this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
301 points (93.9% liked)
Today I Learned
17311 readers
1059 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's pretty anti-semitic in context too.
Do you mean you don't find anti-Semitism a form of racism?
To be fair, that's a difficult question because the forms of anti-semitism changed a lot over the course of recent and not-so-recent history.
By definition, semitic people are not just jewish people, and indeed, "semitic" describes an ethnicity, and by that, anti-semitism would also be racism.
However, many contemporary forms of anti-semitism are exclusively directed at jewish people, at which point they typically occur in people who are often also quite racist shitbags, but their anti-semitism in and of itself is not racist, because they direct their hatred at everything that is jewish, and for example the conspiracy theories surrounding jewish influence in the world have nothing to do with ethnicity, and all with religion.
As I learned it, one of the main historical factors contributing to this (and to anti-semitism) is that jewish people were not forbidden by religion from taking interest on money loans (from non-jews), whereas christians were. All the while in medieval times some other jobs were forbidden to them. So naturally there was an overrepresentation of jewish people in the emerging finance sector, and for the simple mind it is convenient to hate on people who you owe money to. And this form of anti-semitism I see as absolutely unrelated to racism.
PS: I intentionally write "jewish" and "christian" in lowercase because all religions suck donkey balls and while they can be tolerated, they deserve no special emphasis.
You're overanalyzing racism.
Racism is prejudice toward an ethnic group.
Angry about money lenders - prejudiced against money lenders - not anti-semitic, not racist
Angry about money lenders - prejudiced against Jewish people - anti-semitic, racist
And I disagree that these are the only two options you can observe in society. You can very much observe anti-semitism that has nothing to do with perceived ethnicity. Especially because - as much as racists don't like to admit that - the ethnicity of jewish people is very diverse.
Can you elaborate?
Racism isn't about perceived ethnicity specifically, it's about prejudice toward an ethnic group regardless of whether you can perceive the ethnicity accurately.
When someone racist toward Arabs discovers that someone they didn't think was Arab is Arab, then demonstrates prejudice, obviously the perceived ethnicity doesn't matter as much as the prejudice of the idea of being an error.
I don't see the disconnect between anti-Semitism and perceived ethnicity, or how such a theoretical disconnect removes racism from anti-Semitism.
Honestly, I don't think our viewpoints differ enough to waste our time on a discussion. The usefulness of debating nuances is a bit too academic in nature and better done over a beer or so. I like to make a distinction between anti- and racism in order to deface the blatant racism disguised as anti--ism.
E.g. 95% of the European citizens claiming they're "not racist, but" (we call them but-Nazis) they have an issue with islamic traditions, are just stupid racists against brown people but don't have the spine to admit that.
I can't imagine how anti-(fill in the ethnicity) cannot be perceived as racism, so I assumed our perspectives on racism were diametrically opposed.
Thank you for "but-Nazis", haha, I haven't heard that term before and I'm definitely going to be propagating it in the wild.
Notice I wrote anti-, and religion is not an ethnicity per se.
Enjoy the "Aber-Nazis" (I'm German, we have too many of those (again?), unfortunately)
Your desire to protect antisemites is certainly an interesting choice of things to devote energy to but I don't think they'll care about your careful semantics when they're choosing who to hate - you really think they only hate practicing jews? They hate anyone with Jewish ancestry, Roald was talking about a born predisposition not about some aspect of the Jewish religion.
In don't know if you're bending over backwards because to protect a childhood icon of yours or because you've got so wrapped up in the Palestine situation you've been befriending antisemites and telling yourself it's OK but you really are making shitty arguments that have been made by a million racists already
If you are unable to comprehend basic sentences, that's a you problem, not a me problem.
I understand what you said, I also understand it's stupid.
So are you separating semitism with ethnicity? I think I understand what you're saying then, although especially with the Jewish religion, ethnicity is almost intrinsic.
So I'm talking specifically about Dahl's ethnic racism, and you're just remarking that prejudice or racism does not have to be based on race?
Is your brain hardwired to interchangeably read / see the word "religion" as "ethnicity"? How else could you possibly invent a quote that "racism does not have to be based on race"?
Furthermore, I do not use the word "race" because that's not a thing - what is a thing is "ethnicity" - and in a broader biological sense, "species". We're all the same species, but ethnicities differ and only racists take perceived ethnicity and proceed to use "race" as a talking point.
I make a point to differentiate between the kind of anti-semitism that is directed at "everything jewish" and racism, because it helps dismantle people's talking points, especially to out racists.
If someone says they're Jewish, it means their mom is Jewish, and unlike many other religions, that's handed directly down through bloodline, enforcing a shared ethnicity between members of the Jewish community silver you don't join by choice but automatically through genetic inheritance.
I didn't invent the quote ""racism does not have to be based on race".
I don't see how you can understand prejudice against an ethnicity as anything other than racism and am asking you to clarify that position.
I am very much aware. However, what you appear not to be aware of is that there is plenty of biodiversity among jewish people, to the point that there is no such thing as a "jewish ethnicity". The last person that claimed that built concentration camps based on that bullshit.
