The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Redefining "Anti-Semitism" in the Gina Carano Controversy? Or Just Inaccurate Reporting?
The Chicago Sun-Times has this headline over an AP story (the headline appears to be from the Sun-Times, not the AP):
Gina Carano fired from 'Mandalorian' after anti-Semitic social media post
The story begins:
Lucasfilm says Gina Carano is no longer a part of "The Mandalorian" cast after many online called for her firing over a social media post that likened the experience of Jews during the Holocaust to the U.S. political climate.
A spokesperson with the production company said in a statement on Wednesday that Carano is not currently employed by Lucasfilm with "no plans for her to be in the future."
"Nevertheless, her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable," the statement read.
Carano fell under heavy criticism after she posted that "Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…. even by children."
The actor continued to say, "Because history is edited, most people today don't realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?"
USA Today likewise labels the story "anti-Semitic."
I don't buy it. I think overheated analogies to Nazism are rarely sound, whether they are analogizing the treatment of American conservatives to the treatment of German Jews, calling American politicians Hitler, or, in one memorable e-mail I got a few months ago, "We are not Jews living in Germany in the 1930s, Blacks in America are, every day is like Kristallnacht." (On Kristallnacht, 90 Jews were murdered because they were Jewish, out of a population of 1 million in Germany and Austria, more than 1000 synagogues were burned, and there was much more as well; thankfully, that isn't happening any day, much less every day, to any group in America.)
But this is not anti-Semitism, under any established or sensible definition of anti-Semitism. It isn't "denigrating [Jews] based on their cultural and religious identities." It isn't expressing hostility to Jews because they are Jewish. Indeed, the premise of the analogy is that Jews were wrongly hated, and that, she argues, conservatives are analogously wrongly hated today.
A Newsweek story mentions that Carano was under fire in December for posting this meme that "espouses the anti-semitic consp[i]racy theory that a cabal of rich Jews run the world":
But while this was apparently based on an apparently anti-Semitic London mural, it's far from clear that she knew that backstory, especially given that this version (which is different than the original) doesn't seem to use any obviously Jewish faces. These seem to me like generic elderly white rich men, who don't even necessarily seem to be bankers as such, as opposed to just powerful businessmen. (The one guy on the right seems more identifiably Jewish to me, though who knows, but the others look like any old white guy in a suit.) Someone not up on the fine points of such debates (whether in England or as to the image being worn by some in the March on Washington or passed along by Ice Cube) can easily pass it along without perceiving it as being about Jews. And in any event, the anti-Semitism allegations in the USA Today, Chicago Sun-Times, and other news stories focused on the Nazis-demonizing-Jews post, not the mural post.
Let me return to my first point: It's bad to dilute the significance of the Holocaust in the public mind by analogizing all misbehavior to the Nazis' treatment of Jews; it both wrongly minimizes what the Nazis did, and it's not really honest. But it seems even worse to dilute the significance of the label "anti-Semitism," by labeling such faulty analogies anti-Semitic.
UPDATE: Robby Soave (Reason) has more, including a pointer to a Tweet by Carano's costar Pedro Pascal, who has apparently posted overheated Nazi comparisons of his own:
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A lot of times studios fire people for the usual reasons: Being a PITA on set, asking too much money, or generally being mediocre performers - but decide to instead blame their social media posts because its a convenient publicity win-win. On the other hand, studios will tolerate a lot of antics from performers who are a big audience draw.
One thing Disney is very good at is selling people a story, including a story about why someone was fired.
Also the wording from lucasfilm is a little odd to me: A "spokesperson with the production company said in a statement on Wednesday that Carano is not currently employed by Lucasfilm with "no plans for her to be in the future."
It does not say she was fired, or that her contract was cancelled, only that she "was not currently employed". Was her contract even renewed prior to this?
I don't believe the contract was renewed, at least for Mandalorian, but she was a contender for headlining another Star Wars series.
yeah, thats what i read, and if so she was not "fired." But, Disney is the land of make-believe and they will let you believe whatever is convenient for them.
Didn't Walt Disney ban blacks and Jews from the land of Make-Believe? I want to see Disney Land and stand in line out in the heat of Florida someday.
Disney Land is in California. Disney World is in Florida.
Muphry's Law strikes again.
DISNEYLAND (one word) is in California, while Disney World (which is technically Walt Disney World, but you get a pass on that one because everyone drops the "Walt") is in Florida.
This has nothing to do with logic or reason. Stop going down that track, it helps no one.
