OK, Biasapedia, why are people using the past as a historical weapon in the first pla

[renard_ruse]

How many times can one article use the term "false equivalence" and "myth"?

Instead of going after the article on the facts (slavery has been around since at least the rise of settled agriculture, etc, which IS factually true) or the fact that its a matter of opinion if something is a "false equivalent" or not, the bigger question is why is it SO important to many powerful elements to use history as a weapon of division and a tool to maintain power?

If aspects of history are going to be used as a poltical and psychological weapon people have a right to counter it. Or thise who don't like that can stop trying to use it as a weapon.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth

 

[renard_ruse]

Why was indentured servitude outlawed at the same time as slavery if it was so benevolent?

 

[renard_ruse]

This started with bans on questioning the Holocaust, something I never understood growing up. As odd as it seemed that someone would question the Holocaust, it seemed even odder that someone would try to ban anyone from questioning it. The whole thing made no sense to me.

Either it happened, so questioning it wouldn't line up with evidence.and people digging into it further would have their belief in it strengthened or it actually didn't and someone doesn't want people digging into it further.

Now this idea is being expanded to more and more things that can't be questioned, investigated, or even discussed critically. More disturbing is now even citing facts on order to show that something isn't unique historically is apparently being forbidden.

Which brings us back to why this is so important to those trying to prevent historical discussion, unless they are using history as a weapon to promote agendas and intimidate any opposition.

 

[YDB95]

This started with bans on questioning the Holocaust, something I never understood growing up. As odd as it seemed that someone would question the Holocaust, it seemed even odder that someone would try to ban anyone from questioning it. The whole thing made no sense to me.

Either it happened, so questioning it wouldn't line up with evidence.and people digging into it further would have their belief in it strengthened or it actually didn't and someone doesn't want people digging into it further.

Most Holocaust-deniers don't actually argue that it didn't happen. What they do is try to minimise the degree to which the Jews were victims, either by questioning the numbers ("Come on, six million? It couldn't be that bad!") or by emphasising the other groups who were also rounded up and murdered. (The latter is Mel Gibson's MO, incidentally - the interview that his supporters always point to as proof that he isn't a Holocaust denier is in fact proof that he is.)

Now, regarding the Irish in America, no one denies that they were the victims of discrimination when they first started coming over in large numbers. Just like the Germans, Italians, Chinese, Russians, Vietnamese, etc. (I'm an Irish-American myself, for what it's worth.) But they were not enslaved, and those - like you - who argue otherwise are minimising if not outright denying the unique injustice that was inflicted upon Africans brought to America.

 

[CornusKousa]

Most Holocaust-deniers don't actually argue that it didn't happen. What they do is try to minimise the degree to which the Jews were victims, either by questioning the numbers ("Come on, six million? It couldn't be that bad!") or by emphasising the other groups who were also rounded up and murdered. (The latter is Mel Gibson's MO, incidentally - the interview that his supporters always point to as proof that he isn't a Holocaust denier is in fact proof that he is.)

Emphasizing the other groups is in fact holocaust acknowledgement, not denial.

Now, regarding the Irish in America, no one denies that they were the victims of discrimination when they first started coming over in large numbers. Just like the Germans, Italians, Chinese, Russians, Vietnamese, etc. (I'm an Irish-American myself, for what it's worth.) But they were not enslaved, and those - like you - who argue otherwise are minimising if not outright denying the unique injustice that was inflicted upon Africans brought to America.

It has nothing to do with the Africans brought to America and in no way diminishes nor is it in any way shape or form a denial of their totally NOT unique injustice.

You're wildly dishonest to suggest what you have here and it shows your bias and desire for victimhood.

 

[YDB95]

Emphasizing the other groups is in fact holocaust acknowledgement, not denial.

Nope. It's all about minimising the Jews' suffering. There are ways of acknowledging the other victims without doing that.

It has nothing to do with the Africans brought to America and in no way diminishes nor is it in any way shape or form a denial of their totally NOT unique injustice.

Ever hear of dogwhistle politics? To the right ear, it has everything to do with diminishing the suffering of Black Americans.

 

[CornusKousa]

Nope.

Yuuuuup....can't deny the holocaust if you're pointing out people who were victimized by it.

It's all about minimising the Jews' suffering.

That may be what you read into it but that's not what it actually is.

And it's still not denial either, your original claim.

Ever hear of dogwhistle politics?

Yea. "Dogwhistles" are things leftist usually want to read into something when they can't actually support their insane claims that it's there.

Leftist: "That's RACIST!!"
Sane people: "Where? What racism are you talking about??"
Leftist: Unable to produce any evidence of racism = "it.....it's a DOGWHISTLE!!"

LOL....it's buuu shit.

To the right ear, it has everything to do with diminishing the suffering of Black Americans.

Ahh..."to the right ear"....yea, you're full of shit, again.

 

[YDB95]

Yuuuuup....can't deny the holocaust if you're pointing out people who were victimized by it.

The term "Holocaust denier" doesn't literally mean you deny it happened (although a few of them do). It's about denial of the degree to which the Jews were the victims.

