I'm not at all sure that's true. It's definitely not true in the wider world. There are great disparities in how homicide of one group is treated as opposed to another. And this becomes even more obvious when one compares the media coverage. Look who gets lots of it and who doesn't.
It's true ON THIS BOARD. People who post on Babble are not part of anyone supposedly having "control of the media". No one's pain is being privileged over anyone else's in this thread.
btw, I didn't actually use the words "Why Jews?". It's legitimate to ask, in a situation in which people of any group are massacred, "why THEM?" Asking that question is never about minimizing the violent deaths of people in any other group-it's simply something that is natural. At the root of all it is hatred as an overall thing.
What I don't get though, in the immediate aftermath of a horrible event, is why anyone is trying to turn emotional response to an indefensible tragedy into some sort of subject of debate? Unionist posted this because he has every right to feel this on a deep personal level. I responded as I did simply out of empathy to that loss. What the hell is there to discuss? Why is so important for anyone to reduce this to generic hatred and nothing else? Is there any reason why we can't stand for a universal sense of justice and solidarity and acknowledge the specificity and particularity here, as I'd hope we would and in fact do acknowledge the specificity and particularity in any massacre targeting any other group?? What's the importance of saying that we can't look at this as anything other than hatred in general? Should we really assume that any specific reference to any group's pain is somehow a minimization or negation of any other group's pain?
I spoke with a Jewish friend of mine in the USA today
He told me this is what it was like before Hitler took power
Thank you, Ken.
OK. Guns are part of it. I can't believe anyone here would even ask if there'd be any difference had it been a group other than Jews. Obviously everyone here would grieven equally for any other group this had happened to. On this board, we have grieved and raged against, with the same levels of pain and truth, massacres of LGBTQ people, Muslims, women, Palestinians, Indigenous people, leftists and trade unionists. None here, to my knowledge, has treated the loss of any of those groups of massacre victims as if they were any less important than any other.
You immediately jump to ugly conclusions. I suggest you think about that. The point is that the cause remains the same regardless of the target. It isn't specific to being Jewish. There isn't anything any of the targets could do to avoid being targets because they didn't do anything to become targets. To ask why any particular group is a target is to suggest the target has done something to invite the violence. What I am saying is that the rage is created disconnected from any target. The right provides a list of suggestions to direct the rage away from themsleves.
It can happen to any group and has happened to many groups. Fine. We have all grieved the loss of people of many other groups. The cause remains the same. Fine. Why does it matter to you that people are noting that these people were, in fact, killed solely because they were Jewish? The killer said he was going to kill Jews. He did so. Nobody here, including the author of this thread, came even close to believing that it would have been less of a loss or less of a crime if it had been-as it has been before, as it likely will be again-people of another group being massacred. Nobody here was saying that hatred in general isn't lethal. Could you please explain what, in whatever anyone posted in this thread, bothers you? What it is you are seem to be taking issue with? Why you appear-and please explain what you are actually feeling about this if this is not the case-not to be able to just go with the grief and pain the original poster was expressing?
You are completely misinterpreting what I am saying. It is like you are illiterate and just making up what you think is written there. I'm not "taking issue" with what anyone else is saying. I am simply answering the question posed with what I believe is the answer.
I believe that the question is looking for an answer that would prevent this from continuing to happen. If we can answer the question "why" then we can prevent future violence.
The answers Sean is giving are historic and resentment against various groups can be explained this way but education has not been enough to stop anti-semitism.
To stop all prejudice is a wonderful goal but probably not going to happen too soon. The big issue here is the incitement to extreme violence. It's one thing to be prejudice, it's an entirely different thing to go on a rampage killing innoent people in a synagogue, or a church, or mowing down women in the street.
It does not in any way shape or form diminish this tragedy to draw parallels with the extreme random violence permeating society.
Try reading the next bit really carefully, three or four times if need be. I said it in post # 41
I realize now that while the obvious answer to the massacres of women is misogyny that really isn't an answer because even extreme misogyny can exist without mass murder.
I'm drawing a parallel
The same logic applies here. The question is not then, "why me (jews, women, POC, christians)" but rather why the extreme violence.