You cannot reason with unreasonable people. Period. They are not interested in your reasons. They will not be convinced by your reasons. They just get angry with your reasons.
You have to imagine yourself being like a chid with an alcoholic parent. You have to set boundaries that you otherwise wouldn't have to in a normal relationship.
Likewise here. You just have to tell them, "no". That's it. No explanations, no justifications, no quarter, just plain no.
DaveM: It may well be that some people aren't convinced by logic or reason -- perhaps the Chicago Sun-Times headline writer, or the writer of the USA Today story, or the people at Lucasfilm. (I'm not sure, but let's assume that.) But my telling them, "no," isn't going to help, either, right? What do they care about what I say?
On the other hand, if enough people tell them "no," or otherwise push back on what they say and do, then perhaps that will register. Yet to reach those people, logic and reason might actually work; in any event, they're the only tool I have.
The problem here is making the mistake of thinking that, "Antisemite!" actually has anything to do with antisemitism.
"Racist", "Sexist", "Bigot", "Antisemite", and a long list of other labels, have become nearly content free epithets.
That view also conveniently gives you moral cover to be racist, sexist, antisemitic, and otherwise bigoted. There is no need to question your behavior or beliefs if all criticism is content free.
Yes, I can, for instance, be a "racist" by advocating that people completely ignore race in all hiring and school admissions. Or "sexist" for noticing that mutilating surgery doesn't change your sex.
"Or “sexist” for noticing that mutilating surgery doesn’t change your sex."
Of for saying that simply identifying as a different sex doesn't change your sex.
Have you ever used the phrase Dem Plantation? I am pretty sure you have.
Google thinks I haven't.
https://crookedtimber.org/2014/08/20/ferguson-disorder-and-change/
Yikes. This is the kind of thing that makes people think you are racist.
Nicely found. Not "Dem plantation", but Democrats and plantations are in close proximity.
There's the racism! See people think you're racist because you think that Black people lack agency or can be bought and controlled and that they don't understand their own political best interests. (Also your birtherism).
But you have to deny that the criticism of being racist carries any weight so you don't have to address this clearly racist viewpoint and can continue to have it without feeling guilty.
I hardly think they lack agency. That's the problem, actually: I refuse to pretend that their action or failure to act must be somebody else's fault.
I refuse to pretend that their action or failure to act must be somebody else’s fault.
Lol. Brett Bellmore, allow me to introduce you to Brett Bellmore from the Crooked Timber thread linked by LawTalkingGuy, above.
What the hell is crookedtimber.org anyway?
Leo: That's one reason I refused to accept that scheduling an election on an odd year could be fairly considered "vote suppression": It was still their own damn fault they didn't bother to vote, nobody else was stopping them from doing it.
Crooked Timber is a left wing blog that fell behind the iron curtain of comment censorship a few years ago. Used to have some really interesting conversations there before they purged everybody who wasn't to the left of Marx, and required moderator approval for any comment to become visible so that none of the regulars might accidentally post any wrongthink, either.
Now it's become a site for unintentionally hilarious group think.
Of course you refused to accept that election scheduling by Republicans was vote suppression. But you're all over the thread blaming Dems for keeping African Americans down on the plantation.
Or “sexist” for noticing that mutilating surgery doesn’t change your sex.
Actually the term people use for that is "transphobe", not "sexist".
(Just to be clear, I don't think merely believing in an immutable characteristic of "biological sex" makes one a transphobe. It's misgendering or deadnaming trans people that gets a person to that point. But fair or not, the label used is "transphobe", not "sexist".)
"It’s misgendering or deadnaming trans people that gets a person to that point."
It's quite a bit less than that. See JK Rowling, for example.
Yeah, I'm not very fond of this labeling refusing to go along with the latest crazy fad a "phobia". I guess it got its start when the left wanted to imply that straight guys found 'gays' objectionable because they were subconsciously afraid of them, which was supposed to result in the guys abandoning their hostility to prove they weren't cowards. Didn't work, but they clung to the terminology anyway.
They should come up with a term along the lines of "misandry" or "misogyny", if they were trying for something that actually made sense.
But, of course, refusing to call a guy "her" is exactly a refusal to go along with "misgendering", not engaging in it.
Anyway, the point remains: Most of these epithets really carry no meaning beyond, "How dare you not agree with us!"
BS. Phobia has been used as a suffix to denote not just fear, but hatred, since long before homophobia was coined. See, e.g., xenophobia.
