Rashak Mani:
Why are you avoiding the point?
Do you really not understand the impact tossing around phrases like “All of ‘group’ X do Y?”
Are you totally clueless? If so, educate yourself. If you’re not clueless, are you really an anti-semite? I can’t really see other options. It’s not enough to keep making boneheaded statements, defend them for a while, and then quasi-apologize. The goal is to stop making the statements.
That’s no different than the argument used by the bigots who claim that the slaves don’t have anything to really bitch about, since the Irish and Russians were sometimes indentured. I call them on it, so I’m going to call you on it, too. Yes, Soviets died and Gypsies died, but that has squat to do with what the Jews went through, and even if it were worse (it wasn’t), that doesn’t excuse the holocaust. Atrocity “A” never makes atrocity “B” more acceptable. Never. Not only that, but it’s a debate method more frequently used by those whose positions you most despise, so I’m surprised to see you use it here.
I was hoping you’d come in and offer a much better explanation for your use of the term “stick out”, but it didn’t happen. While I’m not ready to call you anti-semitic, I will say that your use of generalizations is a lot broader than I’m comfortable with, and I think you should make sure that your problem is one of communication and not one of thought.
Sorry had a busy day… read the post will answer tommorrow.
Meanwhile RPGers have fun with stereotypes: D&D around the World
I agree that making broad "statements" doesn't help. But how much of this is politically correct talk? How much is this becoming a "N" word thingy ? This is what irks me. (reminds me to search those old threads about stereotypes) Most of my quotes posted here were sarcastic... so its an issue of bad taste rather than anti-semitism IMO.
DMC it wasn’t about excusing the holocaust or any other atrocity. In fact the contrary… how past atrocities seem to be used to justify the new ones. Putting things into perspective or current relevance is important IMO… as the holocaust or slavery shouldn’t be a defense of anything jews or blacks do or get decades later, unless its relevant to today’s problem. (Slavery in some ways is still relevant to brazilian blacks exclusion from the middle class for example regarding education and equal opportunities. So it should be about equalizing… not compensating.)
DMC I understand the “blacks bitching about slavery” excuse you mentioned… but at some point that has or will become irrelevant. Until when can slavery be a catch all root of all the problems of blacks here ? (maybe US too?) Their being treated as second rate citizens unable to go ahead and needing special treatment or protection is good ? We are having problems with this currently here… and the patronizing view of the blacks I think is counterproductive. Especially because most of them here have a real problem of poverty and lousy public education. I’d rather see focus given on what causes that inequality and discrimination now…
None.
It’s about truth, and the ramifications that generalizations about ‘groups’ can have.
Indeed, I said it was pretty much binary; either you were clueless and offensive or anti-semitic. Some statements, if you really do believe them, you need to take a good look at. Jews don’t stick out, at least the huge majority of us don’t. Jews everywhere aren’t anything. Etc…
Just be careful of the generalizations you toss around. Specifics are often more valuable.
Jews everywhere are mammals. ;j
I’ve known a few who were distinctly reptilian 
I’ll be more careful, (you might be a little less touchy too)… though I can’t avoid smirking at the “jews everywhere aren’t anything”… thats a broad statement.
Thank you, but it’s not a question about being touchy. I’ve gone on record on the Dope, more than once, as opposing ascribing fungibility to any ‘group’. Yes, there are statistical facts. And there are cultural influences. But that still means we need to be careful when we make statements.
“Jews everywhere.” ≠ “Value X”
How is that formulation incorrect?
In order to prove it’s incorrect, you’d need to show that Jews everywhere are some specific ‘thing’ or ‘value’. And you can’t do that. Unless we stick to “Jews are human”, which really tells us nothing and doesn’t need to be stated, right?
Yep… humans or mammals… 
Well in theory an alien could convert to Judaism so we never know.
Run a google search for “Alien Jew”. The first hit is hillarious, though I’m not sure it’s supposed to be.
I don’t know who to call first- David Icke or Pastor Arnold Murray!
Are Jews Smarter Thread
Didn’t read the links or the replies posted… but I guess FinnAgain would have an interest.
Already saw it. Check out Tom’s post: