I'll express what my view of Trump is. I don't think Trump is an ideological type of individual. So he really doesn't have any extremist views on race because he honestly has never put much thought into it. However he loves to pander and most of his racism over the course of his last 40 years of public life would propably be defined as "casual racism" such as demanding the execution of 4 black individuals for rape even after they were cleared through DNA analysis or his 3 years going around media circuits claiming Obama was born in Africa or going down a magic escalator with his first campaign speech about how only SOME undocumented Mexicans aren't rapists or having lawsuits against him for housing discrimination. There is more "there there" to label Trump as a racist then there is to label Obama an "extremist Muslim".
Not for the people who use labels there isn't. I have to ask, why are you defending the position that unjustly labeling people and stripping them down to nothing more than a single "offensive" ideal is all good and fine?
Because in social media format, very verbose and nuanced discussion isn't really desired. I'm sure those who call Trump a white supremacist have their reasons and probably have elaborated their views in other formats. So you might see a tweet calling him a white supremacist but you don't know what their entire view is or how they reached that conclusion. You've reduced their take to a single tweet.
I don't have to defend or explain twitterverse' views, they do. I'm merely stating that reducing someone to a single word is wrong and counterproductive and I don't care who or what word it is. You are okay with labeling people with a single word. I think you're wrong and I think that Omar's past statements were ill-advised and wrong but so is labeling her an anti-semite. That's an extremely virulent accusation and label to thrust onto someone that it cannot be done based on a tweet alone. You think it can and it's find, I don't.
People who use labels? Is that a label? Anyway, I agree with you. Something like concluding someone is a racist or an anti-Semite or whatever is a big bomb to throw and shouldn't be done lightly. I wouldn't label Omar an anti-Semite over her comments. She obviously objects to our strong support of Israel. I would say her negative emotions regarding Israel showed through a little too much -- aside from the 'hypnosis' crap people grabbed onto, the tweet didn't center around what the US stance be toward Israel (an appropriate question for a Rep), but about how evil Israel is. I can understand the negative feelings and I have some of the same ones because Israel does some things I don't think we should tolerate from our allies. But, if she shouldn't show them unless she's really ready to fight on them -- and obviously she wasn't. When Trump said Mexicans were rapists, it was a terrible thing to say, but he came to fight so he found success. It looks like Omar didn't expect to get the reaction she got and didn't know what to do with it except retreat. So bad political instincts, bad PR, maybe she'll learn maybe she won't, but not enough evidence to say she's an anti-Semite. I also agree with @fchowd0311 though that Trump is a racist. He hasn't just given us one or two tweets, but a mountain of evidence going back decades. So I feel completely comfortable saying you shouldn't call someone a racist flippantly while also saying Trump is a racist. I'm not being flip about it. Maybe he has other, good qualities as well. But, I don't know what they are.
I think Trump like a lot of older, well to do, white people can be ignorant but not White Supremacists which is the type of label (antisemitic) I'm discussing. As soon as you go there you risk turning the ignorant into a full blown master race white supremacist. Confront them on their ignorance, help to educate, and at worst they remain ignorant. It's likely you replace ignorance with understanding and open mindedness. At best you've create an advocate.
The level of hypocrisy is always astonishing but expected. I can successfully link a glorious russian who arms extreme muslims. I can also successfully link that same glorious russian to the leftists in Latin America. I can also link a certain party in the U.S, and I'm not going to name any names, that will willingly get on their knees to unzip this glorious russian's pants. It's like one bigly circle of hypocrisy. And people buy it and have bought it since Enoch the Patriarch, that was a very long time ago. now this is 3 piece suit gangster:
Eh, not a white supremacist in my view, which would take more of an ideological approach. But I wouldn't say it was as benign as an ignorance either, which could be corrected with a little education. I think he very egocentrically and callously maximizes his own advantage and doesn't let things like morals get in his way. But that's all speculations on his motives, which I can only guess at. The output, whatever the motive, is pretty racist. What Rep Omar said might fall more in an ignorance bucket. I doubt she's out to destroy the Jews like an idealogue, and I don't think she opened her mouth just to promote herself either. I think she was trying to change the discussion about US support for Israel but evoked forces she did not understand. That can be fixed with some education.