"BS. Phobia has been used as a suffix to denote not just fear, but hatred, since long before homophobia was coined."
Using it to descript disagreement about the nature of gender is new, though.
"But, of course, refusing to call a guy “her” is exactly a refusal to go along with “misgendering”, not engaging in it."
Yeah, I guess not agreeing in a construct "gender" that is different from biological sex is transphobic.
You know what else gives moral cover to racists, sexists, antisemites, and otherwise bigoted people? Accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being racist, sexist, antisemitic, and otherwise bigoted. Just as if you yell "wolf" every time a doggie walks by, no one will take you seriously when a real wolf comes along and you shout out.
Wolves are just violent because of socio-economic factors and Golden Retriever supremacy.
Black labs matter.
Thanks for always staying level headed Eugene. Most minds are changed slowly by consistent thoughtful moderate discussions. Add me to the list of people to tell them "no".
Saying "no" isn't enough. The leftists need to be exterminated.
Gene, we have to stop anti-Semitism by any means necessary. No dialogue, no discussion. Just say NO! Shut it down. Shut the platform down. Shit the conversation down. Any comparison to the Shoah or questioning of the primacy of Jewish suffering in the world is an overt act of anti-Semitism.
There have been many genocides since WWII. The Jews have to understand their role in their own victimization. Their one big historic, catastrophic mistake? Weakness.
You may say that was the past. No. It is the present. Jews should conceal carry in synagogue, and blast any attacker. Forget that lawyer bullshit. To deter. Instead, they are whiny, suicidal Democrats, voting for that pro-terrorist, pro-BDS, anti-Israel party. They are leading the attack on the best friend of Israel since Truman, Pres. Trump.
Never again!
Kahane was right!
Be careful when discussing Kahane. That is dangerous ground to tread upon.
Kahane chai! Anyone who says otherwise is an anti semite
They should carry Jewish Space Lasers.
It's called the Federal Reserve interest rate and we only use it a few times a year.
I'm sure Musk would be glad to launch them, assuming the check cleared.
Very well said. That's exactly why I left Judaism.
If you kept the same general idea but swapped in the Rwandan Genocide as your historical analogy, would anybody be saying that the comparison is anti-Tutsi?
What I don't get is that Schwarzenegger was praised for making the EXACT SAME ANALOGY, except in reference to the Capitol Hill Riot. He made a video the same day comparing the Trump supporters to Nazis and explicitly mentioned Kristallnacht.
These two celebrities are very clearly not being treated the same. You can make the exact same statement, but whether it's praise-worthy or prison-worthy is which side of the aisle you are on.
"You can make the exact same statement, but whether it’s praise-worthy or prison-worthy is which side of the aisle you are on."
1. Arnold is a Republican.
2. The reason Arnold was able to discuss it is because he tied it into his personal experience. About how his father (and others he grew up around) were broken afterwards.
You didn't actually watch it, did you?
"Arnold is a Republican."
OK, so it depends on what side of the aisle the guys you are criticizing are on.
Hey, it's 12"Misogynist!
I bet he has words and stuff. I'd read them, except I see him and all I can remember are:
1. He has a stupid name.
2. He's a misogynist.
3. I'm never going to engage him with anything substantive.
Man, this is really some pathetic mean girls shit.
"Sarah, would you tell Jane I'm not speaking to her right now?"
Please address the point.
Whether it's his personal experience or not, that doesn't change the fact that if the comparison is evil, then it's evil.
And the fact is that he was comparing conservatives to Nazis. This is considered good, acceptable, and even proven fact.
On the other hand, comparing liberals to Nazis even in an indirect way is considered absolutely evil by every manner of convoluted logic.
You have to be critical of the power dynamics of the parties involved in the discussion. Liberals and progressives are the underdogs and should be given the benefit of doubt. Republicans, especially white men, are the oppressors and they need to be held to a strict zero tolerance policy with respect to any potential bigotry.
I'm assuming by your "golden retriever supremacy" comment that you're being sarcastic in your comments.
If you are; BRAVO. That's quality material.
"Please address the point."
I did. There are differences in all things.
For example, if I tell my son to go to bed, and he calls me a Nazi, or if David Duke calls Jonathan Greenblatt a Nazi, there are differences that need to be addressed, and it is not sufficient for someone to say, "WHAT IS THE BRIGHTLINE RULE FOR NAZI NAME CALLING????"
If this is too complex for you, then I will simply respond that I am not your monkey, and this is not your circus.
