4 ms·

Eh, look at the modern attacks on white males. Mainstream politicians give speeches where they denounce white men and say things like, "women are better than me

Eh, look at the modern attacks on white males. Mainstream politicians give speeches where they denounce white men and say things like, "women are better than men" (Obama), "women are the primary victims of war" (Clinton), "It's an English jurisprudential culture, a white man's culture. It's got to change" (Biden). They do it because it their base loves it, it plays well to "the mob" (though of course calling it that won't win me any favours here on HN), discrimination and effective banning of white men from being appointed to top positions is widespread behaviour throughout the west at this point, and so on. There seem like two big differences. One is that - so far at least - the politicians doing this don't call for actual violence against white men. However, it's starting to get close. In places where BLM is active people scrawl on their storefronts that they're black, in an attempt to avoid the violence and damage dished out against any business not perceived as 'allied'. Prominent politicians conspicuously avoid condemning the violently racist behaviour of these rioters. The other is that Hitler genuinely hated Jews as a race. He didn't have any concept of 'allied' Jews. Modern racial hatred often comes across as not especially genuine because it's full of white men condemning "white men", and people demanding women /blacks/black women be put into powerful positions ... unless they're the wrong kind of minority, i.e. conservative, in which case they are treated in exactly the same way as the "white men". Scott Alexander has written eloquently about the way these labels, which on the surface appear to have clear racial or gender-based definitions, have been effectively adopted and rewritten within certain subcultures to be code words for conservatives. This doesn't seem to precisely parallel what happened in Nazi Germany where, for all you can say about him, Hitler said exactly what he was going to do and then did it. Although Goebbels was well known for his ideas on propaganda, the regimes most famous for screwing with their citizens minds were all communist. Orwell's 1984 was inspired by socialism and not the more obvious and immediate example of Nazi-ism for that reason.

jgwil2 6y ago
cf. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” White men in 21st century America are still at the top of the totem pole; their situation is nothing like that of Jews in early 20th-century Europe. Perhaps you should spend a little more time worrying about the most vulnerable members of our society, who are also targeted by political speech, ostensibly just to rile up the "masses." Let's not forget that there are now 500 children separated, perhaps permanently, from their parents, as a result of the policies of the man who spoke the words above.
- thu2111 6y ago
  White men in 21st century America are still at the top of the totem pole; their situation is nothing like that of Jews in early 20th-century Europe This seems like an odd statement. You are aware of why anti-semitism was so widespread in Europe at that time and why Hitler found it such fertile ground? It's because Jews were perceived (with some justification) as being at the top of the totem pole, they tended to dominate top financial jobs in particular, but also were successful in many other ways e.g. many were business owners, lots of academics were Jews and so on. The anti-Jewish trope at the time was that this was because Jews were involved in a global conspiracy to promote Jews above others. The Protocols is an example of this kind of conspiracy theory. It was said they controlled the world's financial systems, the press, and so on. The conspiracy theory was vague, and the Protocols doesn't really name any specific people or give specific evidence. Nonetheless it became widely believed in the first part of the 20th century in Russia and Europe. This was why the first part of the anti-semitic policies of the Nazis was to start banning Jews from holding high ranking positions, and boycotting their businesses. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/boycott-of-jewish-businesses https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/boycott-of... Now in 2020 it is de rigour for people to state that white men hold positions of power due to a vague sort of conspiracy ("patriarchy" and "institutional racism"), that they should be removed from these positions and replaced by people of acceptable race and gender, and that this is OK because they sit at the top of the totem pole. Patriarchy/institutional racism are vague theories, with no specific names or evidence ever being presented to support their existence. But nonetheless they are very popular theories and are routinely used to justify discrimination against white men.
  - jgwil2 6y ago
    There was a 1000-year history of antisemitism in Europe prior to the Nazis, and Jews had had the right to fully participate in public life in most of western Europe for less than a century, but sure, other than that it was just like the situation of white men today.
    - thu2111 6y ago
      Jews were taking part in public life in rather big and noticeable ways throughout written history. There's a book about one of them that's quite well read... I think it's clear that you're going to keep looking for real or imagined differences between the situations to dismiss the parallels, because the parallels are uncomfortable. That's fine, there's no expectation on you to recognise how dangerous so-called 'social justice warriors' are today. But think about the similarities instead of searching about for reasons to just reject the whole train of thought outright. It may prove important.

jgwil2 6y ago

cf. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” White men in 21st century America are still at the top of the totem pole; their situation is nothing like that of Jews in early 20th-century Europe. Perhaps you should spend a little more time worrying about the most vulnerable members of our society, who are also targeted by political speech, ostensibly just to rile up the "masses." Let's not forget that there are now 500 children separated, perhaps permanently, from their parents, as a result of the policies of the man who spoke the words above.

thu2111 6y ago
White men in 21st century America are still at the top of the totem pole; their situation is nothing like that of Jews in early 20th-century Europe This seems like an odd statement. You are aware of why anti-semitism was so widespread in Europe at that time and why Hitler found it such fertile ground? It's because Jews were perceived (with some justification) as being at the top of the totem pole, they tended to dominate top financial jobs in particular, but also were successful in many other ways e.g. many were business owners, lots of academics were Jews and so on. The anti-Jewish trope at the time was that this was because Jews were involved in a global conspiracy to promote Jews above others. The Protocols is an example of this kind of conspiracy theory. It was said they controlled the world's financial systems, the press, and so on. The conspiracy theory was vague, and the Protocols doesn't really name any specific people or give specific evidence. Nonetheless it became widely believed in the first part of the 20th century in Russia and Europe. This was why the first part of the anti-semitic policies of the Nazis was to start banning Jews from holding high ranking positions, and boycotting their businesses. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/boycott-of-jewish-businesses https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/boycott-of... Now in 2020 it is de rigour for people to state that white men hold positions of power due to a vague sort of conspiracy ("patriarchy" and "institutional racism"), that they should be removed from these positions and replaced by people of acceptable race and gender, and that this is OK because they sit at the top of the totem pole. Patriarchy/institutional racism are vague theories, with no specific names or evidence ever being presented to support their existence. But nonetheless they are very popular theories and are routinely used to justify discrimination against white men.
- jgwil2 6y ago
  There was a 1000-year history of antisemitism in Europe prior to the Nazis, and Jews had had the right to fully participate in public life in most of western Europe for less than a century, but sure, other than that it was just like the situation of white men today.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Jews were taking part in public life in rather big and noticeable ways throughout written history. There's a book about one of them that's quite well read... I think it's clear that you're going to keep looking for real or imagined differences between the situations to dismiss the parallels, because the parallels are uncomfortable. That's fine, there's no expectation on you to recognise how dangerous so-called 'social justice warriors' are today. But think about the similarities instead of searching about for reasons to just reject the whole train of thought outright. It may prove important.