Whoopi Goldberg is right about the holocaust

You didn’t answer my question why you don’t consider antisemitism racist. 

2. doesn’t it make perfect sense to say antisemitism falls under racism? 

No, because Jewish is a religion not a race, that’s like calling Antichrist people racist, the two are non sequiturs. Even if you wanted to argue from a Jewish bloodline perspective that doesn’t negate the fact that race is still a non sequitur, maybe that more falls under the lines of for lack of a better term xenophobia (don’t quote me on that one), it’s important to know the differences between race, ethnicity, and nationality.

strident in her words

carves out an exception to racism

3. I’m pretty certain Goldberg is pro: more stringent penalties for “hate crimes.” Here, it seems like she is saying that the Nazis were certainly guilty of crimes, just that it didn’t rise to the level of hate crimes— hatred based upon immutable or identity based characteristics.

If you have seen the clip, why do you need me to recite what she said “EXACTLY”?

The Jews in Germany were indeed separated… from non Jewish whites.

It was hatred based upon identity.

Point being, she doesn’t have the knowledge of the subject to pontificate as confidently as she did.

In this case, “race” is just a catch-all for ethnicity and group identity.

The point is the same— Jews were hated, scapegoated, and genocided based upon group identity.

Again, Whoopi was wrong. Race as a categorizing term referring to human beings was first used in the English language in the late 16th century. Until the 18th century it had a generalized meaning similar to other classifying terms such as type, sort, or kind. Occasional literature of Shakespeare’s time referred to a “race of saints” or “a race of bishops.” By the 18th century, race was widely used for sorting and ranking the peoples in the English colonies—Europeans who saw themselves as free people, Amerindians who had been conquered, and Africans who were being brought in as slave labour—and this usage continues today.

The peoples conquered and enslaved were physically different from western and northern Europeans, but such differences were not the sole cause for the construction of racial categories. The English had a long history of separating themselves from others and treating foreigners, such as the Irish, as alien “others.” By the 17th century their policies and practices in Ireland had led to an image of the Irish as “savages” who were incapable of being civilized. Proposals to conquer the Irish, take over their lands, and use them as forced labor failed largely because of Irish resistance. It was then that many Englishmen turned to the idea of colonizing the New World. Their attitudes toward the Irish set precedents for how they were to treat the New World Indians and, later, Africans

In this case, “race” is just a catch-all for ethnicity and group identity. The point is the same— Jews were hated, scapegoated, and genocided based upon group identity.

Except it’s not (Ms. Goldberg’s point all along) maybe YOU don’t have the knowledge to pontificate on this subject.

Tarik’s all over the place.

I agree that Goldberg doesn’t have a substantive point. She’s actually not adding any meaningful info to the discussion (“man’s inhumanity” well, duh!) while also subtracting info (what it ISN’T about).

However, the insightful, informative paragraph you quote first isn’t Tarik but FLRW.

Nope that’s you buddy, asking me the same questions over and over again without bringing anything substantive to the discussion warranting it. I’ve refuted every argument you’ve made and all you’ve done is filibuster and contradict yourself. You shouldn’t expect anyone to honestly take you seriously, get over yourself your pathetic.

In other words, I’m not pontificating here. I’m not telling others what to think, as Goldberg is.

I’m not telling others what to think, as Goldberg is.

Saying it’s about “man’s inhumanity to man” isn’t at all informative.

perhaps she should’ve offered a more specific term rather than the vague one she used since getting the narrative right is the goal, maybe she would’ve gotten less heat if she called it for EXACTLY what it is, antisemitism.

At the same time, she attempts to subtract insight from the discussion, saying what it ISN’T about.

perhaps she should’ve offered a more specific term rather than the vague one she used since getting the narrative right is the goal, maybe she would’ve gotten less heat if she called it for EXACTLY what it is, antisemitism.

Judaism is the religion you fool. 

Antisemitism is a subset of racism:

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/anti-semitism

Regardless Jewish still isn’t a race (the focal point of the whole discussion) it’s an ethnicity and/or culture you fool.

, a xenophobic comment is saying I don’t like Americans, well contrary to many beliefs Americans are composed of many different races of people so your not saying anything pertaining to race just culture and lifestyle. 

Are you sure they’re races and not ethnicities? That was sarcasm by the way. Look at race holistically and you’ll see many positions aren’t mutually exclusive.

Ms. Goldberg failed to say “it’s about ethnic hatred” didn’t she?

What do you not understand about this?

whether or not someone is white isn’t a matter of opinion it’s a matter of fact

Just out of curiosity, do you describe yourself as a “race realist”?

It’s easy to discern when you are lying in regards to me and what I’ve said in order to save face in an argument.

Indeed. Yet, for whatever reason, it didn’t stop you from trying.

Our back and forth dialogue is all documented through this site,