"I did. There are differences in all things."
Such as what side of the aisle you or your targets are on.
So we all agree with Ben. Awesome!
12"Misogynist Strikes again!
Something something ... nothing.
Arnold is a proven box office draw, and former CA governator.
Of course they are not treated the same!
lol.
In fairness, the whole ...
Conan - Conan Destroyer - Terminator - Commando - Predator - Running Man - Total Recall - T2 - Last Action Here - True Lies ...
Sequence? That's, well, even Tom Brady looks at that and says that Arnold might be the GOAT.
Even Olivier looks at that and goes, "Dude, you had the acting chops."
Even Tom Hanks would give all his Oscars (and Wilson) for a streak like that.
Wasn't there some internet poll of men saying that they preferred watching Predator over having sex?
I think it was cell phones.
Personally, I think that Commando is the forgotten classic.
Raw Deal.
The "Como estas" line when he fires the Soviet ballistic knife into the dudes chest is something that I immediately think of whenever someone with without a Spanish accent says "como estas."
(And has caused me to want one of those things ever since.)
It's got the best quips, that's for sure.
"You should not drink...and bake."
Truly awful.
That list omits Twins.
I forgive you.
You know, I was debating putting his other hits (Twins, Kindergarten Cop) on the list.
But no. Just ... no.
"It is not a tumor!" 🙂
(Kindergarten Cop)
I think it's hard to appreciate his comedies without the specific context of that time. 🙂
Kindergarten Cop is canceled due to its antiquated views on sexual binarianism.
Boys have penises, girls have vaginas.
Is Arnold being hired for the Mandalorian? Then they're being treated exactly the same.
Did you see Schwarzenegger's video? I doubt it.
The only people he compared to Nazis were the rioters - he specifically mentioned the Proud Boys. He compared Kristallnacht to the damage at the Capitol.
You can say that's a stretch, but I have little doubt that under more "favorable" circumstances, the insurrectionists would be glad to behave just as the brown shirts did. They were looking to kill, at the behest of their idolized leader - they did kill, in fact.
I thought the video was just fine, somewhat touching, in fact.
Speaking of the Proud Boys, it was certainly interesting to find out the dude who headed it was a government informant. I wonder just how much of the right wing 'militia' ecology consists of honey pots, that exist solely to suck in and identify people? A large part of it, I'd guess.
Sure. Antifa, organized crime and Islamic terrorism too. Just the government stirring a pot that would be much smaller without it. Only a short hop to 9/11 trutherism from there. Everything a false flag, everything government agent provocateurs.
Come on. My guess, a small part, but hopefully such CI's exist to prevent, say, a plot to kidnap the governor of Michigan. Government wouldn't be doing its job without them.
I'm sure some fraction are honey pots, all across the spectrum. I'm just curious whether it's closer to 1% or 99%.
Sure, I'll grant that it's actually quite proper for the government to do that sort of thing, depending on how it goes about it. There's a thin line between finding people who already meant to do wrong, and encouraging people to do wrong so that you can arrest them. Between giving somebody rope to hang themselves with, and accidentally catering a lynching.
Suspect it is closer to 1%, else there would never be successful attacks.
With respect to the rest, to a certain degree, as W.C. Fields said, "you can't cheat an honest man." Entrapment is a defense, though not one often successfully asserted.
I agree with Gene on this one, whole-heartedly, both as to labeling
Carano's post anti-Semitic and for firing her but still find it "funny" that he can devote this many pixels to correcting newspaper headlines while not correcting his own prediction regarding the then-upcoming Jan. 20 festivities in DC. You know, the one that ran
"But my prediction is that (setting aside the surface matters related to the epidemic) it will be a Jan. 20 of an inauguration year much like any other."
I really appreciate Prof. Volokh.
But his January 20th prediction and his "sex joke server" defense of Judge Kozinski are two things that are not his finest moments.
It's interesting, because I tend to view the overall "radicalization" of the GOP by watching EV. He plays it close to the vest, but just in his choice of topics and coverage of them you can see that he has been tilting rightwards the last few years. I think its endemic of the media ecosystem that people are choosing for themselves.
Unless you explicitly opt-out (such as a Prof. Kerr, for the most part) you are akin to the frog in boiling water, not fully aware of how accustomed you have become to the changed landscape.
