Of course Rothschild is known for wealth, privilege and smugness.
In your world - every reference to a person who is, or was, Jewish is a slur or a slight.
Just like in Sharpton's world, every reference to an African American is racist.
You go down that path - and it is a slippery-slope to a dead-end.
Not hardly. I find just the opposite in day to day coverage of Jews: most references are *not* slurs, slights, or antisemitic.
But some references are. This one is. For you to claim "he was only talking about the guy's smugness" when he specifically wrote "Rothschild physiognomy" is foolish. Why are you so invested in insisting his comment was innocent?
I am NOT saying the remark was not antisemitism. And I am not defending the remark. I am saying it is ambiguous. You cannot put a bullet into the person's head for this set of facts alone.
You seem to think I am defending the remark. I am not. Maybe Gonzalez meant it as an ethnic slur - maybe he was just trying to be clever (as writers often try to do to stand out or to appear superior in an argument such as the one he was engaged in). I do not know - and neither do you. If you pretend to know - you're fooling only yourself.
Do not get caught up in the emotion of this. Bari put a swastika image at the top of this story to trigger an emotional response. You took the bait. I understand why. Jews have been persecuted for centuries. But using a swastika to manipulate is a cheap stunt you'd expect from a tabloid for click bait. WE EXPECT MORE FROM BARI.
I suggest reflecting on this and take the emotion out of it. Look at it from a new perspective. I think you'll agree that it might be antisemitic - but it is impossible to know without more info.
We cannot just allow ourselves to be manipulated. To fall for every claim of antisemitism or racism. I like Bari, but she made a mistake by highlighting this case. I hope she withdraws this piece. You and I can surely agree - and I'm sure Bari would too - that there must be other cases of antisemitism that are more clear and could have been a stronger example than this ambiguous case.
You are being ethnocentric.
Of course Rothschild is known for wealth, privilege and smugness.
In your world - every reference to a person who is, or was, Jewish is a slur or a slight.
Just like in Sharpton's world, every reference to an African American is racist.
You go down that path - and it is a slippery-slope to a dead-end.
I pray you reconsider and see how accusing people of antisemitism upon supposition or innuendo is a wrong.
"In your world, every reference . . . "
Not hardly. I find just the opposite in day to day coverage of Jews: most references are *not* slurs, slights, or antisemitic.
But some references are. This one is. For you to claim "he was only talking about the guy's smugness" when he specifically wrote "Rothschild physiognomy" is foolish. Why are you so invested in insisting his comment was innocent?
Let's be clear.
I am NOT saying the remark was not antisemitism. And I am not defending the remark. I am saying it is ambiguous. You cannot put a bullet into the person's head for this set of facts alone.
You seem to think I am defending the remark. I am not. Maybe Gonzalez meant it as an ethnic slur - maybe he was just trying to be clever (as writers often try to do to stand out or to appear superior in an argument such as the one he was engaged in). I do not know - and neither do you. If you pretend to know - you're fooling only yourself.
Do not get caught up in the emotion of this. Bari put a swastika image at the top of this story to trigger an emotional response. You took the bait. I understand why. Jews have been persecuted for centuries. But using a swastika to manipulate is a cheap stunt you'd expect from a tabloid for click bait. WE EXPECT MORE FROM BARI.
I suggest reflecting on this and take the emotion out of it. Look at it from a new perspective. I think you'll agree that it might be antisemitic - but it is impossible to know without more info.
We cannot just allow ourselves to be manipulated. To fall for every claim of antisemitism or racism. I like Bari, but she made a mistake by highlighting this case. I hope she withdraws this piece. You and I can surely agree - and I'm sure Bari would too - that there must be other cases of antisemitism that are more clear and could have been a stronger example than this ambiguous case.