Please publish the above letter, Bro.
A chump might figure that, being a Texan whose base is in the South and Midwest, he was making the usual condemnation of coastal elites and arugula-eating liberals that every other Republican has made before him, maybe with a special nod to the fact that his two most relevant opponents, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, were both from New York.
Because, you see, there are many Jews in New York. By the clever strategem of using words that had nothing to do with Jews or hatred, he was able to effectively communicate his Jew-hatred to other anti-Semites without anyone else picking up on it.
Except of course the entire media, which seized upon it as a single mass. New York values is coded anti-Semitism. New York values is a classic anti-Semitic slur.
New York values is an anti-Semitic comment. New York values is an anti-Semitic code word. New York values gets called out as anti-Semitism. Meanwhile, back in Realityville population: Fellow British politician Ken Livingstone defended her, and one thing led to another, and somewhere in the process he might have kind of said that Hitler supported Zionism.
During the Nazi period in Germany, some Nazis who wanted to get rid of the Jews and some Jews who wanted to get away from the Nazis created the Haavara Agreementwhich facilitated German Jewish emigration to Palestine.
Hitler was ambivalent on the idea but seems to have at least supported some parts of it at some points.
But it seems fair to say that calling Hitler a supporter of Zionism was at the very least a creative interpretation of the historical record. The media went further, again as a giant mass.
Ken Livingstone is anti-Semitic. I understand he is now having to defend himself in front of a parliamentary hearing on anti-Semitism. Ken Livingstone is tasteless, thoughtless, embarrassing, has his foot in his mouth, is inept, clownish and offensive, and clearly made a blunder of cosmic proportions.
But is he anti-Semitic?
I think of the medieval burghers who accused Jews of baking matzah with the blood of Christian children. I think of the Russians who would hold pogroms and kill Jews and burn their property. I think of the Nazis. I think of people who killed various distant family members of mine without a second thought.
But my question is, is he anti-Semitic at all?The most amusing part to me of the “57 states” line is that he was running in the primary at the time, and in Democratic primaries, 57 different states and non-state groups vote(the usual 50 plus DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, Marianas, Samoa, Virgin Islands, and Democrats Abroad).
By his very position in Don Pedro's household, Don John recognizes that he is a "second-class citizen." When he is unsuccessful at gaining recognition through military battle with his brother, he turns his discontent toward conspiracies to hurt those he envies — his brother and Claudio, for example.
Don John is the illegitimate brother of Don Pedro the prince of Arragon. He is, when we first meet him, “out of measure sad” and when told to cheer up he says “I cannot hide what I am”. In his refusal to put on a charming face he is a real contrast to a villain like Iago who very deliberately pretends to what he is not.
Ultimately, Messina does indeed perceive Don John as the villain, a role Don John feels he must fulfill, but Shakespeare’s audience is not fooled: onlookers of the play identify Don John as the victim of a cruel and often two-faced society. The Adaptational Villainy trope as used in popular culture.
The villain of an adaptation or retelling of a story is a familiar character who wasn't as bad in . The real conflict in this country has always been class-based, not race based. The whole idea of "race" is a fiction started up by scientific analysis of different "types" of people and their supposed characteristics.