A few candidates (feel free to suggest your own write-ins):
The Palestinians
The Jews
The Chechens
The Gypsies (or Roma, as many prefer to be called)
The Kurds
The Native Americans
Please justify your choice, preferably outlining:
a) why they are more srewed than anyone else, and/or
b) why the way(s) that they have been screwed are more fundamentally unjust than the ways in which other candidate groups have been screwed.
Ethnic Germans fro eastern Europe.
Although having a history in whatever country happened to own such and such territory by chance or accident at the end of WWII, the largely peaceful ethnic Germans, founders and a frighteningly large proportion of the cities and living testament to the cooperation between peoples that can be, were driven out of nearly every Eastern European locale by '55 or '60.
The German govenment won't ask for apologies or reperations, and no Eastern European gov has offered them. These people lost everything, and huge numbers of Germans died in the forced movements and mass migrations. Though few Westerners have any experience with this (as it started entirely within the Soviet Bloc and ended just inside "The West"), the horrors involved almost rival Nazi practices.
And they are now dying of old age. I mean, the youngest amongst them is no less than 50 or so. No one seemed to care about their plight. Few people even remember it.American Indians. Hands down. No question about it.
Atheists. Definitely a minority, and their role in society is grudging tolerance at best to outright persecution at worst.
All just because we don’t want to believe in invisible sky pixies…
I’ll ask the question. Who is the most justly screwed ethnic/religious minority in the world?
I’ll second athiests/agnostics because every single debate over “freedom of religion” seems to assume that you believe in one religion or another. Freedom of religion means freedom from religion too.
Erm… I can’t think of a situation when it’s just to ‘screw’ any ethnic/religious group, majority or minority. Are you suggesting that some groups deserve the (bad) treatment they get?
Threadkiller: Also, I respectfully request that if you want to see who people feel deserves to be screwed, that you do so in your very own thread rather than by hijacking this one.
How are us atheists the most unjustly screwed minority in the history of mankind? Just because we get attacked in debates? And people look at us funny sometimes? No, that hardly compares to other groups.
Historically, I’d have to say the most unjustly screwed minority are the Jews. Nearly six million dead in the Holocaust, a million killed by the Romans, 300,000 dead in Russian pogroms, thousands killed during the Crusades, Black Death, and Inquisition, and uprooting from their homeland by Assyrians, Babylonians, etc.
In modern context, I’d say the most screwed are the Kurds. Over 120,000 killed by Hussein (some estimates over 200,000) and more than a million forced out of their homes. Over 5,000 killed as chemical weapon guinea pigs, too.
I am NOT saying that any group of people “deserves to be screwed” especially based on religion or ethnicity. I just found your thread title to be curious–by using the term “unjustly” it offhandedly implies that there is, occasionally, justification.
If the SDMB were to impose a “no hijacking” rule, board traffic would be drastically cut, and a lot of interesting lines of thought would be uncovered.
I think I’d have to agree on atheists. Didn’t George Bush, Sr. say this in '88?:
"No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. "
and this:
"Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I’m just not very high on atheists. "
I’m just trying to picture ANY respected politician saying something like that about any other minority group. I mean, for example, substitute “Jews” or “Blacks” for “atheists”, and imagine the outcry there would have been.
Oh, and just to clarify, I’m going by the exact wording of the o.p. title, where it says “most unjustly screwed”. I wouldn’t say atheists are the most screwed, but definitely “most unjustly”, when you consider that atheists are, if anything, more law-abiding as a group than anyone else. When was the last time an atheist made the news for setting off a bomb?
Not that screwing someone is EVER justified, of course.
I don’t know, we had Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin.
I still stand by the Jews and Kurds, respectively.
Yeah, that’s about the same as a Trail of Tears. Or getting gassed & stuff. 
My vote? Canadians. No respect at all.
Get your glasses fixed. Did you see where I wrote “I wouldn’t say atheists are the most screwed”?
Sorry about your reading disability.
I don’t know if he said that. Googling brought up this site, which sounds pretty reasonable, backing that statement up. However, I don’t understand how a campaigning politician saying something as stupid as that equates to persecution. Speech does not equal action.
Yes, there would have been a huge outcry. But just because the atheist population is not organizationally outspoken, nor have a distinct advocacy group to provide outside support, does not mean that that stupid comment by Bush is any more or less harmful.
I’ve seen people before make the claim that atheists are more law-abiding, etc. I assume that this comes from some study I’m not familiar with. Do you have a cite for that? Just because the news doesn’t identify criminals as “John Smith was captured today in the recent pipe bombing at the local post office. He is an admitted atheist.” When was the last time someone was killed as a result of their atheism?
I’m not saying that atheists are not a group that is discriminated against. But I am saying that atheists are not a group that is vigilantly persecuted. I think previous posts to this thread indicate a good number of other groups who’ve had it far worse than atheists.
I have nothing against hijacking per se. I just meant that you were asking precisely the opposite question from the OP, so if there’s a reason why you’re doing this that you think will enlighten us on the OP, please clarify.
Ordinary Afghans. And ordinary Serbs before them. And ordinary Iraqis before that.
One may argue that they were not a minority in their respective countries though…
Almost every group has undergone persecution at some point in their history. I don’t know if you can really say ‘this persecution was worse then that’; it no doubt always sucks to be on the recieving side of persecution.
I’d say it’s the Romany. For most of their history since they moved into Europe, they had no rights at all. The laws in most countries said that they were inherantly slaves, and they could be killed for any reason at all. Even in the 18th and 19th centuries, when liberalism swept Europe, they were the last group to get any sort of freedom, and prejudice and discrimination kept them from exercizing the rights that they legally had. Then, the Nazis came.
In terms of worldwide populations, a higher percentage of Roma were killed than any other group…even more than the Jews. But that the Nazis attempted to commit genocide against them is almost forgotten today.
Even up to the present day, there’s still a lot of discrimination against the Romany, and they’re still scapegoats.
On second reading, I realized you may have thought I had accused you of believing that some groups “deserved” to be persecuted. You did, however, ask specifcally “who is the most justly screwed ethnic/religious minority in the world,” presumably because you wanted other people’s opinions. I just asked, in return, how you thought those opinions might illuminate the OP.
That said, perhaps “unjustly” wasn’t the best possible word choice. I would never suggest that it is fair to treat any group less favorably than others, much less persecute them, based on religion or ethnicity. However, there are some considerations (geopolitics, to name but one) which might make differential treatment more understandable from a realpolitik standpoint, if not justifiable.
Anyway, please do carry on…