I'm saying anti-semitism isn't the cause of the extreme violence just like misogyny isn't the cause of the extreme violence. While both those things are terrible and should be fought they do not provide an explanation for these events. To look at each event in isolation doesn't provide answers. Trump bears some responsibility for his incitement but the kindling was ready to light.
To not look at the larger picture within which this is happening turns it into random inexplicable behavior by a madman.
So then Ken, your answer is that nothing can be done and we should all just say boohoo, accept this tragedy and move on? I'd say you are pretty damn cold.
P.S. Ken, Why are you against the groups subject to extreme violence banding together? (Just trying out your reading style)
While the Guardian and ADL report record levels of anti-Semitic incidents in USA, the rabidly anti-Putin, pro Western propaganda mouthpiece Moscow Times reports Russia has the lowest level of anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe.
Anti-Semitism at Historic Lows in Russia, Jewish Congress Leader Says
"Russia is currently experiencing its lowest level of anti-Semitism in history and has the lowest level of anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe, according to Yuri Kanner, the president of the Russian Jewish Congress. Meanwhile Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a statement warning about 'the spread of anti-Semitism and neo-Nazism in European countries,' the state-run Tass news agency reported."
One rather large factor may be that there are only 380,000 Jews in Russia - that's 1.24 per 1000 population, as opposed to 17.75 per 1000 population in the US. (numbers from 2016)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population_by_country
Generations of killing and driving Jews out of existence has made them difficult to see as much of a threat. I think it's fairly debatable that it's due to Russia being especially pro-Judaism. On the other hand, atheists are increasingly suppressed in Russia now, which is alarming.
Although there don't have to be many around; if anything that makes it easier to use the lie targetting them as someone other than us who doesn't belong here.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/03/10/putin-says-jews-rus...
Where I grew up in the country there was no one who openly identified as Jewish. I still heard all the jokes, stereotypes and smears about what they were supposedly like.
The Roma people have also been persecuted for many centuries. In some central European countries, hatred of Roma and of Jews remains intertwined, even after the Nazi (and collaborator) genocide.
There weren't many Jewish people in my home town, but my father's best friend was Jewish - he was like an uncle to me. The jokes and smears always seemed so weird to me, knowing this clever, well-educated, handsome and charming man. He was a better role model than most of the Christians we knew.
Interesting that putatively pro-Judaism Putin doesn't consider Russian Jews Russian per se.
My point, though, was that Russia has historically worked to eradicate Judaism, and had some success - which may have some effect on the idea of the level of threat they're considered to be. As I said, the lack of anti-Semitism in Russia is pretty debatable - and that's being kind.
Right now, the US scares the crap out of me. My cousin and her family are Jewish, live in the US and I'm worried sick about their safety.
The bigger issue, though, is that you see a rise in anti-Semitism with authortarianism. It's the canary in the coal mine.
The Roma people have also been persecuted for many centuries. In some central European countries, hatred of Roma and of Jews remains intertwined, even after the Nazi (and collaborator) genocide.
Yup. I remember some years ago, when few would have dared to openly show anti-semitic symbols (not only because it was illegal) some of the older people still left out brooms in front of their doors - a message to Roma people that they were not welcome.
(edit)
And yes, it is a sign in particular of the kind of authoritarianism that claims to be overturning society in the name of the people - against those who allegedly control everything in secret.
OK. Guns are part of it. I can't believe anyone here would even ask if there'd be any difference had it been a group other than Jews. Obviously everyone here would grieven equally for any other group this had happened to. On this board, we have grieved and raged against, with the same levels of pain and truth, massacres of LGBTQ people, Muslims, women, Palestinians, Indigenous people, leftists and trade unionists. None here, to my knowledge, has treated the loss of any of those groups of massacre victims as if they were any less important than any other.
You immediately jump to ugly conclusions. I suggest you think about that. The point is that the cause remains the same regardless of the target. It isn't specific to being Jewish. There isn't anything any of the targets could do to avoid being targets because they didn't do anything to become targets. To ask why any particular group is a target is to suggest the target has done something to invite the violence. What I am saying is that the rage is created disconnected from any target. The right provides a list of suggestions to direct the rage away from themsleves.
