When William Shakespeare created the Shylock character of the stage play, “The Merchant of Venice,” he unintentionally created a trope that was later used by people who saw abundant similarities between the Jews they dealt with and the Shylock character. Thus, the mere mention of a “pound of flesh” would conjure up the stereotype of the Jew that is greedy and merciless.
A
trope of this kind — associated with an ethnic
group — is mostly used by insensitive people
who may not realize what they are doing, or do realize it but believe it’s okay
to have a little fun at someone’s expense. Whereas this kind of trope is
practiced in most languages, another kind that is peculiar and apparently exclusive
to the English language, is referred to as “dog whistle.” This one is generally
used by politicians or those who play politics and have an agenda they wish to
fulfill.
Those
who use the political dog whistle, do so to communicate their message to what
is usually a specific audience. For example, when a politician that’s
addressing a gathering of workers, speaks of “a living wage,” those in
attendance understand it to mean raising the minimum wage. Because this kind of
dog whistle rose naturally, it was easily absorbed into the general culture
where it spread so widely that most audiences now understand what message the
term “living wage” intends to convey.
What
is peculiar about the English language, is that it has allowed the culture to
incubate an artificial kind of dog whistle that could not have developed anywhere
else. An example would be the phrase, “Israel has the right to defend itself,”
which means more than what appears on the surface. The phrase has come to
certify the supremacy of the group that calls itself Jewish.
In
fact, an entire glossary of that kind of tropes was invented by the Jews for
the purpose of infusing into the English culture, and for normalizing the
principle of Jewish supremacy. You can see how that’s done when you study the article
that came under the title: “Anti-Semitism’s true nature reveals itself,”
written by Mark Goldfeder—who is director of
the National Jewish Advocacy Center—and published on
May 25, 2021 in the New York Daily News.
What
you’ll encounter in the article is the use of single words or short expressions
that set the Jews apart from all the others, and places them above everyone.
You’ll also get drawn into a narrative that creates a world that’s made of two
parts. One part comprises the Jews, remaining separate and distinct from
another part which comprises the rest of the human race.
As
to the use of single words and short expressions, you’ll encounter, somewhere
in the middle of the Goldfeder article, a short paragraph that reads as
follows:
“For
the record: This most recent conflict was not a battle between Israel and
Palestinians, but between Hamas, a U.S. designated terrorist organization, and
Israel, a key U.S. ally”.
The
two notable terms here are “terrorist” which is associated with Hamas, and “US
ally” which is associated with Israel. For the record: There was never a debate
in the Congress or the media as to whether or not Hamas was a terrorist
organization. The way it happened that Hamas was so labeled is that the Jews so
decided and told the State Department to so designate. Simply stated, the Jews
ordered, the State Department heard and obeyed.
With
regard to the notion that Israel is an ally of the United States, the trend now
is for thoughtful Americans to distance themselves from Israel, at a time when
the fanatics are trying to saddle America with the crimes that Israel has
committed, is now committing and plans to commit in the future. And there is no
one in America that’s man enough to say: No. We’re neither friends of nor
allies with Israel. We were duped into a donor-supplicant relationship that
turned out to be deadly and bankrupting for us. It is time we sever the ties that
have been established between us.
As
to the trope that’s created by the development of a narrative, an example is
the creation of the definition of anti-Semitism, devised by the International
Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The way this definition came to be, is an
example of how persistent the Jews are when it comes to imposing themselves as being
separate and above the human race. Here is how and why that definition was
created:
For
centuries, America lived normally like every other nation, with laws that were
based on the principle of equal protection for all its citizens. Then the Jews
came to America and said that while some crimes committed against the Jews are the
same as those committed against others, some crimes are specifically committed
against the Jews because who they are. These are hate crimes, said the Jews,
which are motivated by anti-Semitism. For this reason, they asked that there be
a law to protect them from this kind of crimes.
Pressured
to do so, George W. Bush urged the Congress to pass the law that set so-called
hate crimes apart from those pertaining to ordinary crimes, and make them
punishable with harsher sentences. The Congress did, and the Jews were
satisfied, believing that they were now placed above the others.
But
then it happened that other identifiable groups were subjected to crimes
because of what identified them as different from others. They sued under the
Jewish law and won. This turn of events so upset the Jews, they came up with a
new definition for anti-Semitism as a first step to asking for laws that will apply
exclusively to them.
And this is how the Jews create elaborate tropes, spending years and countless fortunes paid by others, in the effort to force governments to place them above the rest of society.