(PS- as to the instant issue, it wasn't a firing, so much as a non-renewal. And she was earmarked to head a new series before this. I think this tweet was just the latest; between the anti-mask stuff, and the election was stolen stuff, they just decided not to risk it. After all, why devote the resources if something else was going to come out. Still, on the merits, I have trouble seeing this as anti-Semitic).
Questioning the primacy of the Shoah as worst event to befall humanity because of the death of six million Jews by comparing it to either historical or contemporary events is an act of overt anti-Semitism. Eugene, my poor mensch, is simply wrong is his declaration that Gina was not guilty of posting anti-Semitic hate speech on Twitter.
Troll better. You're getting boring.
"But my prediction is that (setting aside the surface matters related to the epidemic) it will be a Jan. 20 of an inauguration year much like any other."
What's wrong with that? IIRC the gist of the comment was that any efforts by Trump to unlawfully retain power were going to be more of a speed-bump than anything else, and that prediction was pretty much correct.
"I agree with Gene on this one, whole-heartedly, both as to labeling
Carano’s post anti-Semitic and for firing her"
I did not perceive Prof. Volokh to be objecting (overtly) to any action by Ms. Carano's employer . . . but if that objection is there, it constitutes a particularly prime piece of partisan hypocrisy.
How does one go about correcting a prediction?
My understanding is that the Krystalnaught was so much an exercise of disorganized anarchy that some of the fires endangered (damaged?) non-Jewish property as well. I think it is a fair statement to say that it wasn't just uniformed soldiers perpetrating it.
I don't see anything wrong with saying that....
Mostly peaceful vandalism really...
The wrongness is in the following attempt at a syllogism:
Nazis convinced fellow Germans to hate Jews.
Germans, not just Nazis, perpetrated Kristallnacht.
Therefore, do not criticize conservative viewpoints.
Minimizing and inapt use of Nazi atrocities is at least adjacent to antisemitism.
Now criticize people calling migrant facilities "concentration camps".don't forget the liberal Hollywood actors who called Bush I, Bush II, McCain, and Romney "Nazis" for having the chutzpah to run as Republicans.
Don't be ridiculous. It's a slippery slope, "Calm down. I don't like where this is going" argument by reminding us of just how far we can fall.
The Nazis weren't devils. They were completely human. That's what's so frightening. We can become just like them if we aren't careful.
When we have politicians actively talking about reeducation camps, purging Trump voters from police and military, transparently political prosecutions of government officials, and removing conservatives from all levels of society, this isn't as far out a comparison as normal political rhetoric would be.
Right, and consider: At one time Germany was considered a very good place for Jews to live, that's why so many lived there. At a later point, the Holocaust.
Somewhere in between you can find any level of discrimination against Jews you want, and they ALL ended up at the Holocaust.
Sadly, the only way you can be absolutely sure that somebody is wrong about comparing something to the lead up to the Holocaust is to wait a decade, and look for gas ovens.
HOLOHOAX.....the imaginary gas chamber of Auschwitz where millions died, but left no trace....oi vey, this sh*t again. As Patton said, USA fought for the wrong side. Should have wiped out the Bolshiviks .... let's all make believe 1.5m jews died at Treblinka II without leaving a trace. The existence of Israel proves the need for being anti-semitic. America has been dragged into armed conflict/war by need of the jew, no reason to be proud of them. Time for a purge.
We killed Tzar Nicholas II and his family. What makes you think you can stop us?
PP and RHW seem to be working together. I think they are the same person.
Can someone please ban this guy? I know he's just trolling, but this is getting absurd. Why do we even have flags?
Ben bar Houston, he helps stimulate the kvetching in the comments.
Agreed.
"Can someone please ban this guy?"
What if it's a Kirkland sockpuppet? Prof. Volokh would never hear the end of it.
No, please don't ban Pavel. In fact, I want everyone here to read what he says. More than once. Get a good look.
Professor Volokh is right about this. If 1A means anything, it means that it protects outrageous and odious speech. To me, every time Pavel opens his mouth to loudly proclaim his belief it is an own goal.
Just remember though, Pavel really means what he says; he believes it. Govern yourselves accordingly.
And Pavel....Am Chai Yisroel! One day, you will be rotting in a grave; dead, unloved, and forgotten. But our people will live. We have seen a lot of people like you in 5000+ years. We're still here.
I tend to take commenters at face value. Even if they don't mean it, Popehat's Rule of Goats applies. But this guy's so over the top, I do suspect he's trolling. YMMV.
As an American who is Jewish and lost family in the Holocaust I have to take issue with the post by Prof. Volokh.