It can happen to any group and has happened to many groups. Fine. We have all grieved the loss of people of many other groups. The cause remains the same. Fine. Why does it matter to you that people are noting that these people were, in fact, killed solely because they were Jewish? The killer said he was going to kill Jews. He did so. Nobody here, including the author of this thread, came even close to believing that it would have been less of a loss or less of a crime if it had been-as it has been before, as it likely will be again-people of another group being massacred. Nobody here was saying that hatred in general isn't lethal. Could you please explain what, in whatever anyone posted in this thread, bothers you? What it is you are seem to be taking issue with? Why you appear-and please explain what you are actually feeling about this if this is not the case-not to be able to just go with the grief and pain the original poster was expressing?
You are completely misinterpreting what I am saying. It is like you are illiterate and just making up what you think is written there. I'm not "taking issue" with what anyone else is saying. I am simply answering the question posed with what I believe is the answer.
I believe that the question is looking for an answer that would prevent this from continuing to happen. If we can answer the question "why" then we can prevent future violence.
The answers Sean is giving are historic and resentment against various groups can be explained this way but education has not been enough to stop anti-semitism.
To stop all prejudice is a wonderful goal but probably not going to happen too soon. The big issue here is the incitement to extreme violence. It's one thing to be prejudice, it's an entirely different thing to go on a rampage killing innoent people in a synagogue, or a church, or mowing down women in the street.
It does not in any way shape or form diminish this tragedy to draw parallels with the extreme random violence permeating society.
Try reading the next bit really carefully, three or four times if need be. I said it in post # 41
I realize now that while the obvious answer to the massacres of women is misogyny that really isn't an answer because even extreme misogyny can exist without mass murder.
I'm drawing a parallel
The same logic applies here. The question is not then, "why me (jews, women, POC, christians)" but rather why the extreme violence.
I'm saying anti-semitism isn't the cause of the extreme violence just like misogyny isn't the cause of the extreme violence. While both those things are terrible and should be fought they do not provide an explanation for these events. To look at each event in isolation doesn't provide answers. Trump bears some responsibility for his incitement but the kindling was ready to light.
To not look at the larger picture within which this is happening turns it into random inexplicable behavior by a madman.
So then Ken, your answer is that nothing can be done and we should all just say boohoo, accept this tragedy and move on? I'd say you are pretty damn cold.
P.S. Ken, Why are you against the groups subject to extreme violence banding together? (Just trying out your reading style)
Obviously we need to look for solutions. Obviously we shouldn't accept this tragedy. I was simply saying that, in THIS ONE thread, which was started by one of our most honorable and universalist posters, we shouldn't pull back from the agony that person was expressing and try to take it away from what he was feeling.
We would inevitably have had the sort of discussion you're talking about in a couple of days.
What happened in Pittsburgh isn't just an abstraction at this point. All of us here are up for finding active solutions, but this was a thread for grief.
There was already a vigil planned here for tonight:
https://www.cjme.com/syn/653/430438/saskatoon-synagogue-vandalized-after...
Obviously we need to look for solutions. Obviously we shouldn't accept this tragedy. I was simply saying that, in THIS ONE thread, which was started by one of our most honorable and universalist posters, we shouldn't pull back from the agony that person was expressing and try to take it away from what he was feeling.
There is no need for you to be policing threads or posts. There was nothing offensive in my comments. I didn't do what you are accusing me of. You picking a fight with me in this thread is extremely inappropriate.
Right now, the US scares the crap out of me. My cousin and her family are Jewish, live in the US and I'm worried sick about their safety.
The bigger issue, though, is that you see a rise in anti-Semitism with authortarianism. It's the canary in the coal mine.
Well put. I think these are the most important points here.
I'm picking no fight with you. Haven't the whole thread. I simply, as gently as possible, asked you to let this thread continue in the spirit Unionist meant it in. The thread is about his community and their pain more than anything you or I might want to discuss.
I'm picking no fight with you. Haven't the whole thread. I simply, as gently as possible, asked you to let this thread continue in the spirit Unionist meant it in. The thread is about his community and their pain more than anything you or I might want to discuss.
11 Killed in Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooting; Gunman Yelled 'All Jews Must Die'
That was the sum total of the first post. Nothing about this being a condolences thread.
