A charge of bigotry can shift from minority-rights claim to adjunct of state power.

Evidence

We can see something similar in the case of antisemitism. Through much of the 20th century the meanings attached to antisemitism rested on universal ideals as well as Jewish interests – upon the ideas of equality vested in Jewish emancipation and minority rights. This concept of antisemitism has not disappeared but it has been supplemented and sometimes overshadowed by a concept of antisemitism that is attached to the defence of Israel, its right to exist and its policies. … When the charge of antisemitism arises in the context of debate on the politics of Israel/Palestine it is wielded, in part at least, as an adjunct to state power and not as an auxiliary to the claims of a vulnerable minority. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 719

Categorization

  • DEEPTHINKING: A genuinely paradigm-shifting observation: the same accusation-word flips its political valence entirely — from weapon of the weak to amplifier of the strong — depending on who wields it and what political entity it now serves.
  • XREF: Reframes how the reader should assess any charge of bigotry — including Islamophobia — as indexical to power position rather than fixed in content. — connects to: State anti-racism language can become a bargaining chip for co-opting minorities into security policy. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 491; Charges of antisemitism can serve state power rather than minority rights — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 714; Racialization shifts with the political interests of those in power — , Selod, Saher - Forever Suspect_…, 86 (+4 more)

Broader Connections