I thought Jewish people were famously anemic and immunocompromised because of a lack of genetic diversity.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-genetic-diseases/
Specifically because they're culturally encouraged to marry with in the religious bloodline, they're less ethnically diverse than other groups.
I could have made that more clear, that's what I mean by having particular prejudice against Jewish people clearly being racism because it's directed toward a specially, culturally and traditionally uniform ethnic group.
There can be such an issue among a subset of a population without applying to all of them. Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about, let me reiterate: A distinction should always be made between racism and antiism, regardless of the overlap of ethnicity and any religious affiliation. Especially because religious traditions/prejudices are often used by racists to poorly mask their racism, and making this distinction is the easiest way to unmask racists.
"Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about..."
You specifically brought up Jewish genetic diversity in your previous comment:
"...you appear not to be aware of is that there is plenty of biodiversity among jewish people..."
which is famously medically inaccurate as referenced above.
As for "A distinction should always be made between racism and antiism..."
Academically, sure, if you're debating prejudice as a theory or defining terms, but this is a specific example and nobody is arguing racism and anti-Semitism are precisely identical concepts.
Here, there's no point in drawing a distinction between Dahl's anti-Semitism and racism because Roald Dahl is explicitly promoting both, and more.
The Israelis, Jews and Zionists are his salient topics, buttressed by his rationalization of the ethnic genocide of jews by that "stinker" Hitler, demonstrating both anti-semitism and racism quite clearly and specifically.
Yes, because it doesn't take a Ph.D. in biophysics to see that there are slavic jews, caucasian jews and arab jews at the very least.
Of course not.
I'm pointing out that you are trying to dismiss the article regarding Jewish genetic diversity by saying
"Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about..."
even though it has only become a topic because you have taken the initiative to weigh in on the topic in your previous comment.
In no way am I trying to dismiss the article by saying "I'm not weighing in on that". Nevertheless, my core point remains unrelated: antisemitism should not be used interchangeably with racism. And by saying that, in no way am I trying to condone either.
I agree.
I think you're preaching to the choir here though, nobody has used either term incorrectly in these threads, as far as I've seen.
Disambiguation might be more useful somewhere that the terms are being conflated.
Defining terms is unrelated and unnecessaryto the topic here.
Not inaccurate, perhaps unwarranted.
Well - the discussion originated from my comment that the OP quoted something anti-semitic in a post whose title is about racism. I just thought it's maybe not the most fitting example. But yeah, it doesn't matter too much.
The post is about anti-Semitism, a specific form of cultural and ethnic racism against Jews and Israelis demonstrated in multiple quotes by Roald Dahl.
Dahl attributes undesirable characteristics to several linked groups(Jews, Israelis, Zionists) and rationalizes the specifically ethnic Jewish genocide by Hitler.
There are further quotes that you may be missing. Pretty much all of his racism and anti-Semitism is gathered here now, however you care to define each term.
I was not arguing the point that the author had racist opinions / convictions. I was saying I expected there to certainly be a quote that was more fitting to the post title. Especially since as you confirm there are plenty of quotes. Anyways, I came to the post to inform myself - I have heard the name, but the works of this author are not among those books I have read.
The referenced OP quote Dahl makes rationalizing the Holocaust, a specifically ethnic genocide, doesn't strike you as racist?
How are you defining racism if not as prejudice against a specific race?
Also
"But yeah, it doesn't matter too much."
You've mentioned this a couple times, but each sentiment is contradicted by a dozen of your own comments belying your ardent passion for splitting the hairs of bigotry from racism for an as of yet unclear reason.
That context is not part of the quote though. As a matter of fact, unless you started mentioning it, and specifically with a jewish perspective on this author in this very thread, I wasn't aware that he was also rationalizing the holocaust.
I am bewildered how you and some others keep misquoting me this badly. I thought we had already agreed on the bottom line? I'll sign out of this discussion here, there was nothing to be gained beyond a fruitful exchange, and that is no longer to be gained.
The context is literally the quote in this case.
Dahl says:
"I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”
What connections were you making from his rationalization of "Hitler didn't just pick on them for no reason" if not a rationalization of the Jewish genocide?
Didn't read the second paragraph as part of the quote, to be honest - too much space between paragraphs. Or it got lost the moment someone took offense that I said this wasn't the best quote to link to the title. I still stand by this. Would have avoided this whole discussion here had the post replaced the word racism with anti-semitism
Avoid blaming others for your own misreading of the quote.
You can try Merriam-Webster/Oxford/Cambridge to suggest your own exclusively non-race related definition of racism.
You can similarly try contacting the museum to see if they'll change their statement regarding their condemnation of Dahl's racism.
Keep us updated on your efforts.
And let's not even get started about the disgusting mix of rightful criticism of the Israeli government with anti-semitism and racism. This topic is so emotionally charged, and gets "overcharged" each time a new sequence of Hamas-Israel mutual war crimes is started (whatever the name), and every time civilians suffer, and people nurture their hate. Mankind is so messed up.