The part that disagrees with my definition.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Whoopi Goldberg suspended from “The View”…
- Thread starter Fast Eddie B
- Start date
The part that disagrees with my definition.
Which is?
A social construct would be a culture.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
So am I, but I still understand that the Nazis believed that the Jews were an inferior race and a threat to what they believed was their own superior race, and so chose to murder them in the millions in an attempt to exterminate their race. For the perpetrators, it was all about race.
Dave
GrandMasterFox
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 3,391
I'm sorry, but this whole debate on whether or note Jews are race is just absurd. It's like when you tell someone they are a homophobe and their response is "I'm not a homophobe because phobia means fear and I don't fear them"
Words have meaning and that meaning isn't set in stone, it evolves over time and isn't always based on how the word originally started.
When we talk racially motivated crimes, we look at the intent of the perpetrator. If I see a Chinese person and hate him for it because I blame him for spreading Covid and kill him - is it less of a racially motivated crime if it turns out he was actually Japanese?
And yes, we would call it racism even if "China" isn't a race.
The word evolved and does include things like nationality or religion even if those things have nothing to do with biology.
The Nazis had literally called it a race issue. And it's their terminology that counts as they are the perpetrators.
The whole discussion that people talk about whether it does or doesn't count for Jews - including what Whoopi actually said - is a very silly attempt at trying to pin point some scales of horribleness.
"Holocaust is bad, but it's not as bad as..."
Which usually result from "Can you guys please stop complaining of the bad stuff you're going through because we think we have it far worst, so let's ignore your issues and only deal with mine. Thanks"
It's not Mel Gibson level bad, but still bad.
For what it's worth, around here the opposite is just as prevalent.
"Yes, police killing black people is bad. But it's not as bad as <latest act of antisemitism>"
As a side note, I couldn't care less about her suspension as it really means nothing. It's paid vacation. Even if it's withholding some payment, she's still massively wealthy and hardly feels it as a sanction.
I also don't care about any of these idiotic celebrity apologies as they are always so fake. Okay, you're making me say I'm sorry, so fine now leave me alone.
I doubt her mind is changed.
Words have meaning and that meaning isn't set in stone, it evolves over time and isn't always based on how the word originally started.
When we talk racially motivated crimes, we look at the intent of the perpetrator. If I see a Chinese person and hate him for it because I blame him for spreading Covid and kill him - is it less of a racially motivated crime if it turns out he was actually Japanese?
And yes, we would call it racism even if "China" isn't a race.
The word evolved and does include things like nationality or religion even if those things have nothing to do with biology.
The Nazis had literally called it a race issue. And it's their terminology that counts as they are the perpetrators.
The whole discussion that people talk about whether it does or doesn't count for Jews - including what Whoopi actually said - is a very silly attempt at trying to pin point some scales of horribleness.
"Holocaust is bad, but it's not as bad as..."
Which usually result from "Can you guys please stop complaining of the bad stuff you're going through because we think we have it far worst, so let's ignore your issues and only deal with mine. Thanks"
It's not Mel Gibson level bad, but still bad.
For what it's worth, around here the opposite is just as prevalent.
"Yes, police killing black people is bad. But it's not as bad as <latest act of antisemitism>"
As a side note, I couldn't care less about her suspension as it really means nothing. It's paid vacation. Even if it's withholding some payment, she's still massively wealthy and hardly feels it as a sanction.
I also don't care about any of these idiotic celebrity apologies as they are always so fake. Okay, you're making me say I'm sorry, so fine now leave me alone.
I doubt her mind is changed.
Last edited:
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Re
And in the end, their motivation is all that really matters in this case. If they considered it about "race", it was about race. Anything else is an effort at rewriting history to suit a present agenda.
GrandMasterFox
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 3,391
There is also the notorious tale about Fritz Lang, a famous director at the time (the equivalent of Peter Jackson back then after his epic fantasy movie of the ring). He was offered a position by Gebels to do the Nazi propaganda.
The story goes that he told Gebels he was jewish. Gebels replied : "We decide who is Jewish"
They could cut corners when they wanted.
Surely part of this is that their ideas of race and hers are different? For whatever reason she thinks the Jews and Aryans were different ethnicities, not different races. Is the concept of volk the same as the concept of race or ethnicity? If she is talking from her perspective on race, maybe she's right? If she's talking from theirs she is wrong? And if she is talking about some universal concept of race, she is incoherent because there isn't one.
There's literally an entire subplot in the movie Conspiracy, taken directly from notes from the infamous Wannsee Conference, where high ranking Nazi officials endlessly debate how to define who is a Jew and the answer, in the end, for them turned out to be "Whatever we say they are."
That's inevitable with a blurry edged category like this.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
That's what I was thinking: Goldberg was speaking from her perspective of race, which coming from an American in 2022 is naturally different from a 1930s American, German, Jew, or German Jew (hey! Intersectionality is a thing! Now). But the topic is so delicate it has hair-trigger reactions built in.
RecoveringYuppy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 14,185
Pretty sure that "/s" means "end of sarcasm".
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
I still think some people are picking this up from the wrong end. If you murder a bunch of people for made up reasons, the made up reasons are the de facto reason for the murders.
Why people are chosen is defined be the chooser.
Why people are chosen is defined be the chooser.
This could be the subject of its own thread, but suffice it to say that this definition if far from being universally accepted. Very, very far.
The Shoah is often used to describe the Jewish Holocaust, but Romani and other victims of the slaughter reject the concept that the capitalized word "Holocaust" should only refer to the crimes against the Jewish people.
Don't get me wrong - there are many Jewish people who do prefer Rockinkt's definition. But other victims of the Nazis disagree with them.
Publicity for the show to get the ratings up?
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Going to be hard to say without watching the comment in context, which would mean intentionally watching "The View". That strikes me as an unreasonable request.
Distracted1
Philosopher
A distinction that could be debated.
The "son of Sam" murdered people because the neighbors dog told him to do it is a valid interpretation of his actions. So also is that the killer murdered people because he suffered from a mental health issue that caused him to believe (wrongly) that the neighbors dog was communicating with him.
A similar distinction can be drawn between the Nazis' use of hatred and inhumanity to further their goals, specifically through the persecution of groups of people they defined as inferior "races", and their persecution and murder of people they wrongly labelled members of a "race".
Since it is a clearly debatable issue, the backlash that Ms. Goldberg was the victim of seems reactionary, and removed from what she was actually pointing out.
That's where it gets interesting. Forgetting the details of definitions and meanings.... unless she has holes in her brain, she must know that you can't be seen to approach particular opinions on particular topics even if you are technically right about everything you say. Having the correct skin colour and politics gives you plot armour to get through it, but you are still tap dancing through a minefield. She was either doing it for attention, or she is retarded.
Whether she is technically correct isn't the issue. It might be technically correct that many ex-slaves looked back warmly on their lives in slavery, but I would be a fool to think that that was an opinion that could safely be articulated by a celebrity who wanted to continue working.
Unless she was looking for attention, she was a fool to say it.