"The Holocaust isn't about race" Whoopi Goldberg on the View

[Scott Mayers]

Well, the Nazis spent a lot of time aiming hatred at what they considered a race, the Jews. That they were racist against Roma, doesn't take away from their racism against what they considered a race, the Jews. That they hated Communists and jailed and concentration camped communists doesn't take away from their racists tracts, books, speeches, radio programs, race laws that justified kiling this person but not that one based on how much they belonged to or had genes of a race. That they killed developmentally disabled people does not take away from their racism. They were racist against Jews and spent more time focused on this racism - in terms of propaganda - than they spend on other races and groups. But, sure they hated other people also. If i hate black people and also want to euthanize people who have cleft palates or men who wear their hair long, this doesn't take away from my racism. Nor does the Nazi hatred and killing of other groups mean that the Holocaust, which is a term focusing on the killing based on race which was primarily focused on Jews, but yes also got aimed at Roma, Poles. But the term, which was actually first used in relation to Armenians by the Ottomans (sabout race) and later got focused on the genocidal project aimed at the Jews. It wasn't coincidental at so many Jews were killed. They were chosen due to race, even if they were good at chess and being a doctor and were anti.communist.

The term was specifically used to refer to genocidal race based killing, that is on a broad scale. That is what the term meant. It did not mean, the killing done by the Nazis on any grounds. It was focused primarily on the Jews because this was the most ambitious facet of the racial killing I would guess also that since Roma, for example, were killed in smaller numbers, had little lobbying power in countries like the US - which is where the term arose - and even whose deaths might not have been noticed so well internationally during the war when the term was first used to describe, yes, the genocidal racist killing of Jews.

That's what the term was intended to be used for.

The term, "Holocaust" itself is a reference to genocide and intentionally ignores the general CRIME here.

What you and many other are not aware of (or don't want to be for many) is that the National Socialists and Facists BASED their ideal on the assumption that the Jew were themselves a 'fascist' group considering they close off their community and aim to FAVOR their own (as would be expected of most people in such groups). They are ALL 'cults' to me given I don't think religion itself is anything rational except for a means to manipulate. So the fact that the JEWS themselves interpreted themselves as a 'race' is NOT merely from the Nazis but a reflection of their own "supremacy"!! Israel IS just such a clearly FACIST state.

If this keeps up, I don't wonder why their is a rise of fascism from the non-Jewish whites: I would be more surprised that we DON'T have them. The SOLUTION should be to RESPECT the fact that "hate"-isms can ONLY come about from (1) a concentration of wealth and power to some EXCLUSIVE subset of people who pass on INHERITANCE to their OWN ONLY, and (2) the opposing concentration of another subset of people(s) getting too big on the IMPOVERISHED side of the population. The hate cannot occur WITHOUT a belief in ISOLATING FAVOR to one's own genetic supremacy

What are you on about? Are you drunk?

What, you don't like it that I am agreeing with you here?

I think you may be not be reading me correctly for maybe finding my vocabulary too hard for you to follow. I should have not have responded to you in particular given your past 'hateful' responses of most comments you make here in this forum. [I don't know if you actual 'hate', but often speak up with the kind of behavior that is easy to INTERPRET as 'angry' retorts.]

I assure you that I do not agree with the actual 'white supremacist' kind of anger that only stereotypically gets reflected as 'hate'; I am arguing here WHY it is unfair to presume 'white supremacists' exists as the dominating threat. If you are some 'supremacist' yourself, I also disapprove of you given it ADDS the fuel to the fire of those you hate.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The term, "Holocaust" itself is a reference to genocide and intentionally ignores the general CRIME here.

What you and many other are not aware of (or don't want to be for many) is that the National Socialists and Facists BASED their ideal on the assumption that the Jew were themselves a 'fascist' group considering they close off their community and aim to FAVOR their own (as would be expected of most people in such groups). They are ALL 'cults' to me given I don't think religion itself is anything rational except for a means to manipulate. So the fact that the JEWS themselves interpreted themselves as a 'race' is NOT merely from the Nazis but a reflection of their own "supremacy"!! Israel IS just such a clearly FACIST state.