You are correct being against many of the injustices of Israel is not anti-semitic, though the often deployed tactic to claim that is starting to wear thin-- even with younger American Jews. Why are you guessing that? Naive faith in the mainstream media?
Wall Street Journal Editorial Board on the rebuke of Omar and how her comments can hurt the Democratic party: The Education of Ilhan Omar Democratic leaders rebuke their anti-Israel freshman colleague. 865 Comments By The Editorial Board Feb. 11, 2019 7:17 p.m. ET The Democratic Party’s support for Israel has been fraying for years, and some new Members of Congress seem willing to indulge in arguments that border on the anti-Semitic. So kudos to House Democratic leaders who slapped down one of their own, freshman Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, for her ugly comments. “Legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies is protected by the values of free speech and democratic debate that the United States and Israel share,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House Democratic leaders in a joint statement on Monday. “But Congresswoman Omar’s use of anti-Semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel’s supporters is deeply offensive. We condemn these remarks and we call upon Congresswoman Omar to immediately apologize for these hurtful comments.” The leaders are trying to put out a firestorm that erupted after Ms. Omar claimed on Twitter that her colleagues defend Israel for the money, writing, “It’s all about the Benjamins baby.” When asked who she thinks is “paying American politicians to be pro-Israel,” Ms. Omar named the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, which doesn’t donate to political candidates, though it does urge U.S. support for Israel. Republicans in the House had threatened to offer a resolution rebuking Ms. Omar, who was at first indignant but apologized after hearing from party leadership. “Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes,” Ms. Omar said, adding that “I reaffirm the problematic role of lobbyists in our politics, whether it be Aipac, the NRA or the fossil fuel industry.” While she’s learning about history, she should also read the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right of Americans to petition their government. The rebuke from party leaders is especially important because anti-Israel sentiment is growing on the left. While 79% of Republicans sympathize more with Israel than the Palestinians, according to a Pew survey last year, the split among Democrats is 27% for Israel and 25% for the Palestinians. In 2016 dozens of Black Lives Matter groups released a platform accusing Israel of “genocide” and “apartheid” and endorsing the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement. In 2017 the Democratic Socialists of America overwhelmingly endorsed BDS at its national conference, upon which the room erupted in chants of “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!” Two Democrats the socialist group has propelled to Congress, Rashida Tlaib and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are also anti-Israel. Ms. Omar says she “almost chuckles” when Israel is called a democracy, comparing its Jewishness to the state-enforced Islam of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Ms. Tlaib, who supports a one-state solution that would destroy Israel, argues that supporters of a pro-Israel, anti-BDS law “forgot what country they represent.” Democrats risk losing moderates as well as part of their base if these sentiments begin to define their party’s view of Israel in the public mind. They’re wise to send a rebuke now. Appeared in the February 12, 2019, print edition. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-education-of-ilhan-omar-11549930665?mod=hp_opin_pos2
This is definitely a case where eating one's own is a preferable situation, now they can't force her to resign, but they can definitely minimise her and then move her on in the next election cycle.
Israel and Anti Semitism is really a subject in which Republicans turn into Democrats the way they act with words. People need to realize that words cannot hurt and move on. Otherwise we will grow up in a society in which we blame others for what they do rather than our ability to endure, withstand or ignore stupidity. Racism in any form is just idiocy, but calling out people as being racist or not culturally sensitive is just silly. Everyone needs to grow up.
She, along with the other Anti-Semitic Women’s March supporter AOC, were the big story that Democrats wanted to tout this election cycle. This will only increase and become the norm for the Democratic Party. You ain’t seen nothing yet.
This has been their MO since the Soviet Union days, defectors have spoken about what they were doing and what they were targeting. It's things, Putin being the old spook he is, never allows in Russia.
I get the whole "Jews control x" is anti-semitic, but how is saying a lawmaker is influenced by money from a pro-Israeli lobbying group anti-semitic? So if someone is saying a lawmaker is under the thumb of the Saudi Royal family - that's racist if there is a trail of money going from Saudi lobbying groups to that lawmaker?
