https://x.com/laraseligman/status/1792996008684573064
Why say “the people of Gaza” when “Gazans” is right there? Is it Pentagon-speak?
wow, you don’t say!
So you’re saying our staging point for the IDF was just a staging point for the IDF and not actually for humanitarian aid?
Good thing we did that to give them another way to reject aid.
If only we could do something
If only we could do something.
Before I was worried that the invasion of Rafah will be a slaughter of historical proportions. It still might be. But now I wonder if the slaughter will be - in the POV of Biden, the dems, and the Israelis - a manageable slaughter that can be handled via propaganda.
It seems to me that Biden’s biggest desire is how things look.
is “the people of gaza” worse than “gazans”? if it was “the people in gaza” i could see how that could enable israeli propaganda on indigeneity, but “of” does suggest some link to their land
The typical way to describe people from a place is to use the demonym. An example is Californian. “People of California” sounds like something a pol would say. Or a poet or something. I think it’s very notable that - as far as I know - the West Bank has no demonym. Everybody - including reporters - is forced to use a clumsy mouthful of syllables like “Palestinians in the West Bank”. I’m not a linguist but it seems really weird to me that a simple demonym (West Bankers?) isn’t used.
-–
Edit
A comment to me at another site
A significant number of them are officially refugees and therefore not Gazan.
amending ‘people’ to demonyms is meant to center the humanity of subjects in speech and engender thought and empathy in writing. the most widespread application is probably ‘people of color’. i think the whole project was well intentioned and has some legit positives, it feels better to write ‘imprisoned people’ instead of criminals or prisoners
but it also rings nauseatingly hollow how corpos and politicals adopted it, they’ll sign off on genocide but use the nice words as if that means anything.
I saw a lib just now say that Trump would be worse than Biden because at least Biden is getting aid into Gaza lmao
At this point, the biggest difference between the Democrats and the Republicans are their ad campaigns. One says, “We melt the poor, but we feel really bad about having to melt them,” while the other says, “We melt the poor, because the poor fucking deserve it.”
One says, “We melt the poor, but we feel really bad about having to melt them,” while the other says, “We melt the poor, because the poor fucking deserve it.”
One says, “We melt the poor, but the poor are too stupid to know why it’s good for them” while the other says, “We melt the poor, because the poor fucking deserve it.”
I’m broken record but I can’t help but think libs should not be allowed to use 𝚠𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍 + 𝚃𝚛𝚞𝚖𝚙 until after the election permanently. They should get an electric shock if they do. I too love counterfactuals but enough already for this thought-terminating cliché for libs.
I used to not understand Adam Johnson’s great dislike of counterfactuals. But I sure do now!
![[Not the Onion Genocide News] Pentagon press secretary said that they do not believe any of the aid that's been delivered through the pier has actually gotten to Gazans.(hexbear.net)](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/b3999b1f-9fd0-4925-8886-a5e17dbc87fe.jpeg){kind=link}