If this keeps up, I don't wonder why their is a rise of fascism from the non-Jewish whites: I would be more surprised that we DON'T have them. The SOLUTION should be to RESPECT the fact that "hate"-isms can ONLY come about from (1) a concentration of wealth and power to some EXCLUSIVE subset of people who pass on INHERITANCE to their OWN ONLY, and (2) the opposing concentration of another subset of people(s) getting too big on the IMPOVERISHED side of the population. The hate cannot occur WITHOUT a belief in ISOLATING FAVOR to one's own genetic supremacy

What are you on about? Are you drunk?

What, you don't like it that I am agreeing with you here?

I think you may be not be reading me correctly for maybe finding my vocabulary too hard for you to follow. I should have not have responded to you in particular given your past 'hateful' responses of most comments you make here in this forum. [I don't know if you actual 'hate', but often speak up with the kind of behavior that is easy to INTERPRET as 'angry' retorts.]

I assure you that I do not agree with the actual 'white supremacist' kind of anger that only stereotypically gets reflected as 'hate'; I am arguing here WHY it is unfair to presume 'white supremacists' exists as the dominating threat. If you are some 'supremacist' yourself, I also disapprove of you given it ADDS the fuel to the fire of those you hate.

Perhaps if you had more skill with your language then you wouldn't get 'misinterpreted'.

[commonsense]

I know its all a bit too much of me to expect any of you to educate yourself, but the holocaust is not just about Jews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_victims

Not to excuse her, but I wonder if the numbers in Wikipedia are why Whoopi said the Holocaust was not about racism. Roughly half of the people slaughtered by the Nazi’s were not Jewish.

It's more than that. Non Jewish Russian non compatants is more than the 6 million estimated Jews.
Have you noticed, as I have that the other classes of people rarely if ever get mentioned?

Yes. And I initially heard that there were 12 million deaths and only the Jews were mentioned.

[Scott Mayers]

What are you on about? Are you drunk?

What, you don't like it that I am agreeing with you here?

I think you may be not be reading me correctly for maybe finding my vocabulary too hard for you to follow. I should have not have responded to you in particular given your past 'hateful' responses of most comments you make here in this forum. [I don't know if you actual 'hate', but often speak up with the kind of behavior that is easy to INTERPRET as 'angry' retorts.]

I assure you that I do not agree with the actual 'white supremacist' kind of anger that only stereotypically gets reflected as 'hate'; I am arguing here WHY it is unfair to presume 'white supremacists' exists as the dominating threat. If you are some 'supremacist' yourself, I also disapprove of you given it ADDS the fuel to the fire of those you hate.

Perhaps if you had more skill with your language then you wouldn't get 'misinterpreted'.

Perhaps if you had more skill in YOUR vocabulary and etiquette, you'd be able to respect that some of us argue with more than Tweets of derision without substance.

Like I said, I should not have responded to your quote and will not from now on. How's that for demonstrating how and why people turn against others? If you deride those supporting the same position as you would against, you isolate those of us who are trying to help.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

What, you don't like it that I am agreeing with you here?

I think you may be not be reading me correctly for maybe finding my vocabulary too hard for you to follow. I should have not have responded to you in particular given your past 'hateful' responses of most comments you make here in this forum. [I don't know if you actual 'hate', but often speak up with the kind of behavior that is easy to INTERPRET as 'angry' retorts.]

I assure you that I do not agree with the actual 'white supremacist' kind of anger that only stereotypically gets reflected as 'hate'; I am arguing here WHY it is unfair to presume 'white supremacists' exists as the dominating threat. If you are some 'supremacist' yourself, I also disapprove of you given it ADDS the fuel to the fire of those you hate.

Perhaps if you had more skill with your language then you wouldn't get 'misinterpreted'.

Perhaps if you had more skill in YOUR vocabulary and etiquette, you'd be able to respect that some of us argue with more than Tweets of derision without substance.

Like I said, I should not have responded to your quote and will not from now on. How's that for demonstrating how and why people turn against others? If you deride those supporting the same position as you would against, you isolate those of us who are trying to help.

I read it back and I still can't tell what you are 'agreeing' or 'disagreeing' with.

[Scott Mayers]

Not to excuse her, but I wonder if the numbers in Wikipedia are why Whoopi said the Holocaust was not about racism. Roughly half of the people slaughtered by the Nazi’s were not Jewish.

It's more than that. Non Jewish Russian non compatants is more than the 6 million estimated Jews.
Have you noticed, as I have that the other classes of people rarely if ever get mentioned?

Yes. And I initially heard that there were 12 million deaths and only the Jews were mentioned.

