this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
611 points (87.1% liked)

Progressive Politics

3360 readers
903 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world -2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

For me it felt like the exact opposite of your take.

The people of Gaza is everyone in Gaza.

"Israeli families" feels more limited.

[–] PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

If you're not aware of the subtle but pervasive linguistic technique here, you need to educate yourself. The supposed sympathetic party is always described in human-sounding terms, the supposed adversary is always dehumanized, using sterile language. And it works, it nudges those who don't think very critically into framing their subconscious opinions that way.

Your personal reaction to one incident of such isn't very relevant. It's a thing and it's nasty.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

You think "people" somehow doesn't sound human?

[–] PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago

"Families" is absolutely more warm and human than "people" and while I see what you're saying that "people of Gaza" could be interpreted as more inclusive than saying "Gazan families", that would be an excessively literal reading, it is really not what's going on here.

Again, this is just one instance of a consistent pattern among media and public figures in general. Not interested in splitting hairs with you over your personal interpretation of the one specific phrase. It's like a dog whistle, once you know what it sounds like, you can hear it, but it will escape your notice until you learn about it.