Post # 7
It is horrific. Just too much, the three hate-filled ultra-right-wing white men, in separate crimes. I didn't even know about the two Black people (both of a certain age) killed by the would-be Black church mass murderer. The Synagogue mass murderer also hated Muslims and wanted to rid (white) USAmerica of Muslims as well as Jews, and of course all those damned "immigrants".
See that, Lagatta mentioned other persecuted groups. She is not in any way diminishing the fact that this time it is Jewish people.
It is not up to you to judge the suitability of my comments. If you have a problem with my comments report me. You may want to try sticking to the topic of the thread yourself because this certainly isn't respectful of anyone.
I would NEVER downplay antisemitism. Recognising that even the original version of Nazism had singled out other groups of humans for persecution and death does not deny the Nazis' particular obsession with destroying European Jewry.
Pondering, I am going to suggest you take a step back from babble for a while - for your own sake as well as others.
Meg, Ken's questions are loaded like "Have you stopped beating your wife?" in that he is flinging accusations at me that have nothing to do with what I wrote.:
Post 41 (me) Would it be any better if it were women or POC? The banality of evil is nothing new. Apparently security is up around synagogues but there is nothing we can do to protect ourselves from this form of extreme violence. The next attack is just as likely to be a mosque, church, school, daycare, etc.
I realize now that while the obvious answer to the massacres of women is misogyny that really isn't an answer because even extreme misogyny can exist without mass murder. The same logic applies here. The question is not then, "why me (jews, women, POC, christians)" but rather why the extreme violence. Violence is rage coupled with opportunity in the form of weaponry and a target.
Ken: OK. Guns are part of it. I can't believe anyone here would even ask if there'd be any difference had it been a group other than Jews. Obviously everyone here would grieven equally for any other group this had happened to. On this board, we have grieved and raged against, with the same levels of pain and truth, massacres of LGBTQ people, Muslims, women, Palestinians, Indigenous people, leftists and trade unionists. None here, to my knowledge, has treated the loss of any of those groups of massacre victims as if they were any less important than any other
Me: You immediately jump to ugly conclusions. I suggest you think about that. The point is that the cause remains the same regardless of the target. It isn't specific to being Jewish. There isn't anything any of the targets could do to avoid being targets because they didn't do anything to become targets. To ask why any particular group is a target is to suggest the target has done something to invite the violence. What I am saying is that the rage is created disconnected from any target. The right provides a list of suggestions to direct the rage away from themsleves.
Ken: Why does it matter to you that people are noting that these people were, in fact, killed solely because they were Jewish? The killer said he was going to kill Jews. He did so. Nobody here, including the author of this thread, came even close to believing that it would have been less of a loss or less of a crime if it had been-as it has been before, as it likely will be again-people of another group being massacred. Nobody here was saying that hatred in general isn't lethal. Could you please explain what, in whatever anyone posted in this thread, bothers you? What it is you are seem to be taking issue with?
Me Now: Nothing in the thread bothered me. I didn't take issue with anyone or anything. I was not critical of other posters.
I have since discovered that had they merely been Jewish they would not have been murdered.
Just hours before his attack on October 27, he posted of Hebrews Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), a refugee-aiding organization connected to Tree of Life Synagogue:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/29/inside-the-online-ces...
Immigration was the trigger. They were killed for helping refugees not for being Jewish.
Would it be too much to ask you to tell Ken to lay off with the accusations?
Meg, Ken's questions are loaded like "Have you stopped beating your wife?" in that he is flinging accusations at me that have nothing to do with what I wrote.:
Post 41 (me) Would it be any better if it were women or POC? The banality of evil is nothing new. Apparently security is up around synagogues but there is nothing we can do to protect ourselves from this form of extreme violence. The next attack is just as likely to be a mosque, church, school, daycare, etc.
I realize now that while the obvious answer to the massacres of women is misogyny that really isn't an answer because even extreme misogyny can exist without mass murder. The same logic applies here. The question is not then, "why me (jews, women, POC, christians)" but rather why the extreme violence. Violence is rage coupled with opportunity in the form of weaponry and a target.
