It's exactly what happened. Here. Go read it: https://nitter.net/elonmusk/status/1724908287471272299

User @breakingbaht said:

> Okay.

> Jewish communties have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.

> I'm deeply disinterested in giving the tiniest shit now about western Jewish populations coming to the disturbing realization that those hordes of minorities that support flooding their country don't exactly like them too much.

> You want truth said to your face, there it is.

Musk replied:

> You have said the actual truth

And then a bunch of advertisers slashed their Twitter ad budgets, and Musk sued someone else.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about Ben Shapiro's take on Musk's words.

"Jewish Communities" doesn't mean "All Jews", and that's obvious to anyone not looking for a reason to be angry. Muslim communities just bombed the hell out of Israel, and that's not islamophobic to say, because it doesn't implicate all Muslims.

I don't know about that. As a reader, I find that "Jewish Communities" very much sounds like "All Jews" and "Muslim Communities" very much sounds like "All Muslims". If that's not what the authors mean, I'm sure that there are much, much better phrasings.

That may very well be your own bias. If I say "Christian Communities hate gays", you'll probably think of one or two specific communities. When I saw "Jewish Communities" in gp's headline, I immediately thought "oh, the ADL", because they're bigots and don't really hide it.

Everyone has biases, and you're not exempt. If you know that your language might be grossly misinterpreted, consider changing it, if only for your own image.

> If I say "Christian Communities hate gays", you'll probably think of one or two specific communities.

That might be true for me, but I'm thinking of "Protestant Christian evangelicals and co." as one community, so...

> If you know that your language might be grossly misinterpreted, consider changing it, if only for your own image.

No, if only to make a point.

> That might be true for me, but I'm thinking of "Protestant Christian evangelicals and co." as one community, so...

Yup. What I expected. I'm positively full of bias, and happy to admit it.

And my point is that "Muslim communities bombed Israel" is not an obviously reasonable statement. If Reuters or AP posted an article with that phrasing, I'd wonder if some party other than Hamas was fighting Israel now. At that point, why not just say "Muslims bombed Israel"? It's technically true but also wildly disingenuous. You'd have to qualify it with a bunch of details in order to make it an honest, good-faith statement.

But it's the literal truth, and using a descriptor on a group of people acting does not attribute the action to all people who fit the descriptor. Not all mammals are dogs, and that shouldn't need to be said.

You're confusing semantics and subtext.

The clear subtext in your examples is "Jews" (not "some Jews"), "Muslims" (not "some Muslims"), "Christians" (not "some Christians"). A racist (or variant thereof) will not say "all Jews"/"all Muslims"/"all Gays"/... , they'll just casually namedrop "Jews" (or even a single Jewish personality), "Muslims" (or even a single Muslim personality), "Gays" (or even a single Gay personality), and use this as a dogwhistle.

If you write "Christian Communities hate gays", I will very much read "all Christian communities". And deduce that you're probably spewing nonsense, just as with "Jewish communities" and "Muslim communities".

Also, please do not make assumptions on my biases.

Sure, how about "dogs bite people", then?

It definitely means that, as a general rule, dogs bite people. It might not mean all dogs, but it's definitely a warning against dogs in general.

Now, transpose this to human beings. The message we're commenting is a warning against Jewish Communities, i.e. I can't think of any reasonable way to interpret it other than as antisemitism.

You say "that's obvious" but your terminology is ambiguous. I wouldn't say "Muslim communities bombed Israel". To me, that sounds something along the lines of "the predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East teamed up and bombed Israel".

And that's your bias speaking, since my statement is factual. It's perfectly normal, and you can accept that my meaning and your interpretation can be wildly different, therefore accusing me of the worst possible interpretation is unfair.

It's totally fair. If you're going to be intentionally ambiguous just because it's technically correct, we can just assume you're an asshole and extrapolate from there