this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
300 points (93.6% liked)
Today I Learned
17808 readers
4 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I thought Jewish people were famously anemic and immunocompromised because of a lack of genetic diversity.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-genetic-diseases/
Specifically because they're culturally encouraged to marry with in the religious bloodline, they're less ethnically diverse than other groups.
I could have made that more clear, that's what I mean by having particular prejudice against Jewish people clearly being racism because it's directed toward a specially, culturally and traditionally uniform ethnic group.
There can be such an issue among a subset of a population without applying to all of them. Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about, let me reiterate: A distinction should always be made between racism and antiism, regardless of the overlap of ethnicity and any religious affiliation. Especially because religious traditions/prejudices are often used by racists to poorly mask their racism, and making this distinction is the easiest way to unmask racists.
"Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about..."
You specifically brought up Jewish genetic diversity in your previous comment:
"...you appear not to be aware of is that there is plenty of biodiversity among jewish people..."
which is famously medically inaccurate as referenced above.
As for "A distinction should always be made between racism and antiism..."
Academically, sure, if you're debating prejudice as a theory or defining terms, but this is a specific example and nobody is arguing racism and anti-Semitism are precisely identical concepts.
Here, there's no point in drawing a distinction between Dahl's anti-Semitism and racism because Roald Dahl is explicitly promoting both, and more.
The Israelis, Jews and Zionists are his salient topics, buttressed by his rationalization of the ethnic genocide of jews by that "stinker" Hitler, demonstrating both anti-semitism and racism quite clearly and specifically.
Yes, because it doesn't take a Ph.D. in biophysics to see that there are slavic jews, caucasian jews and arab jews at the very least.
Of course not.
I'm pointing out that you are trying to dismiss the article regarding Jewish genetic diversity by saying
"Now, I am not a evolutionary biologist nor doctor, so instead of weighing in on a subject that I do not know about..."
even though it has only become a topic because you have taken the initiative to weigh in on the topic in your previous comment.
In no way am I trying to dismiss the article by saying "I'm not weighing in on that". Nevertheless, my core point remains unrelated: antisemitism should not be used interchangeably with racism. And by saying that, in no way am I trying to condone either.
I agree.
I think you're preaching to the choir here though, nobody has used either term incorrectly in these threads, as far as I've seen.
Disambiguation might be more useful somewhere that the terms are being conflated.
Defining terms is unrelated and unnecessaryto the topic here.
Not inaccurate, perhaps unwarranted.
Well - the discussion originated from my comment that the OP quoted something anti-semitic in a post whose title is about racism. I just thought it's maybe not the most fitting example. But yeah, it doesn't matter too much.
The post is about anti-Semitism, a specific form of cultural and ethnic racism against Jews and Israelis demonstrated in multiple quotes by Roald Dahl.
Dahl attributes undesirable characteristics to several linked groups(Jews, Israelis, Zionists) and rationalizes the specifically ethnic Jewish genocide by Hitler.
There are further quotes that you may be missing. Pretty much all of his racism and anti-Semitism is gathered here now, however you care to define each term.
I was not arguing the point that the author had racist opinions / convictions. I was saying I expected there to certainly be a quote that was more fitting to the post title. Especially since as you confirm there are plenty of quotes. Anyways, I came to the post to inform myself - I have heard the name, but the works of this author are not among those books I have read.
The referenced OP quote Dahl makes rationalizing the Holocaust, a specifically ethnic genocide, doesn't strike you as racist?
How are you defining racism if not as prejudice against a specific race?
Also
"But yeah, it doesn't matter too much."
You've mentioned this a couple times, but each sentiment is contradicted by a dozen of your own comments belying your ardent passion for splitting the hairs of bigotry from racism for an as of yet unclear reason.
That context is not part of the quote though. As a matter of fact, unless you started mentioning it, and specifically with a jewish perspective on this author in this very thread, I wasn't aware that he was also rationalizing the holocaust.
I am bewildered how you and some others keep misquoting me this badly. I thought we had already agreed on the bottom line? I'll sign out of this discussion here, there was nothing to be gained beyond a fruitful exchange, and that is no longer to be gained.
The context is literally the quote in this case.
Dahl says:
"I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”
What connections were you making from his rationalization of "Hitler didn't just pick on them for no reason" if not a rationalization of the Jewish genocide?
Didn't read the second paragraph as part of the quote, to be honest - too much space between paragraphs. Or it got lost the moment someone took offense that I said this wasn't the best quote to link to the title. I still stand by this. Would have avoided this whole discussion here had the post replaced the word racism with anti-semitism
Avoid blaming others for your own misreading of the quote.
You can try Merriam-Webster/Oxford/Cambridge to suggest your own exclusively non-race related definition of racism.
You can similarly try contacting the museum to see if they'll change their statement regarding their condemnation of Dahl's racism.
Keep us updated on your efforts.