Ken: OK. Guns are part of it. I can't believe anyone here would even ask if there'd be any difference had it been a group other than Jews. Obviously everyone here would grieven equally for any other group this had happened to. On this board, we have grieved and raged against, with the same levels of pain and truth, massacres of LGBTQ people, Muslims, women, Palestinians, Indigenous people, leftists and trade unionists. None here, to my knowledge, has treated the loss of any of those groups of massacre victims as if they were any less important than any other
Me: You immediately jump to ugly conclusions. I suggest you think about that. The point is that the cause remains the same regardless of the target. It isn't specific to being Jewish. There isn't anything any of the targets could do to avoid being targets because they didn't do anything to become targets. To ask why any particular group is a target is to suggest the target has done something to invite the violence. What I am saying is that the rage is created disconnected from any target. The right provides a list of suggestions to direct the rage away from themsleves.
Ken: Why does it matter to you that people are noting that these people were, in fact, killed solely because they were Jewish? The killer said he was going to kill Jews. He did so. Nobody here, including the author of this thread, came even close to believing that it would have been less of a loss or less of a crime if it had been-as it has been before, as it likely will be again-people of another group being massacred. Nobody here was saying that hatred in general isn't lethal. Could you please explain what, in whatever anyone posted in this thread, bothers you? What it is you are seem to be taking issue with?
Me Now: Nothing in the thread bothered me. I didn't take issue with anyone or anything. I was not critical of other posters.
I have since discovered that had they merely been Jewish they would not have been murdered.
Just hours before his attack on October 27, he posted of Hebrews Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), a refugee-aiding organization connected to Tree of Life Synagogue:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/29/inside-the-online-ces...
They were killed for helping refugees not for being Jewish.
No, they were killed for being Jewish and underplaying the overt anti-Semitism in the act is extremely problematic and requires a response. I can suggest mediation for the two of you but at this point it needs to be taken out of the thread and into group messaging if we are to resolve this conflict in a meaningful way that doesn't take up space meant for discussion of the issue.
Meg, Ken's questions are loaded like "Have you stopped beating your wife?" in that he is flinging accusations at me that have nothing to do with what I wrote.:
Post 41 (me) Would it be any better if it were women or POC? The banality of evil is nothing new. Apparently security is up around synagogues but there is nothing we can do to protect ourselves from this form of extreme violence. The next attack is just as likely to be a mosque, church, school, daycare, etc.
I realize now that while the obvious answer to the massacres of women is misogyny that really isn't an answer because even extreme misogyny can exist without mass murder. The same logic applies here. The question is not then, "why me (jews, women, POC, christians)" but rather why the extreme violence. Violence is rage coupled with opportunity in the form of weaponry and a target.
Ken: OK. Guns are part of it. I can't believe anyone here would even ask if there'd be any difference had it been a group other than Jews. Obviously everyone here would grieven equally for any other group this had happened to. On this board, we have grieved and raged against, with the same levels of pain and truth, massacres of LGBTQ people, Muslims, women, Palestinians, Indigenous people, leftists and trade unionists. None here, to my knowledge, has treated the loss of any of those groups of massacre victims as if they were any less important than any other
Me: You immediately jump to ugly conclusions. I suggest you think about that. The point is that the cause remains the same regardless of the target. It isn't specific to being Jewish. There isn't anything any of the targets could do to avoid being targets because they didn't do anything to become targets. To ask why any particular group is a target is to suggest the target has done something to invite the violence. What I am saying is that the rage is created disconnected from any target. The right provides a list of suggestions to direct the rage away from themsleves.
Ken: Why does it matter to you that people are noting that these people were, in fact, killed solely because they were Jewish? The killer said he was going to kill Jews. He did so. Nobody here, including the author of this thread, came even close to believing that it would have been less of a loss or less of a crime if it had been-as it has been before, as it likely will be again-people of another group being massacred. Nobody here was saying that hatred in general isn't lethal. Could you please explain what, in whatever anyone posted in this thread, bothers you? What it is you are seem to be taking issue with?
Me Now: Nothing in the thread bothered me. I didn't take issue with anyone or anything. I was not critical of other posters.
I have since discovered that had they merely been Jewish they would not have been murdered.