What the actor's post does is to trivialize the oppression and murder of Jews by the Nazi's. She is subliminally stating that the treatment of Jews in Germany at that time was no worse than the treatment of Republicans or conservatives today, and even worse, is trying to borrow the horror of the murder and torture of Jews to attach it to treatment of those politicians she supports.
The pain of Nazism will be with me the rest of my life, and the pain, the suffering, the murder of those victims is not available for political appropriation. The subtext here is Jews don't matter which is anti-semitism at its worst.
I respectfully dissent.
Exactly! No one else has ever dared to invoke the Holocaust as a political bat to wave at their opponents. As a third generation Holocaust survivor, I ache everyday with the knowledge that anti-Semitism still exists in the world.
...snore...
False charges of anti-semitism are just as denigrating to the memory of the holocaust as are false equivalence to Nazism.
"subliminally"
Shrewd of your conscious mind to pick this up.
Sidney, what part of "Never Again" do you have a problem with?
Some of us fear that we are where Germany was in 1933.
Do you fear it because the ostensible conservative party is aligning itself with a movement that:
Rejects the concept and institutions of liberal democracy,
Believes that a collection of liberal elites and cultural others have conspired to steal the right to rule from the one true people of the nation,
Believe that these elites and others are hindering the return of the one true people of the nation to the glory that they supposedly had in some mythical past,
That the leader of this movement is a clownish man who simultaneously articulates victimhood and comically stereotypical masculine strength,
And the members of this movement have been less and less hesitant about advocating for and using organized violence to achieve their goals?
Is that why?
The Fuehrer would be proud of your (asinine) assessment.
Which part was wrong?
'Never Again' is my mantra. It should be the first thing every Jewish parent teaches a child. We may die at the hands of the Nazi like thugs that are present and growing in the American political culture, but we will never ever surrender.
Just be sure to hand in your guns before the pogroms start. We can't have unsanctioned violence in the country similar to what was experienced at the Capital on 6 Jan 2021.
Rabbi -- there were 10 Million Jews in Europe in 1933.
If only 10% -- 1 Million -- had owned a gun, there wouldn't have been a Holocaust. Imagine Anne Frank's Uncle Otto with a revolver when the Gestapo broke in -- she'd have lived...
Look at what the Warsaw Ghetto did with very few weapons.
Isn't it "Never Again -- To *Anyone*?
And didn't all the stuff last summer bother you?!?
It sure bothered me. I saw this in a local (online) newspaper:
I thought of pogroms. During pogroms, Russians would put icons in their windows (to let the mob know that they weren't Jews).
We are all familiar with Godwin's law ... but I wonder whether it is worse to risk diluting the memory of the Holocaust, or ignoring its lessons outright.
All I know is that 6 million Jews died under Hitler and 400k Americans died under President Trump. That makes Trump the equivalent of 6.7 centiHitlers, rounding up.
"6.7 centiHitlers"
Ok, I chuckled. I guess I am a terrible person.
loki will probably be around shortly to confirm.
If people take the lessons and comparisons of historic atrocities to heart at an early enough time and then adjust their behavior, the comparisons would obviously seem way overblown in retrospect. I mean there probably isn't much worse than a Holocaust comparison being timely and apt in retrospect.
Gina should have said the Uighurs are the modern day Jews, the Chinese government are the Nazis, and Disney is a modern I.G. Farben with a nice supply of slave labor too.
She, like most Americans, doesn't know anything about history.
The correct historic comparisons are the Red Guards in China and if current trends continue, the Jacobin terror.
Firing and shunning won't satisfy the left rage mobs forever.
I admit it! I am a kulak and my family are kulaks too!
What's really amazing is that many of the same people who assert that Ms Carano's analogy is anti-semitic will strongly insist that neither anti-Zionism nor the BDS movements are anti-semitic. It's almost like someone has set out to make allegations of "anti-semitism" into a kind of totally meaningless gibberish.
Right.
- I hate Xs.
- I like people who attack Xs. When people who attack Xs are criticized, I defend them.
- I dislike people who defend Xs. I criticize them whenever I can. When I think I can get away with it, I criticize them for being anti-X.
Carano's remarks aren't anti-Semitism, but they do run afoul of Goodwin's Law.
Or, alternately, confirm it.
Carano's statement is incorrect, but it's not antisemitic.
