Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to operate under the assumption that you're replying in good faith and truly don't recognize the racist and anti-Semitic dog whistles all throughout the article. I'll highlight some of them for you. Btw, if you aren't familiar with dog whistles, read this first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_(politics) Here is an anti-Semitic dog whistle that promotes the conspiracy theory that Jews control the…
Not really, no. I don't see them. I'm a little preturbed, though. When the author talked about his time working with journalists, and when he described some of them negatively, you assumed he was talking about Jews. When he talked about Stephen Gould, a widely read pop-sci academic, you zeroed in on his last name's "Jewish-ness". It just seems like you're reading a lot into what he's saying, rather than what he's say…
Replying to this separately because I feel like you mischaracterized my point about Stephen Gould, and I think you're aware of that.
I did not simply zero in on his last name, as your comment says. I pointed out that the author directly links a Jewish person to having secret evil intentions and hidden political power:
>These explanations have their merit, but I think they are too kind for assuming good intentions. Throughout human history, the powerful have sought to mystify the source of their power, whether it be through religion, divine mandate or royal inheritance.
By the way, did you notice that "divine mandate" line? Why don't you take a guess on that one, too.