Political language before and after Tucson

After the Tucson shootings, we hear from Dutch and German journalists about political discourse and violence in their countries.

Like many Europeans, the Dutch used to think of their country as less violent than the United States, in both word and deed. That’s no longer the case, after the street assassinations of politician Pim Fortuyn and film director Theo van Gogh. After Fortuyn’s murder in 2002,  the political left came under fire for the tone of their verbal attacks on Fortuyn, who was a populist right-winger — something of a foreshadowing of the Tucson shootings, albeit with the politics of the accused and accusers switched.

In Germany, political discourse is far more subdued. There is, of course, a historical reason for that:  hate-mongering speech during  1920s and 1930s that led to political assassinations, firebombings and the rise of the Nazis. Moreover, there are certain things in Germany that you cannot say;  most famouly, you cannot by law deny the Holocaust. Also, libel law is more stringent than in the United States. Josef Joffe, the German journalist we talk to,  says that as a result, German political rhetoric today is “almost boring.”

Sarah Palin’s equivalent in Germany — should such a person ever exist — almost definitely would not have used the term blood libel. With its Jewish associations it would have been beyond the pale. It was strange enough to hear it in the United States. Defending herself against charges that her own harsh language contributed to the Tucson shootings, Palin said journalists and pundits were “manufactur[ing] a blood libel.” See her video message here.

Historically, as my colleague Alex Gallafent reports, blood libel is a “false accusation that Jews murder others in order to use their blood in ceremonies.”  This form of anti-Semitism goes back centuries. After the false accusation was made, more extreme rhetoric followed, often ending in ethnic violence.  Sarah Palin’s use of the term seems misplaced, insofar as she is neither Jewish nor is she accused of orchestrating or relishing the death of anyone. Still, it did draw attention to Sarah Palin, which may have been the point.  It meant that Barack Obama’s oratory at a memorial ceremony inTucson later that day, while receiving high marks, did not get the banner headline coverage than it might otherwise have done.

Listen in iTunes or here.


Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “Political language before and after Tucson

  1. Trang Vo

    I am Trang Vo, a student at NOVA CST229-001
    This Podcast was very interesting because it compared the response to harsh political retoric, after in the shooting in Arizona, to how several other European countries feel about and deal with negative political speech. Also it is very interesting to hear how both sides of the political spectrum respond to criticisms of overly negative political retoric. Lastly, I would like to mention that I have never really thought so much about where the meaning of terms, such as blood libel, come from.

  2. Iam a student at NOVA with the CST 229-01 course.
    Great points were made in this podcast. Analyzation of events in Germany, Netherland, Israel political history really helped create a sense of awareness for how intense political discourse is becoming. The Tucson shooting was questioned in regards to being influenced by political rhetoric. Who is to blame? Obama alleviated tension regarding where culpabilites lie. Palin made it clear that an individual has the freedom to debate appropriately unlike Loughners actions. Mental health is an issue, and should definitely be addressed within contextual laws. Political discourse is intense though… I agree we have a first amendment right to be practiced and sensibility should be consistently integrated into rhetoric. I would definitely agree there needs to be more efficient and effective laws governing firearm purchases by the mentally ill. There are reponsibilities and lessons learned from devastations like the Tucson shooting and i hope they are pursued.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s