-
I mean, you frame it that way, @ReekBlefs frames it the opposite way, it’s almost as if the phrase needs a neutral framing or to be dropped entirely.
h2o-
Look I like ReekBlefs' analogy. I struggled with an obvious comparable, which is why I went with more ambiguous dog whistles, but it's hyperbole. There is no ambiguous history of that National Front chant - whereas there is space for a bit of both sidesing from the river to the sea.
But one of points I'm making - probably too indirectly - is that I'd put money on it that none of the people arguing for it being totally fine, would for a second try and both-sides "all lives matter", or dog whistles like urban youths in a comparable situation.
Look back to the reaction on here to Amber Rudd's use of coloured instead of woman of colour, or Danny Baker's gaff. Next to zero space given for any accidentally gaff. But yet it's cool to go to a rally and try and reclaim a phrase Jewish people view as antisemitic, because fuck it, geographic facts don't care about your feelings sweetheart?
At best it's a dumb ego driven gaff necessitating a public slap. At worst it's a cynical dog whistle. Either way it's not Starmer who is at fault, especially given Labour's record under Corbyn.
Tl;Dr
it’s almost as if the phrase needs... to be dropped entirely.
Agreed.
-
you frame it that way, @ReekBlefs frames it the opposite way
I think we're both pointing out the same thing, that each of these phrases is at best a dog whistle and at worst openly and obviously racist - and therefore probably best stayed away from in contexts where they're likely to be inflammatory.
EDIT Ha jinx
hugo7
ReekBlefs
He well may have been. But why?
Is he the sort of person who responded to questions about BLM with "I think all lives matter"?