Going into these readings I already knew a lot about the Hungarian government’s disdain towards George Soros. They believe that Soros is behind some plot to destroy Europe and Christianity by filling it with Middle-Eastern refugees. Of course the idea that these refugees are dangerous is islamophobic, but the use of Soros also implies a Jewish-ness to the conspiracy. However, Hungary can escape accusations of anti-semitism by dancing around the question and using dogwhistles (the triple-parentheses dogwhistle comes to mind). This was the focus of the Kalmar article, but the Stone article and the articles about QAnon also discuss this.
In the Stone article, the connection is made between Eastern Europe not dealing with its anti-semitic past and the existence of its islamophobic present. Open anti-semitism isn’t allowed, but anti-semitism can be rerouted through conspiracies that are subtly implied to be Jewish in nature. It reminded me of the movie Look Who’s Back where (as far as I remember) Hitler comes back in modern Germany and becomes a far-right, anti-refugee “””comedian””” who mirrors the islamophobic rhetoric Stone is talking about.
The Guner article feels slightly separate from the others in discussing the ‘whiteness’ of the Turks. The racial ambiguity of Turkey reflects the social construction of race: the Turks originated from Central Asia but have been often considered white and now have a perception of themselves as black (in what seems to be a spiritual/cultural way). I remember Looks Who’s Back very briefly poking fun at this as well.