Berzerker
Deity
I was thinking of all the other non-Jewish semites
The fact that your (our) mind(s) wandered to the bolded shows just how bad his remark was.Spicer should lose his job because it's a stark example of how incompetent he is. A press secretary should not be acting so amateurishly. It's very doubtful that he denies elements of the Holocaust, although it's possible he would downplay elements of it, or just be historically ignorant. In this case his amateurishness simply makes him look like a buffoon, but it's entirely possible that in other circumstances it could have real adverse consequences for the US, e.g. if he accidentally says something that precipitates conflict.
I'd say not-ignoring other Hitler's victims should apply to everybody including Jew-centric organizations.Nobody is saying to ignore Hitler's other victims. What people are saying is that it makes sense that a Jew-centric organization would refer to the Jews.
It seems that "holocaust-related-ignorance" is included in the concept of holocaust denial... which actually makes sense given Spicy's position. When you have the White House issuing statements that downplay or gloss over the holocaust, it lends credibility (such as it is) to others who would do the same.Or they knew he just made a dumbass mistake and they're using it to nail him because that's their agenda.
It would make sense if they actually went after him by calling him an idiot, but they weren't doing that. They were accusing him of actually denying the holocaust, which his initial statement didn't do, and his later remarks (while being just as stupid as what he said first) pretty much clarified that he doesn't actually deny the holocaust.It seems that "holocaust-related-ignorance" is included in the concept of holocaust denial... which actually makes sense given Spicy's position. When you have the White House issuing statements that downplay or gloss over the holocaust, it lends credibility (such as it is) to others who would do the same.
In other words, I can see the justification for going after him on this.
Hitler also said the Russians were subhuman, among tons of others. Jews were NOT the only minority the nazis were trying to wipe out. If antisemites use this to promote jew hatred that can't be helped, but that doesn't make it wrong. If David Duke says the grass is green and the sky is blue, he would still be correct.
I have genuinely no idea what you are trying to say to me.
He didn't deny that though.You are wrong, the Jews were specially targeted for extermination. And attempting to deny this is playing into anti-Semitic nonsense at best, verging on Holocaust denial at worst.
Without detracting in any way from the gravity of the crimes perpetrated against all victims of Nazism, it seems that major distinctions exist between their Jewish and non-Jewish victims:
Only the Jews were singled out for total destruction. From the ideological principles formulated in Mein Kampf to the original anti-Jewish legislation in Germany of the 1930s, the Jews were singled out as the focus of German wrath. According to the Commentaries to the German Racial Laws of 1936:
"The Blood Protection Law deals with the segregation of Jewish and German blood from the biological point of view… As an acute danger threatened the German people from Jewry alone, the law aims primarily at the prevention of further mixing of blood with the Jews."2
The government-sponsored pogroms in November 1938 did not include Polish nationals or businesses or Catholic churches. Mass Jewish emigration was Germany's goal at that point. The formulation of the "Final Solution" to the Jewish problem in January 1942 did not treat the Polish or Russian ethnic problem or outline worldwide extermination of homosexuals, but dealt exclusively with the anticipated extermination of the 11 million Jews of Europe. At no point did any plan for the total murder of any other population exist formally or informally other than of the Jews.
These distinctions between Jewish and non-Jewish victims continued into the final months and days of the war. As the German Army retreated both on the Eastern and Western fronts, the effort to exterminate as many Jews as possible continued unabated. The ideal of reducing inferior Polish and Russian populations to make room for an expanded German Reich would not be realized, but the removal of as many Jews as possible from the world stage remained Germany's highest priority, to which resources continued to be directed even as the war was being lost. Nor were the Jews given a chance to reform or correct their ways. German homosexuals willing to accept therapy and rehabilitation would certainly have been spared, as would have the masses of Poles and Russians had they acquiesced to Aryan conquest of their lands.
No such option existed for the Jews.
At no point were the religious texts, objects, edifices or spiritual leaders of other populations targeted as were those of the Jews.
The other problem is mentioning Jews only creates the sense that there were no other victims except them.The problem is that insisting that everyone mentions the non-Jews along with the Jews creates the sense that the two are vaguely equivalent, or at least vaguely in the same league.
Well, the Nazis focused primarily on the Jews as their first targets, but Generalplan Ost envisaged killing or deporting to a rump state in Siberia large percentages of the Slavs in their way (ranging from 50% of Czechs, to 85% of Poles, Lithuanians, and Russians, to 100% of Jews of course). They got around to killing the Jews first because they were Nazis, but then they lost the war with the vast majority of the secondary Slavic targets still alive. If they'd won, it's reasonable to assume that the majority of Slavs in their new Lebensraum would have been killed, forcibly assimilated, or deported (mostly killed, I assume) over the following couple of decades.
Of course, Hitler's thinking here was basically that he wanted to be like the US, where we did push continually westward, committing a long series of wars and genocides until the conquest was complete and we had the whole temperate part of a vast continent by 1890, with the few survivors consigned to worthless chunks of land in the middle of nowhere, where their descendants continue to suffer desperate poverty to this day. The Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders did the exact same thing with the same success. I fault his tactics and his focus on the Jews specifically, but as a member of a settler colonial society myself, I totally understand the brutal and inhumane logic of the whole settler-colonial scheme.
To my mind, the main difference between them and us is that our genocides worked. Germany committed the faux pas of attempting a huge settler colonial project in Europe, and doing it too quickly without the aid of disease, thereby biting off more than he could chew. He also did it like a century after settler colonialism had become uncool, not that it was ever really cool to do it in Europe rather than to find some other continent to exploit.
He's peddling the usual anti-Semitic nonsense. Dude has a track record, it's not like we haven't seen him being anti-Semitic before.
Anyway, link me a post I made on CFC where I was anti-Semitic, or apologize.
Side note: Jews were definitely the primary target of the holocaust (more Jews were killed than everything else combined) but they were not the only people stuck in the concentration camps.
To my mind, the main difference between them and us is that our genocides worked. Germany committed the faux pas of attempting a huge settler colonial project in Europe, and doing it too quickly without the aid of disease, thereby biting off more than he could chew. He also did it like a century after settler colonialism had become uncool, not that it was ever really cool to do it in Europe rather than to find some other continent to exploit.
I think I understand your point, but I don't think I got my point adequately across here. The reason they didn't call him "an idiot" instead of calling him "a holocaust denier", is because they very intentionally do not want to give any quarter to people who fail to recognize the holocaust, regardless of context. In a way it goes back to what Hygro said about their focus (agenda), ie raising (and keeping high) the awareness, recognition, etc., of the holocaust.It would make sense if they actually went after him by calling him an idiot, but they weren't doing that. They were accusing him of actually denying the holocaust, which his initial statement didn't do, and his later remarks (while being just as stupid as what he said first) pretty much clarified that he doesn't actually deny the holocaust.
The argument that "You didn't actually deny the holocaust, but you're still a holocaust denier because of <reasons>." is just stupid, and twisting the logic behind the phrase doesn't change that. They should have reacted by calling out his stupidity, not by making accusations that are clearly not true.