quote:

Originally posted by ShiroKuro:
So, what was Whoopi's point in saying it wasn't about race?

She was trying to say that when white people kill other white people, it isn't about race. It can't be, because they're the same race. So what is it, then? It's man's inhumanity to man.

And by saying the Holocaust was about man's inhumanity to man (and setting aside the gender imprecision there), she was right in the broadest sense. Many different types of humans were murdered, so that phrasing captures it pretty accurately, IMHO.

I guess what confuses me is why PJ and Pique don't want "ownership" of the Holocaust. By that, I mean that black people in the U.S. want "ownership" of slavery. We don't want people saying, "Yeah, that happened, but a whole lot of people around the world have been victimized by slavery, so the enslavement of black people in the U.S. isn't unusual. Let's move on." We don't want people diluting or dismissing what our ancestors went through because it impacts us to this day. I would imagine that Jewish people would feel the same way about the Holocaust because even though others were murdered too, jewish people were targeted especially and bore most of the impact given that there was a serious attempt to wipe them off the planet.

So when I hear "man's inhumanity to man," I hear it as very broad. Not wrong, but broad. To make it less broad, I would have to zoom in some and recognize the Holocaust as genocide, by its intent and its impact.

But I have a hard time zooming in more and saying it was genocide against a "race," if the perps were the same race as the victims.

And that takes us back to square one: Are Jews a "race" different from Germans? I can see how people might come to different conclusions on that, but I don't see how whoever gets it wrong ought to be suspended.

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:
I'm not inside Whoopi Goldberg's head. But because she is Black her statement appears to imply that racism can only be something suffered by people who have darker skin.

Mmmmm, I wouldn't say that's exactly where she would land.

Racism is discrimination or bias based on race.

Because lighter skinned people have a disproportionate amount of power and opportunity to discriminate, most racism is against people of color.

But there is, of course, racism against people with light skin. I'm black, and I have some power in my job. I could decide that I won't put Jewish attorneys on my cases. Of course, this would be an example of discrimination against someone with light skin.

If I did that, I would get sued. But I think I would get sued because of discrimination based on religion or national origin (which includes culture). I doubt they could sue me for race discrimination unless I was motivated by their (light) skin color as opposed to their Jewish identity.

I think . . .

quote:

Discrimination on the basis of an immutable characteristic associated with race, such as skin color, hair texture, or certain facial features violates Title VII, even though not all members of the race share the same characteristic.

My reading of this draws me to the conclusion that Jews are a race. By this standard, the fact that people "look Jewish" would fit.

quote:

I guess what confuses me is why PJ and Pique don't want "ownership" of the Holocaust. By that, I mean that black people in the U.S. want "ownership" of slavery. We don't want people saying, "Yeah, that happened, but a whole lot of people around the world have been victimized by slavery, so the enslavement of black people in the U.S. isn't unusual. Let's move on." We don't want people diluting or dismissing what our ancestors went through because it impacts us to this day. I would imagine that Jewish people would feel the same way about the Holocaust because even though others were murdered too, jewish people were targeted especially and bore most of the impact given that there was a serious attempt to wipe them off the planet.

And I'm confused by what you've written. We do feel the same way about the Holocaust. Not sure why you would think otherwise.

quote:

I could decide that I won't put Jewish attorneys on my cases. Of course, this would be an example of discrimination against someone with light skin.

Not to mention an example of poor judgment.

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:

quote:

Discrimination on the basis of an immutable characteristic associated with race, such as skin color, hair texture, or certain facial features violates Title VII, even though not all members of the race share the same characteristic.

My reading of this draws me to the conclusion that Jews are a race. By this standard, the fact that people "look Jewish" would fit.

To me, it sounds like you are saying that Jews are a race, so it is illegal to discriminate based on physical characteristics associated with the Jewish race.

But that begs the question of whether Jews are a race.

I always thought that the phrase "the Jewish race" was basically a slur. Maybe based on the historical reasons you and PJ have explained?

The legal language you cited establishes that races have common physical traits. Jews have common physical traits. They tend to have kinky hair and hooked noses. Not every Jew, but your citation is explicit that even if not all members of a race have the common physical traits, that doesn't exclude them.

I'm not saying it is a race or it isn't. I'm just going off your citation and saying if that is the standard, then Jews are a race.

"The Jewish race" is offensive, because it recalls Hitler.

It's complicated.

Amanda should weigh in here.

I will say that my experience of being Jewish is genetic. Not just because of appearance, but also because of genetic traits like Tay Sachs disease and breast cancer that are so strongly present in Jewish families that we are advised to undergo genetic testing before marriage.

I am appreciating everyone’s comments, but a little tired to say much of substance this evening.

But thank you all for posting here. There’s always more learn! I will make time to read the article linked above about why this incident reinforces that we need CRT.

I’m not really up to speed on the whole WG incident, but it seems like a really good opportunity for discussion rather than immediate suspension.

Good nght

I, too, would be interested in what Amanda thinks of this. She has lived a lot closer to the issues than I have.

It's sticky and nasty.

I have no idea what Whoopi Goldberg had in mind or what point she was trying to make in the discussion -- a discussion about the graphic novel MAUS being banned from classrooms in a school district in Tennessee. My personal opinion is that she kinda stepped in it during the discussion. She got put in time out for doubling down on her point instead of apologizing and committing to gain a clearer understanding and doing better in the future. She apparently believes she did nothing wrong.

I believe she did something wrong.


I agree that the definitions of words like "race" and "ethnicity" change over time. When Whoopi Goldberg followed-up by saying "the Holocaust wasn't about race, it was about ethnicity", she implied they were two different things (which is why I looked at the contemporary definitions).

In my experience, there are different groups of people that are different from all others by some genetic makeup. And there are subgroups within each that sometimes I have a hard time discerning. "Asian" is a huge group that includes Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Filipinos, and many others. Which level of division gets the label "race"? Are Arabs and Jews the same race? Are they both White? Are the Irish and Italians different races? They are both White (and were both discriminated against by Western Europeans). What about Hispanics and Latinos? There are dozens of web pages explaining the difference. Are they White? I probably could not differentiate a Tutsi from a Hutu, but they certainly can.

My mother was Jewish. In Jewish custom, Jewish identity is based on the mother -- because you *always* know who the mother is. One of my brothers married an Asian woman. They have a daughter. She wanted to live in Israel. My mother had to write a letter confirming my niece's Jewish identity.

It's messy.

I've had my eyes opened by this discussion and it's given me a lot to think about.

I need to reread Cindy's post about "owning" the Holocaust and pique’s reply.

Why is this discussion important? There are very few Holocaust survivors left. There are very few people with first-hand knowledge of the Holocaust. And now we have people openly and proudly calling themselves nazis as the US comes dangerously close to fascist totalitarianism. Acts of antisemitism are increasing.

Why is this important?

When you visit Auschwitz, these are two of the first things you see on the tour:

Hitler was seeking to ensure that the Aryan race (his term) was not diluted. He blamed Jews for Germany losing WW1. He executed homosexuals, disabled people, Roma and Slavs as detrimental to his vision of an superior Aryan race ruling europe - and beyond.

Hitler viewed his efforts at extermination as a quest for racial purity. It's best to define terms before walking into this sensitive a subject. The Nazi's actually studied race law in the US to implement laws in Germany concerning the determination who would be classified as Jewish.

At the same time, Holocaust is often equated with only the extermination of Jews, but there were other groups also slated for execution - just not in the same numbers and perhaps not with the same ferocity.