I always thought that even one death was sufficient to argue against some system that encouraged it. But when you start speaking numbers, you FEED into the hands of those charging one is 'denying the Holocaust' because then the argument transfers to an unending fight about facts.

It should be enough to know that not only Jews were harmed in the Holocaust and that when trying to STOP any such abuses in the future, it has to respect all victims. As I already mentioned, the National Socialists were basing the likelihood of success on the Jews own success throughout time for embracing their culture THROUGH genetic favoritism. They argued that if the Jew can prove their success through facism as it exists in the MEANING behind the term, the German people who were suffering a loss of their own economic power TOO can 'borrow' those traits. Thus, the adaption of trying to rile up a 'culture' of what it means to be Germanic was about trying to EMBRACE the ideals of the Jew.

As for politics, while it is horrendous to opt for genetic annihilation, in contrast, this was done by all people in all times, ...including the Jews* themselves.

[Note *"Jew" is itself a misnomer for some specific people given it likely only reference ANY 'transients' during a time when people begun making land claims. The "lord" as a reference in Biblical scripture referred to those who commanded land ownership rights that made it more and more difficult for those wanderers to be respected. Oddly, some don't recognize when the use of the word, "Lord" in scripture was not always about God's 'lordship' of nature but as an insult or violation of those travelling to a from various places.]

[Scott Mayers]

I read it back and I still can't tell what you are 'agreeing' or 'disagreeing' with.

You're right. I don't agree with you now. Thanks for the clarity.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I read it back and I still can't tell what you are 'agreeing' or 'disagreeing' with.

You're right. I don't agree with you now. Thanks for the clarity.

You are welcome. Now, brush up on those reading comprehension skills

[Scott Mayers]

I read it back and I still can't tell what you are 'agreeing' or 'disagreeing' with.

You're right. I don't agree with you now. Thanks for the clarity.

You are welcome. Now, brush up on those reading comprehension skills

?? I wasn't supporting your own inability to follow. It was sarcasm.

And thanks for now derailing the thread. (that's sarcasm too)

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You're right. I don't agree with you now. Thanks for the clarity.

You are welcome. Now, brush up on those reading comprehension skills

?? I wasn't supporting your own inability to follow. It was sarcasm.

And thanks for now derailing the thread. (that's sarcasm too)

You are welcome

[Age]

How could the so-called "nazi's" annihilation of "jews" have absolutely ANY thing at all to do with 'race'?

If being a so-called "jew", "muslim", or "christian" has ANY thing at all to do with 'race', then how exactly?

Well, that might be a good question to have asked the Nazis who clearly thought the Jews were a race. Christianity is not race based. It might have been Jewish in the beginning, but long before the Nazis were destroying their own country and many people elsewhere, Christianity was clearly followed by many races Yes, there are some Jews who are not racially Jewish. But these people were not in Germany, for the most part, and were not a threat, and certainly not the internal one the Nazis were obsessed with. Islam while associated with Arabs not race based and easy to join. To become a Jew you have to be tested and go through a rather intense process, especially if you have not been circumcized. You do not have to get rid of your foreskin in Islam. To become a Christian you can just start attending a church or even just follow the religion in your own way. Of course, some Christians might think you need to be baptized. But there is no agreement about what one must do and there is nothing like an adult circumcisn,

Was ANY of this meant to be an 'answer' to both, or either, of my two questions here?

If yes, then which part/s, exactly?

ANY adult human being can CHOOSE to have and maintain religious views or beliefs like "jewish" ones, "christian" ones, or "muslim" ones.

Sure. But that doesn't mean there isn't a racial component in actually being Jewish.

The clarifying question I asked above was; If being a so-called "jew" has ANY thing at all to do with 'race', then how exactly?

Which could also be asked as; If there is a racial component in actually being "jewish", then what is that 'component', EXACTLY?

You did write above; "To become a "jew" you HAVE TO be 'tested', and go through a rather intense process".

Now, what 'test' does one HAVE TO do, and pass, to THEN become a "jew", and, what EXACTLY is the "rather intense process"?

Also, are there ANY 'racial components' here?

So, if someone wants to annihilate a human being or human beings of some 'religion', then what 'religion' a human being has CHOSEN to follow or BELIEVE IN, then this can only happen ACCURATELY through CLARIFYING QUESTIONING, and absolute TOTAL Honesty, and NOT through 'race' AT ALL.

The Nazis didn't care what Jews believed.