Just hours before his attack on October 27, he posted of Hebrews Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), a refugee-aiding organization connected to Tree of Life Synagogue:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/29/inside-the-online-ces...
They were killed for helping refugees not for being Jewish.
No, they were killed for being Jewish and underplaying the overt anti-Semitism in the act is extremely problematic and requires a response. I can suggest mediation for the two of you but at this point it needs to be taken out of the thread and into group messaging if we are to resolve this conflict in a meaningful way that doesn't take up space meant for discussion of the issue.
I would be happy to do so at whatever time is convenient to you and Ken.
Great. I've got a meeting in a few minutes but will set up a message thread for the three of us shortly thereafter.
I would NEVER downplay antisemitism. Recognising that even the original version of Nazism had singled out other groups of humans for persecution and death does not deny the Nazis' particular obsession with destroying European Jewry.
And I never thought you would or did.
Noam Chomsky on Pittsburgh Attack: Revival of Hate Is Encouraged by Trump’s Rhetoric
quote:
The roots lie in what has happened to the general population over the past 40 years. People really have faced significant distress. An astonishing fact about the United States is that life expectancy is actually declining. That doesn’t happen in developed societies, apart from, you know, major war or huge famine. But it’s happening because of social distress, and not necessarily impoverishment. The people who are demonstrating this fear and resentment may be even moderately affluent, but what they see is they’re stagnating. In the past, there was—you had this dream: You worked hard, you could get ahead, your children would be a little better. Now it stopped. It stopped for the last 40 years as a result of very specific socio and economic policies, which have been designed so that they sharply concentrate wealth, they enhance corporate power, that has immediate effects on the political system in perfectly obvious ways, even to the point where lobbyists literally write legislation. This onslaught has literally cast a bunch of the population aside. They’re stagnating. They are not moving forward. They see no prospects. And they’re bitter and angry about it.
And this anger and bitterness can take pathological forms. It could take very constructive forms. It could lead to popular organized movements, which would dedicate themselves to overcoming these blows against decent human existence, which certainly can be done. The groundwork for that has been severely undermined, for example, by the destruction—careful, planned destruction—of labor unions, the main force, historically, for leading the way towards more progressive, humane policies. All of these are a package. They’ve all gone together for 40 years—there’s precursors, of course—and it has led to a situation where you get an outburst of what Gramsci once called morbid symptoms, pathological developments, of the kind that you mentioned, growing out of a soil that is rich in incitement to such things happening.
quote:
AMY GOODMAN: So, I wanted to turn, then, to a clip of the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, who was interviewed by Ayman Mohyeldin on MSNBC on Sunday, so it was soon after the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre. Dermer was asked if Trump’s rhetoric is in part to blame for the massacre.
RON DERMER: I see a lot of bad people, on both sides, who attack Jews. This is not the first time that a Jewish community has been attacked. It is the worst anti-Semitic attack in, oh, 200 years in the United States, that you have 11 dead.
AMY GOODMAN: Dermer said no world leader had made stronger statements against anti-Semitism than Trump. And then he went on to blame both sides.
RON DERMER: To simply say that this is because of one person or it only comes on one side is to not understand the history of anti-Semitism or the reality of anti-Semitism. One of the big forces in college campuses today is anti-Semitism. And those anti-Semites are usually not neo-Nazis on college campuses. They’re coming from the radical left.
This is not going to stop:
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/brooklyn-synagogue-event-canceled-af...
Ron Dermer is full of shit. Being against the way Israel treats the Indigenous people is not remotely antisemitic. No more than opposing the mistreatment, expulsion and sometimes outright genocide of Indigenous peoples here is anti-Canadian or anti-Québécois.
I know of NO moderately or radical-left campus groups who persecute Jews as Jews, and many Palestinian solidarity groups include Jewish as well as Arab students (of course both of those groups are "semites", though yes, I do know how it was used by the European racist far-right until Jean-Marie Le Pen decided to prioritise hatred of both those semitic peoples).
By the way, McCord museum, one of the Mtl historical museums (there are several) is making Shalom Montréal, about the contributions of the MTL Jewish community/communities, free of charge until and including Sunday.
