4 ms·

To correct the mangling of history, there was no "list of Jews kept by the Netherlands [pre-occupation]". There were only pre-existing Dutch population registri

by smcin 7mo ago

To correct the mangling of history, there was no "list of Jews kept by the Netherlands [pre-occupation]". There were only pre-existing Dutch population registries of all people, where the personal details collected by the Dutch had included religion, not for any ill purpose. (The Nazis subsequently compiled a list, post-occupation, but that's not what you asserted.)

thaumasiotes 7mo ago
So, the Netherlands kept a list of everyone, and they specifically marked out all the Jews, but that doesn't constitute keeping a list of Jews?
- magicalhippo 7mo ago
  It wasn't a list of Jews, it was a list of everyone from which Jews could be easily identified. The distinction is important in this context, since the purpose of collecting and keeping the data wasn't specifically to have a list of Jews handy. This is relevant to data collected by companies and governments today. Consider a list of children with their parent names and the parents' preferred pronouns. You don't have a list of gays, but you have a list from which gays can be readily identified with high accuracy.
  - thaumasiotes 7mo ago
    > The distinction is important in this context, since the purpose of collecting and keeping the data wasn't specifically to have a list of Jews handy. How does that make the distinction important? The lesson to draw is "you shouldn't keep a list of Jews, whether you think you're doing it for good reasons or not". The list is a list regardless of whether you think calling it a list is fair in some abstract sense. > You don't have a list of gays, but you have a list from which gays can be readily identified with high accuracy. Well, you're almost right. Except of course that you do have a list of gays. That's why Grindr having Chinese ownership was seen as a national security risk.
    - expedition32 7mo ago
      The Netherlands today is a secular country in which the government doesn't give a flying fuck about your religion or identity. But the situation in 1940 was very different: religion permeated every fabric of society. Mind you the government simply took over the job of record keeping from the churches, temples and synagogues. I am sure Jews today still keep lists about who is a Jew and so does every other religious denomination because such mundane information matters to them.
    - magicalhippo 7mo ago
      > Except of course that you do have a list of gays. If you go to your kindergarten and tell them to stop keeping a list of gays they will look at you weird and most likely dismiss you as a nutjob. Because they don't have a list of gays, they just have a list of kids with their parents' names and pronouns. That's why I think it's important to keep the distinction rather than conflate the two like you want to.

by smcin 7mo ago

thaumasiotes 7mo ago

So, the Netherlands kept a list of everyone, and they specifically marked out all the Jews, but that doesn't constitute keeping a list of Jews?

magicalhippo 7mo ago
It wasn't a list of Jews, it was a list of everyone from which Jews could be easily identified. The distinction is important in this context, since the purpose of collecting and keeping the data wasn't specifically to have a list of Jews handy. This is relevant to data collected by companies and governments today. Consider a list of children with their parent names and the parents' preferred pronouns. You don't have a list of gays, but you have a list from which gays can be readily identified with high accuracy.
- thaumasiotes 7mo ago
  > The distinction is important in this context, since the purpose of collecting and keeping the data wasn't specifically to have a list of Jews handy. How does that make the distinction important? The lesson to draw is "you shouldn't keep a list of Jews, whether you think you're doing it for good reasons or not". The list is a list regardless of whether you think calling it a list is fair in some abstract sense. > You don't have a list of gays, but you have a list from which gays can be readily identified with high accuracy. Well, you're almost right. Except of course that you do have a list of gays. That's why Grindr having Chinese ownership was seen as a national security risk.
  - expedition32 7mo ago
    The Netherlands today is a secular country in which the government doesn't give a flying fuck about your religion or identity. But the situation in 1940 was very different: religion permeated every fabric of society. Mind you the government simply took over the job of record keeping from the churches, temples and synagogues. I am sure Jews today still keep lists about who is a Jew and so does every other religious denomination because such mundane information matters to them.
  - magicalhippo 7mo ago
    > Except of course that you do have a list of gays. If you go to your kindergarten and tell them to stop keeping a list of gays they will look at you weird and most likely dismiss you as a nutjob. Because they don't have a list of gays, they just have a list of kids with their parents' names and pronouns. That's why I think it's important to keep the distinction rather than conflate the two like you want to.