I think it was reasonable to point out specific tropes frequently used in antisemitic writing.
- fellellor 6y agoI don’t agree with this at all. It sounds like bullshit. And bullying. “whether the speaker intended to or not“, is the really messed up line here. Intent is pretty important. In fact, IIRC it’s the pretty important even when deciding if there’s a violation, legally speaking.