I’m also going to say that converting to Judaism is like adoption. You are being adopted into a tribe. It’s not just a statement of belief, like a conversion to a branch of Christianity might be. Once upon a time, most religions were also tribal and represented identity, custom, and law as much as belief. That’s why the Romans mapped local deities onto their own pantheon, sometimes expanding or adjusting their pantheon to do so – because they wanted to incorporate conquered people into their society, and that was how they did it.
Judaism still keeps some of those traits.
I think terms like race and ethnicity can be used meaningfully, you just need to understand that they are squishy social constructs with fuzzy boundaries. But in a sense, so is “tall”. What’s tall varies from population to population, and it’s not meaningless. it’s just squishy. A dark-skinned person in one community is light-skinned in another. Some people will be born or raised into several different ethnic groups, due to mixed marriages and migration.
I imagine that even pre-suspension Whoopi Goldberg would agree that the Germans were at least bigoted against Jews, just like today’s racists are bigoted against Blacks.
Well, no. When we call that category “sex” then it’s sexism. When we call it “race” then it’s racism.
It’s really not an expansion. I’m just telling you what it is. “Genocide” tells you who did what to whom. It doesn’t have the explanatory power to tell you who is involved, why they’re categorized as they are, and why one group is the one doing the genociding, or what seemingly unrelated incidents have in common.
Handy pocket list of discriminating behaviors:
racism: deciding who can be oppressed based on a category of immutable attributes
sexism: deciding who can be oppressed based on biological sex
bigotry: a general dislike of a people based on their category
chauvinism: believing that your category is better than others
supremacy: believing that your category should rule other people in other categories
Well sure. You’re white, so for you it’s adequate just to describe bad things that have nothing to do with you. You’re going to have some natural resistance to examining social constructs that help give you beneficial status, but aren’t very nice to think about, especially the fact that you may have some unearned status due to racism. Nobody likes to think that about themselves.
But who is “we”? I would not have called Nazi persecution of the Jews racism (whatever the Nazis called it), and apparently neither would Whoopi have. If “you” choose to call something racism, must I?
Hell, groups have called their odious tactics “ethnic cleansing” or “repatriation” - but that doesn’t mean the rest of us and later generations have to accept those as accurate descriptors. Has any genocidal administration admitted that they were engaged in genocide?
I agree - bigotry is likely a much better word than racism. I imagine if the comment had been whether Nazis were bigoted WRT Jews, neither Whoopi nor I would have questioned that description at all.
The Nazis defined Jews as a race. That’s why it’s racism.
It’s a sign of strong character when one is confronted with their own ignorance, admits it, and makes the necessary adjustments. That’s what Whoopi did. That’s sort of the opposite of what you’re doing here.
So if I define women as a race, does that mean you have to accept it?
I generally have a difficulty with the idea that you have to defer to a proclaimed victim’s definition of certain actions. For example, sexual harassment. I in no way deny that sexual harassment exists, but I have a problem accepting that sexual harassment has occurred based solely on the claimed perception of the “victim.”
And yeah, my views are largely colored by my makeup and experiences. This is one of a limited number of instances I have encountered that confuse and bemuse me. None of you know me or have any reason to accept this as true, but I have to seek out pretty extreme leftist groups to find people further to the left than me - and generally that only occurs WRT limited issues. One of the most recent near-arguments my wife and I had was that I favored far more “affirmative action” than she. In no way am I trying to justify opinions that Nazis are right, that antisemitism is good, that white males are superior, etc. More that I’m being a semantic pedant.
And I thought the portions of Whoopi’s apologies that I read were pretty much in the non apology category. The sole newspaper article I read had language such as, “I’m sorry I was misunderstood…”
This observation is about as useful as saying you can call a knife a screwdriver because they can both rotate some types of screws.
Do you have to accept my definition of “knife equals screwdriver”? No, you can just dismiss me as an eccentric crank for insisting on using my own idiosyncratic definition in lieu of a vast body of common knowledge and academic literature that says a knife is a different tool from a screwdriver. If I’m doing that, you can and should dismiss me as a crank with an irrelevant opinion.
Sure. And if I made Shahada, Muslims might consider me Muslim. But I won’t be an Arab.
If she did anything legitimately, she wouldn’t have had to lie.
Based on lies.
When the thing that is being accepted is the relationship, accepting it is sufficient.
Provided it’s not based on lies, of course.
I’ve been punched out cold in a colour-blind bar fight, and I’ve been beaten with whips for the colour of my skin. Guess which one I consider worse?
And that’s a fucked-up belief. By that anti-logic, I wasn’t a victim of racism throughout the Apartheid years.
I’m happy to call previous WASP prejudice against Irish, Italians, Polish, etc. racism. Because that’s what it was.
Yes.
Yes.
It’s also racism when the Japanese are prejudiced against their Korean minority.
It’s also racism when olive-skinned Italians are prejudiced against blonde, blue-eyed Polish guest workers (OK, I’ve only seen the last as a plot point in Under The Tuscan Sun, but I’m sure it happens)
Words are her profession, and the bread-and-butter of the show she’s on. Being given time to reflect is a luxury, could have been worse.
One exception - Whites have taken to placing Asians above themselves in race realist arguments about intelligence. However, I’m sure this is just a plausible deniability thing, and it’s the lower position of Blacks that is more important to those race realists.
I’d call this part of the model minority myth. The theory is that Asians work harder than other ethnicities, arguing that this explains racial disparities. I could be wrong, but I personally haven’t witnessed a white person stating that Asians are smarter or better than them. Certainly that wasn’t true in America in the 19th or early 20th century.
However I have seen tons of white people declare that Asians are model minority that others would benefit from emulating. Or that they work harder from the motivations of poverty, or by the genetic advantage of counting rice grains or some shit.
Praising the Asians is sort of a strategic retreat from the more generalizing aspects of racism to support the aspect of racism that’s most important to Americans… explaining why the underclass is the underclass and should remain an underclass forever. The model minority myth helps with that.
I’ve heard many Americans opine that the work ethic and other values exhibited by Mexican Americans and other immigrants exceed those of many Euro-ethnic Americans.
In the first year I moved to Montreal, I heard a hockey announcer describe Jean Beliveau as “a credit to his race”. Everywhere, the word race is used to differentiate “us” from “not us”. It is always a social construct as the quote above from Ben Franklin shows. Whoopy Goldberg’s “crime” was applying her very American definition to early 20th century Germany. At worst it was a case of ignorance. Are Jews a race? I think this is what I am claiming when I call myself an atheist Jew, as @Miller pointed out.
Refusing to discuss this topic does not make the problem go away.
Admittedly, if only you refuse to discuss it, others can continue to work to improve the situation. But I’d presume that refusing to discuss it would include not discussing that others are doing so.
– and I note from the rest of the thread continuing past the post I’m answering that you’re continuing to discuss it, and to criticize others for doing so.
It’s the “Whites are the default” style of racism. Asians are smarter than “normal.” Blacks are more athletic than “normal.” White people, on the other hand, are the norm against which all the other races are measured.
With “Asians are smarter” specifically, it probably helps that a lot of the people who believe that generally don’t put a huge premium on “intelligence” as a virtue in the first place.