Yea. "Dogwhistles" are things leftist usually want to read into something when they can't actually support their insane claims that it's there.

Leftist: "That's RACIST!!"
Sane people: "Where? What racism are you talking about??"
Leftist: Unable to produce any evidence of racism = "it.....it's a DOGWHISTLE!!"

The Southern strategy is real. At least one RNC chair has apologised for it. Get over it.

 

[CornusKousa]

The term "Holocaust denier" doesn't literally mean you deny it happened (although a few of them do).

Oh so it was just shitty labeling by mother fuckers who can't speak English worth a fuck.....I'm sure that's it and not that you didn't fuck up at all by putting out a stupid argument.

Must be the same retards who came up with "white privilege".

It's about denial of the degree to which the Jews were the victims.

Again, pointing out that there were a LOT of others that got tossed in with them doesn't deny or diminish anything that the Jews went through.

You're just wrong and can't own it. Grow up.

The Southern strategy is real. At least one RNC chair has apologised for it. Get over it.

Whatever..... I like pizza!! Hey random comment moment everyone!!

LOL

 

[YDB95]

Oh so it was just shitty labeling by mother fucker who can't speak English worth a fuck.....I'm sure that's it and not that you didn't fuck up at all by putting out a stupid argument.

You're entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts. The term "Holocaust denier" does NOT refer exclusively to people who think the event didn't happen, period.

Again, pointing out that there were a LOT of others that got tossed in with them doesn't deny or diminish anything that the Jews went through.

Depends on context. That's where the dogwhistle comes in. Remember, one of the larger bases of anti-Semitism is the belief that the Jews are out to control everything. The idea that they have claimed more victimisation in the Holocaust than they really suffered is a perfect example of that. Anti-Semites do not need that spelled out, when they hear people talking about all the victims except the Jews, they know exactly what that means.

 

[WillJ8787]

Ah, so first big mistake here is to use Wikipedia as a source.
It is not accepted as a legitimate source in academic circles.

I don't know what the point of what he is saying...it's not clear.

I can infer that he might be Irish and is taking offence to Wikipedia saying Irish were not slaves in the same manner as Africans and it's a conflation and false equivalency.

If so....that is 100% correct. The Irish experience is specific to them and different than what Africans experienced. Both groups do share some common ground though.

Irish were treated horribly in the US when they first arrived and were an oppressed and discriminated against group.

So we're Africans....Africans were brought here in bondage for the most part....Irish were not for the most part.

Irish arrived here free....Africans did not.

And they should be allies because they do share a common bond of much oppression and discrimination.

 

[CornusKousa]

You're entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts. The term "Holocaust denier" does NOT refer exclusively to people who think the event didn't happen, period.

You stick with that "they had no idea what they were saying!!" line...we totally believe you!!

Depends on context. That's where the dogwhistle comes in.

No....there is no context.

You have a belief you can't back up, so you call it a "dogwhistle".

The end.

 

[CornusKousa]

And they should be allies because they do share a common bond of much oppression and discrimination.

How though...the Irish are white, that automatically gives them all these PRIVIELEGES, everything was handed to them on a silver platter because of their skin color. Their born oppressive over black people that oppress them and keep them from succeeding at ANYTHING.

Deny it and you're a white supremacist!! #stayWOKE

 

[YDB95]

How though...the Irish are white, that automatically gives them all these PRIVIELEGES, everything was handed to them on a silver platter because of their skin color. Their born oppressive over black people that oppress them and keep them from succeeding at ANYTHING.

Deny it and you're a white supremacist!! #stayWOKE

Once again you apply the most extreme views found anywhere on the left to the entire left. That would be like comparing all Republicans to you. Which would be extremely unfair to Republicans.

 

[CornusKousa]

Once again you apply the most extreme views found anywhere on the left to the entire left. That would be like comparing all Republicans to you. Which would be extremely unfair to Republicans.

Except I'm not that far right.....and those views on the left are poplar and common place.

Your just mad.

 

[WillJ8787]

How though...the Irish are white, that automatically gives them all these PRIVIELEGES, everything was handed to them on a silver platter because of their skin color. Their born oppressive over black people that oppress them and keep them from succeeding at ANYTHING.

Deny it and you're a white supremacist!! #stayWOKE

Ah, lost soul who really doesn't understand.

Sad!

 

[CornusKousa]

Ah, lost soul who really doesn't understand.

Sad!

Ah, a hit dog....hollerin'

 

[YDB95]

Except I'm not that far right....

Just because you insist on calling yourself a liberal doesn't really mean anything.

.and those views on the left are poplar and common place.

Which is why you can never point to any actual examples of anyone here saying those things. Right.

 

[CornusKousa]

Just because you insist on calling yourself a liberal doesn't really mean anything.

Other than I politically favor liberty over authority....which is true.

Because words mean things.

And liberal can be left, right or in-between....I favor certain aspects of both so I consider myself a moderate liberal.

Which is why you can never point to any actual examples of anyone here saying those things. Right.

No I just learned early on that no number of examples no matter how mainstream will change deep DEEP red tint of the rose colored glasses you wear for the authoritarian left.