LOL Besides the Fact that this is completely AND utterly MISSING MY POINT, some might argue that the so-called "nazis" ACTUALLY were caring, and A LOT, what "others" were thinking and BELIEVING.

Secular atheist jews were killed in large numbers. In many countries on the Axis side conversion to say Catholicism was absolutely no protection.

Okay, but AGAIN if this has absolutely ANY thing at all to do with what I said and which you quoted me here saying, then what EXACTLY is 'that'?

By the way, and just out of CURIOSITY, what is 'it' EXACTLY do you think or believe I am saying here, EXACTLY?

The races laws were blood laws, thus genetic laws.

What does this even mean and what is this even referring to EXACTLY, in relation to what I ACTUALLY said and wrote here above?

[Age]

I so sick of all these pathetic faux apologies and all the fuckwits who pretend to be offended all the time.

Do those faux apologies offend you?

Or, are you just sick of pathetic faux apologies?

And, what about those human beings who are actually offended, some of the time?

How do you KNOW how to accurately distinguish between and separate those who are pretending, from those who are not pretending, to be offended?

[Age]

Whoopi was suspended (big whoop) but it took her five trips to haul ass off the set.

"Goldberg." Her last name is "Goldberg." She's not Jewish, but she goes by "Goldberg."

And she's denying the racism of the Holocaust.

Y' know, sometimes irony is just too obvious.

So, what was the 'racism' of the holocaust EXACTLY?

[Age]

How could the so-called "nazi's" annihilation of "jews" have absolutely ANY thing at all to do with 'race'?

If being a so-called "jew", "muslim", or "christian" has ANY thing at all to do with 'race', then how exactly?

ANY adult human being can CHOOSE to have and maintain religious views or beliefs like "jewish" ones, "christian" ones, or "muslim" ones.

So, if someone wants to annihilate a human being or human beings of some 'religion', then what 'religion' a human being has CHOSEN to follow or BELIEVE IN, then this can only happen ACCURATELY through CLARIFYING QUESTIONING, and absolute TOTAL Honesty, and NOT through 'race' AT ALL.

And, with enough CLARIFYING QUESTIONING, and absolute TOTAL Honesty, then what each 'religion' entails ACTUALLY could NOT be done ACCURATELY and IN AGREEMENT.

Furthermore, 'race' is ALSO NOT even an ACTUAL 'thing', which could be SEPARATED, DISTINGUISHED APART, and IDENTIFIED ACCURATELY IN AGREEMENT, either.

I just wanted to comment on your point that a person can choose their religion or religious beliefs.

I believe that in the early twentieth century a Jew was a person borne of two Jewish parents, who each were borne of two Jewish parents, and so on all the way back to the first ones who met this criteria.

For the most part there was no choice, only a fact of birth. Intermarriage and conversion were negligible sources of Jews.

Of course your remarks that religion can be a matter of choice is correct at the present time.

What EXACTLY is even a "jew"?

What does the word "jewish" even mean or refer to in the words "being jewish"?

LOOK AT these questions from the perspective that I am the MOST IGNORANT and STUPID one there is.

You used the words, "who met this criteria", so what is the EXACT 'criteria' for "being jewish"?

[Age]

However, if “Goldberg” is a “Jewish name”, would it surprise anyone if Whoopi thought that blacks, and by extension people of any race, could be Jewish?

From her comments, you can tell exactly what she thinks. She bluntly said, on Stephen Colbert, when trying to excuse her earlier words, that Jews are white, and Germans are white, so the Holocaust was white-on-white, an in-group fight, and hence, "not racist."

Not much of an apology, really. More like, "I'm sorry you people are so offended, but you wouldn't be, if you were smarter." A funny sort of position for somebody to take when supposedly retracting. Sort of a "whoopsi," Ms. Goldberg.

The bottom line is that she doesn't thinks Jews can be blacks, or blacks Jews; she thinks that Jews are "whitey." And whitey can't experience racism.

No wonder the new name for Critical Social Justice is "Neo-Racism." It's a much better label, actually.

Back in those days when this was being written adult human beings would use and say words but NEVER actually KNOWING what they ACTUALLY meant NOR referred to, EXACTLY. As will be PROVED True here ONCE AGAIN.

What are "blacks", and what are "jews", EXACTLY, "immanuel can"?

This ones complete INABILITY to CLARIFY here what I just asked for PROVES IRREFUTABLY True what I just CLAIMED.