Disliking or shunning people because of their political beliefs is not the same as disliking or shunning them because of their ethnicity (to the Nazis, Jews were a "race" not a religion -- they hated Christian "Jews" and atheist "Jews" as much as religious "Jews"). If it were wrong to "hate someone for their political views", you couldn't hate Nazis or Communists, whereas I hope all decent people do.
But what the Nazis did was lead Germans (many of whom were already prejudiced against Jews) to think of the Jews as not being part of the national and even human family. That then made it easier for Germans to look the other way (or worse) when the Nazis rounded up the Jews and sent them to the camps.
It is certainly an exaggeration to say that some people today are seeking to treat conservatives or Trump supporters as inhuman, but it is less of an exaggeration to say that some people want to exclude conservatives and Trump supporters from our national political family. That doesn't mean that the American Left is planning a holocaust, but it does mean that we need to be wary of where our divisive politics are leading our country. That's the germ of truth that Carano's clumsy statement obscures rather than illuminates.
Well said. We need to separate immutable characteristics (e.g. ethnicity, skin color) from voluntary characteristics (e.g. political affiliation, favorite color, religious views). China is not building concentration camps for it's Uighur citizens and does not want to exterminate them like the Nazis attempted to do to the Jewish people. China is just helping the Uighurs become part of the national Chinese family by encouraging them to participate in traditional Chinese culture. This includes things like eating pork, drinking alcohol, and honoring ancestral spirits. To be a united Chinese nation, the Uighur people will have to learn Chinese values and abandon foreign religions that they voluntarily submit to.
Voluntary characteristics start to approach being immutable, once you start reaching back into the past; You can change what your beliefs are today, but you can't reach back and, say, change the fact that you were opposed to SSM in the 1990s, when basically everyone was.
The past is immutable, so past beliefs start to approximate the status of immutable characteristics.
If you aren't a member of The Elect when you were born, you will always be stained with the sin of racism, homophobia, transphobia, and anti-Semitism. But that membership is a religious issue that the courts don't consider.
I agree with your analysis, but disagree with your conclusion.
True, the situation is not identical. However, it is certainly similar, and the comparison is not invalid.
I think being overly pedantic is what obscures truth. There is a very different level of analysis between a simple statement of concern (Carino's post) and an academic analysis (even a casual one such as your post).
Saying that she is "incorrect" in her statement while largely agreeing with her point is what I would call clumsy and obscuring the point. A less-obtuse way to say it would be along the lines of "not precisely".
I don't think it's antisemitic in the sense of expressing a derogatory opinion about Jews.
It is pretty insulting, "Yeah, I know exactly what your parents went through. Just yesterday somebody called me a name because I voted for Trump."
As for the post of the cartoon, yeah, it's antisemitic. It relies on standard antisemitic tropes and the faces look a lot more Jewish to me than they do to Eugene.
Yeah, we should infantalize ourselves, like the shvartzes, everytime some fool says something ignorant. Speaking of anti-Semites, ViacomCBS has rehired Nick Cannon after he apologized about his remarks regarding the Nation of Islam and Yakub's Frankenstein, da wypipo.
People with antisemitic or racist beliefs are often sophisticated about getting their message out there without needing to state or show it in the most explicit or vulgar terms. Images or statements are imbued with a level of plausible deniability.
Are sheriff stars and OK hand signs part of the covert white supremacist threat to subvert American democracy?
What's more insulting is that a gentile understands more about this than a Jew does. She's been fired, socially ostracized, and cast out from society for having a factually correct understanding of the Holocaust and noting that we're going down that same path. If you can't see the connection between that and what happened to our families, then you might need to revisit the history lesson on Hitler's rise to power. It didn't happen overnight via a coup or revolution. It dragged out over a course of almost two decades and succeeded via popular democratic support.
Except, it's a bunch of old, rich, white bankers playing Monopoly on the backs of the people. Looks like the same message as Occupy Wall Street.
None of the people involved have any Jewish iconography, at all, that I can see. If they do, it's so subtle that it's easy to miss. From my perspective, you are creating the anti-Semitism out of whole cloth because YOU think that they look Jewish.
I think this says more about you than the actress.
In related news, Ismay is gone...
https://www.masslive.com/politics/2021/02/massachusetts-climate-change-undersecretary-david-ismay-resigns-apologizes-for-comments-saying-state-needs-to-break-will-of-consumers.html
Good, now they can commence memory holing him.
The most honest admission since some environmentalist on the left admitted limit discs in California were more about prepping the people to accept bigger intrusions into regulation than actual benefit.
