The Economist flirts with anti-Semitism? Or is this love?

What in heaven's name is the Economist playing at? It gets closer to the the Guardian all the time. Its cartoon (see below) is shocking bigotry, nothing more and nothing less

the commentator
On 19 January 2014 21:10

The Cartoon below was published by The Economist on January 18. We've had quite a few calls about it throughout the day. It relates to the difficulties Obama might have in bridging the relationship gap with Iran. Before we say another word, just take a look and see if you can see what's wrong, badly, badly, wrong with this picture.

You don't have to be (clue) eagle eyed to spot it do you? At the centre-top of the Congressional emblem, above that eagle, is a Jewish Star of David. Now, this obviously plays to the theme, common among anti-Semites around the world, that the U.S. Congress is essentially a puppet of the Jewish people.

Obama is literally and figuratively chained back from properly reaching out to Iran by the Jews.

The Israeli flag has a Star of David in it, of course. But if the cartoonist, and the editorial team of The Economist that approved it, had wanted to emphasise Israel rather than the the broader global Jewish community, they could have easily had the cartoonist put in the image of the Israeli flag. No problem at all from a technical point of view.

That would still have been bigotry -- the notion that Israel runs American politics is an obvious form of neo-anti-Semitism.

But this is the old fashioned stuff. It's the kind of thing that appeared in The Protocols of Zion. It's the kind of thing the Nazis used. It's the kind of thing bigots -- including in the Western-funded Palestinian authority -- use all the time.

The Jews run the world: or at least its most powerful nation. That's the message The Economist conveys. Sometimes the term anti-Semitism is over-used. Sometimes it is under-used. This time there's no doubt at all what is going on.

One really wonders how they're going to get out of this. And one wonders even more what is going so badly wrong at The Economist that it was allowed to happen in the first place. Thoughts?

blog comments powered by Disqus