I get the reaction toward someone or group taking offense to something. Sometimes there’s a basis for why there’s an offense, sometimes there isn’t, and usually you can say that both can be arguably true and a consensus can’t be gotten beyond “Let’s agree to disagree”.
With the situation with the plates i fully get the license plate holder’s intention and point of view. The plates don’t offend me, had i seen them i would’ve gotten a kick out of it. The plates got pulled however and i understand why, if i were in a position that i had to defend those plates i’m not sure i would though. If someone else feels like they would then that’s fine. We shall have to agree to disagree and move on.
This subject reminds me of the far from settled issue of religion and how it should be represented if at all, in U.S. government.
Some groups whose religion has been represented and embedded in government ceremonies, monuments, and so on in the past see removing their religion in favor of diversity as an attack. Other groups who have never been represented see it as a move towards equality.
I believe that government, which is meant to be impartial and representative of all citizens can only be generic and sanitized in service of that goal.
So while I would probably chuckle at a 80085 plate, I can understand why it would probably not be allowed, and certainly won’t lose any sleep over it’s absence.
Do tell how Manitoba has a history of creating Jewish ghettos, as opposed to forcing Native populations to assimilate into white European culture.
(Why yes, I am totally ignoring the ignorance rampant in the false claim regarding the root of anti-Semitism.)
And for those of us with heritage from multiple countries, to say nothing of multiple continents, exactly which drop of blood would you say holds the essence to indicate the identity of “our own kind”?
I imagine that “The Best of Both Worlds” cliffhanger episode must have had a whole different feeling if you approached it from the point of view that the Borg were the good guys.
Perhaps (although I don’t think that’s the same definition of “assimilate” that is being discussed here), but if so, it has happened without those cultures being assimilated themselves.
If, to use a Wizard of Oz analogy, you graft wings onto a monkey and it uses them to fly, the monkey has assimilated the wings as part of itself. If the monkey instead eats and digests the wings, the monkey has still assimilated the wings as part of itself. However, only in the latter case have the wings been assimilated.
[quote=“Bert_Difig, post:135, topic:100214”]
I think assimilation is preferable to the previous current and historical reference of “Ghettos” where each sub-group lives separately. A lot of the anti-Jewish sentiment was driven by this lack of assimilation, moreso than any other single factor.
[/quote]OK, I’ve weighed how to respond to this in a way that’s remotely acceptable socially and might not violate message board rules. Because my initial intended response … wasn’t, and would.
What you said there? It’s not just wrong. It’s multiple levels of wrong, and some of those levels are a “gee, this commenter might be a Nazi” type of wrong. Blaming the Jews and their refusal to assimilate For. The. Fncking. Holocaust. is a good way to, at best, start rumors behind your back that you’re at least an appalling dipsh!t and at worst a big fan of Adolf Hitler. In less polite or more intoxicated society saying something like that is a good way to get beaten up. It’s not just that your line is stunningly ignorant and ahistorical - the Jews of Germany were the most assimilated Jewish community in the world, and Jews who did live in Ghettos and Shtetls didn’t do so by choice - it’s that it’s appallingly amoral. And then you double down on it, saying that “more than any other factor” anti-Jewish sentiment was driven by a lack of assimilation, which would have been fncking news to a LOT of victims of European antisemitism, some of whom were so assimilated they’d been living as Christians for two generations; some weren’t even aware of the Jewish heritage their parents and grandparents had assimilated away.
I recommend you to read a book. Read a bunch of books. Talk to people. Take them aside quietly and ask whether they think there’s anything you can do in order to be less offensive and less of an smugly ignorant apparent bigot. Aim in particular to do this with people who aren’t like you, and are educated. Jews in particular, obviously, but I suspect there’s a lot of subjects on which you’re equally likely to portray yourself as an assho|e.
I forgot who, maybe it was Chris Rock, but someone pointed out that the name is on par with calling a team the “New York Niggers”.
Yet the fans of the Redskins continue to push back against a name change. If I had to assume why I’d say that the American genocide against the native Americans was largely successful and they never meet any Mattaponi to remind them they’re humans.
Yeah that was my initial reaction… but can’t let you, @Mindysan33, @chgoliz, @Missy_Pants and many others who I am too tired to remember handles for right now smack the idiots down all the time even when y’all are much better at than I am.
Actually many scholars have included the refusal to assimilate as one of the reasons for anti-semitism and creation of ghettos. Honestly even today look at how the press (even the Jewish press like Forward) treats the Charedim.
Actually there is lots of written documentation by rabbis and common Jews, those who werent on the assimilation/Reform side, that shtetl life was preferred to abandoning Jewish life and practice. Essentially the same can be seen today in places like Kriyas Yoel or B’nei Brak. And as above, the Charedim still get shit on in the press by Jews and gentiles alike.
Kinda reminds me of what Johan Sfar said about eastern Europe Jews in the early 20the century, who went West to escape pogroms, but also fundamentalist rabbis.
Still, I think it isn’t merely about refusing to assimilate, but also about refusing to integrate*, which is another matter entirely.
The Haskala started in the 19th century, but yes, there were those who sought to assimilate out of their culture into the dominant one. In fact if you read the writings of the rabbis who went on to create the Reform movement, assimilation was in fact the goal, not integration.