Curse that psych 101 class for showing that example and others in the manipulation unit.
I get to play my Jew card here, she said nothing of the sort. Her comments show a very nuanced understanding of the Holocaust that shows that Germans, Austrians, French, Poles, and all the Europeans and Americans who turned a blind eye or participated in the Holocaust had contemptible views of their own about the Jewish people. Hitler was not a master hypnotist who turned the Jewish utopia of Germany into their worst nightmare. He took the hatred and distrust of Jews in the hearts of millions and acted upon it.
Most people, especially Germans, understand this. That's why we enjoyed a relative grace period of nation-wide feelings of guilt towards the Jewish people that resulted in open communication and relationship building. Unfortunately, as most of those involved with WWII and the Holocaust have now perished, very few people share those sentiments and we've returned to the natural state of Americans and Europeans, which is to distrust Jews and treat us as a monolith.
I'm sure we can ease their fear of outsiders by supporting unlimited and unchecked immigration to both the European Union and the United States. Anyone who disagrees should be labeled a "white supremacist" or "far right conspiracy theorist" to silence dissent. If I went to bed in Tel Aviv with Kosher grocery stores and gay pride flags hung in bars and woke up the next day to a Tel Aviv filled with Saudis and Halal butcher shops and public gay executions, I wouldn't be shocked or opposed to immigration. I would just celebrate the diversity of cultures that I get to experience daily.
This is nuts. Everyone wants to condemn the people they disagree with. Everything is spiraling out of control. We assume the worst about everyone else.
For thousands...well, forever, the shoe was on the other foot, and gays and gay supporters got cancelled.
And they had the law on their side to boot.
It was a complete shock when Disney gave domestic partner benefits. Thjs angered the cancelling side so much they tried to intervene in laissez faire capitalism and outlaw that.
Now that the public shaming power has flipped, can you blame them for using it?
Didn't the Nazis also have a story about how they had previously been unjustly suppressed/oppressed (by the "Jewish establishment," presumably)? Didn't Hitler title his book "My Struggle"?
Impressive work during a pandemic to assemble the full caucus of Jew haters in one comment thread.
I'd think the better argument for anti-Semitism is trivializing the Holocaust and the run up to it. That's usually considered as such, no?
Comparing how conservatives are treated in America to how Jews were treated in 1930s-40s Germany is beyond absurd. Comparing not liking someone because their beliefs involve supporting mass death as the price to pay to not have to wear a mask in a pandemic, or committing a violent insurrection to overturn an election based on blatantly false claims of fraud, and because of the Jewish religion, is also beyond absurd. Suggesting the course could be similar, that liberals are heading towards extermination camps for conservatives, is yet again beyond absurd.
Equating these is making a joke of the Holocaust.
Obviously, you are generally going to cause a stir when comparing things to the Holocaust, but in this case the tweet was more of a final straw than the complete reason she was dropped. She has previously come under fire for supporting Trump's misguided "stolen election" narrative as well as for making fun of people wearing masks. This just gave Disney the cover to do something they likely wanted to do anyway.
Whether or not she was actually "fired" or not is it's own story. She wasn't exactly a main character in the series (appearing in less than half the episodes), and while there was talk of her getting spun off to a new show, I don't think anything had been finalized and it's not going to be a big deal for Disney to just replace her character.
On the other hand, I do wonder how her tweet would have gone down if she had instead made a comparison to the McCarthyist "Red Scare" of the 50s. It's a more apt comparison (even down to the color) as I have no doubts that many conservatives are essentially blacklisted by the major studios if they are too vocal with their opinions.
In a way, her cancellation on goes to prove her broader point, even if the comparison was quite overstated.
I was recently called a "Goy" and told that I could not know or understand what is and isn't anti-Semitism because I'm not Jewish. I told her the term has meanings which we can objectively determine whether words or actions meet that definition and that Gina Curano's words failed to meet that meaning. She called me a Goy again and reminded me that I'm a cisgendered white heterosexual male of privilege. I had hoped debating someone with a PhD in Chemistry would go a bit better than that, so I sent your blog post to her and she replied "well he's entitled to his own opinion." You also are a man of privilege, she added.
Oh the fun never ends. I never was able to get her to define anti-Semitism.
My favorite part was when she explained that left wing anti-Semitism only occurs because the left wing doesn't think Jews are discriminated on enough.
Her non-Jewish white knighting boyfriend was also a hoot. He never said anything relative to the discussion at hand and had an obsession with penises.