Cynical, Hypocritical Use of Language by the Left

[RDKirk]

I've complained about this sort of cynical language wrangling before.

According to Michigan Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the term "from the river to the sea," is a call for "freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence." According to many others, including Hamas, it is a call to destroy Israel even at the cost of Jewish lives.
....
Over at the progressive New York Magazine, Eric Levitz has an answer. What's not surprising is that it exonerates Tlaib, what is surprising is that it is an absolute refutation of two decades of progressive orthodoxy about bigotry.

"Too often, arguments about antisemitism get bogged down in assertations about a given claim’s motivation, which in most cases is unknowable. So in determining whether a statement should be branded as antisemitic, let’s focus on its explicit meaning, not its alleged motivation."

It is utterly astounding.

This is the 180-degree opposite of everything the left has said about racism, sexism and transphobia as it pounded into our heads that we shouldn’t use terms like "you guys," "peanut gallery," or "mother" even if our motivation is purely innocent.

MSN

 

[MrMoe]

Two phrases I've noticed that have quietly disappeared from the left wing vocabulary are "dog whistle" and "stochastic terrorism". Which is interesting, since Rashida Tlaib saying "from the river to the sea" can easily be seen as an anti-Semitic dog whistle and stochastic terrorism.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

MSN

I guess I'm still waiting to hear of the congressperson who was censured for saying "you guys, peanut gallery" or "mother."

 

[DaisyDay]

We use language to communicate, the Left uses language to manipulate.

Naw, man, we are the Left.

To look on the bright side of it, it's good that they still have to use code; they can't just explicitly express the evil in their hearts.

Projection and manipulation. This is you, not me.

 

[Chesterton]

Naw, man, we are the Left.


Projection and manipulation. This is you, not me.

I said exactly what I meant to say. And although we may wish it were otherwise, "us versus them" is a cosmic reality.

 

[Margaret3110]

I'm not sure what a reasonable person is supposed to do these days, politically. The right and the left are both pretty much unhinged in my opinion.

 

[DaisyDay]

I said exactly what I meant to say.

Oh, I didn't doubt that.

And although we may wish it were otherwise, "us versus them" is a cosmic reality.

There's that royal "we" again! That's your way of seeing things...and I'm just saying that you got the "us" and "them" wrong.

 

[Pommer]

I said exactly what I meant to say. And although we may wish it were otherwise, "us versus them" is a cosmic reality.

But see if we stay in this mindset too long, then moderates will exit the political realm and leave things up to the extremists among us.

 

[DaisyDay]

I'm not sure what a reasonable person is supposed to do these days, politically.

It's a dilly of a pickle.

The right and the left are both pretty much unhinged in my opinion.

You're not wrong, but who doesn't see their own selves as the reasonable middle? --- I know who: the purists.

 

[Margaret3110]

It's a dilly of a pickle.

You're not wrong, but who doesn't see their own selves as the reasonable middle? --- I know who: the purists.

Well, to clarify, I think there's a range of reasonable positions one can take that aren't in agreement with each other. I mean there are liberal and conservative positions on various issues that are thoughtful and valid. I lean liberal, but I absolutely believe there are sane ideological positions that are in disagreement with mine and I can respect those positions.

But at least the loudest voices on both sides right now seem to have gone off the rails. And it's nearly impossible to have a normal, thoughtful debate about anything anymore.

 

[durangodawood]

We use language to communicate, the Left uses language to manipulate. To look on the bright side of it, it's good that they still have to use code; they can't just explicitly express the evil in their hearts.

How does the right express the evil in their hearts?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's a valid criticism...

In an age where we've just gotten done being hounded about "microaggressions" (over trivial and innocuous language) for the last 8 years, the fact that some of those same people will defend a slogan that anyone finds offensive is counter to what they've been saying.

The same people who would've been lecturing others for abstract figurative usage of the word "kosher" 2 years ago, are now defending a slogan that they know a significant number of Jews find offensive.

It's basically just shy of if they said "Well All Lives Matter is okay to say in the context of defending Palestinians"

 

[Ana the Ist]

MSN

There's no consistent value or principle I can think of that actually exists on the left.

Unless you count the "rules for thee but not for me" cliche.

These people literally thought you were causing harm if you used a pronoun they didn't like....

....calls for genocide? No biggie.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Two phrases I've noticed that have quietly disappeared from the left wing vocabulary are "dog whistle" and "stochastic terrorism".

Good point.

Let's be honest though...they weren't going to keep looking up stochastic terrorism to find out what it means, and once they started using their own dog whistles...they stopped complaining about them.

Which is interesting, since Rashida Tlaib saying "from the river to the sea" can easily be seen as an anti-Semitic dog whistle and stochastic terrorism.

 

[Nithavela]

MSN

"Even at the cost of jewish lives"? Ending jewish lives is the entire point.

 

[Nithavela]

How does the right express the evil in their hearts?

They usually first call out anyone doing good for "virtue signalling" and then pretend to be morally superior for flaunting their bad behaviour. You know, the "I might be a scumbag, but at least I show it and am not a hypocrite" kind of behaviour, like "rolling coal".

 

[Ana the Ist]

They usually first call out anyone doing good for "virtue signalling"

Actually doing good isn't virtue signaling. It's just virtue.

and then pretend to be morally superior for flaunting their bad behaviour.

If two people engage in the same bad behavior and one is honest about it...you can actually argue that one is morally superior.

You know, the "I might be a scumbag, but at least I show it and am not a hypocrite" kind of behaviour, like "rolling coal".

I don't think that really happens....w EPA standards and all.

 

[Chesterton]

Oh, I didn't doubt that.

There's that royal "we" again! That's your way of seeing things...and I'm just saying that you got the "us" and "them" wrong.

It's not a royal we. I meant you and I and everybody; all decent people who wish things were otherwise.

 

[Chesterton]

How does the right express the evil in their hearts?

We go to confession.

 

[zippy2006]

We use language to communicate, the Left uses language to manipulate. To look on the bright side of it, it's good that they still have to use code; they can't just explicitly express the evil in their hearts.

Great post. Deeply true.