crazy that it's literally 80y since liberation of auschwitz with all these commemorations over and over again every year and still you gotta tell supposedly progressive ppl that nazism is about killing jews, that antisemitism is the core of nazism.
"but the institute for sexual science in 1933-" institute founded and lead by a jewish gay man, who also founded in 1897 first ever queer rights organization. institute that was heavily centered around queerness, which was considered by nazis a symptom of jewish disease rotting the world, as literally everything that nazis didn't approve off. everything that nazis viewed as wrong was the fault of evil jews.
words have meanings, if you mean "fascism", say "fascism", if you mean "ethno-nationalism", say "ethno-nationalism". "nazi" is not an umbrella term for every bad guy.
Centre of Holocaust Education somewhat contradicts you, and BTW, Korean adopted to a Jewish family. I have two genocides to contend with and explain, though it's not like anyone in the US or Europe wants to acknowledge how much the US and UK helped Japanese in trying to genocide Koreans, so then deny it as an attempted genocide at all—yes, including some Jews (Mostly white).
I also did a BA in Anthropology which I concentrated on Systems, basically how hate occurs and stratification.
I get nuance dies on the internet, but I'm still going to try.
(PDF warning)
The center (or centre) of Nazism, might have hyperfocused on antisemitism, but hatred of homosexuality, which starts in Europe around the 13th century and became more pronounced over time was not really about Jews SOLELY, but about the "purity" or the Aryan "race".
100% I get that nuance isn't popular on the internet.
But as the Centre puts it, Homosexuality was seen as a barrier to populate the Aryan race from the Nazi PoV, which is why it specifically was targeted. This is also why theoretically it was targeted in the 13th century, though scholars pin this down to male fragility about primogeniture due to Mongols. (SVing and women willingly being with them)
While homophobia and legal discrimination of homosexuals was the norm throughout interwar Europe, persecution became particularly extreme in Nazi Germany. In 1936 the Office for the Combating of Homosexuality and Abortion linked what were seen as population ‘problems’ undermining Nazi attempts to increase the so- called ‘Aryan’ race. Homosexuality was regarded as a threat to the moral and spiritual wellbeing of the nation and throughout the 1930s, gay men were harassed by the police, imprisoned, and increasingly incarcerated in concentration camps, where their treatment was particularly severe and mortality rates were exceptionally high.
The precise number of homosexuals who died at the hands of the Nazis is unclear but estimates put the number at 10,000 - 15,000.
Persecution was thus brutal and violent but the regime did not adopt a coherent, organised policy of murdering gay men. Instead, deterrence and violent ‘re-education’ tended to be pursued and the policies did not extend beyond the borders of the Reich.
Historically, worldwide, too, hatred of homosexuality often is in conjunction with the fall of women's rights, which is usually about sexual violence. (Pulling out my BA in Anthropology which I concentrated in systems).
In order to control women, you have to often discipline LGBTQIA (and disability too).
YES, at its core, if you want to "wipe out" PoCs and so-called "Lesser" white populations, you need to basically make a "breeding program" (which we can see rise AGAIN in the Untied States. Though it never left.)
BTW, the notions of Aryan mostly come from Anthropology. There was a schmuck Anthropologist that stole, basically the skulls of Eastern European sex workers (one of which is in this painting, BTW):
Upon learning this, I've never looked at this painting the same again. AND I've seen it in person multiple times.
Basically took people who were sex trafficked, desecrated their graves, and then poured the equivalent of styrofoam into their skulls. He stuffed it the most with Western Europeans, the least with Africans. Thus he ranked it: Black people at the bottom, Asians next, and Eastern Europeans last. (Didn't do Indigenous people or South Pacific). This is why we measure in ccs. Also this anthropologist was a dick. This, for the white Jews not paying attention is where the term "Caucasian" came from. If you're trying to not be anti-semitic against yourself, let that term as the "origin of white people" die the death it deserves. Because that term inspired Hitler.
Anyway, the hatred of Jewish people, has basis mostly in the usury laws, where Jews couldn't lend to each other, but could lend to gentiles. Stephen Fry, a Jew, goes over this (focusing on Italy), and Professor Janega goes over this. And other scholars. Some Jews know this, some don't. My parents (white ones) didn't. Otherwise they wouldn't have used the highly sexist, antisemitic and racist term, "Caucasian".
This means these were separate events, but under Nazism, tied together. Nazis wanted more Aryans, but the barrier to Aryan population was Homosexuality (and basic LGBTQIA).
The PDF goes over it and the more nuanced approach of death of Romani, etc (using the derogatory G word that is history appropriate), but I do understand that Jews want to say they are the biggest victims and compare and contrast genocides, but at the same time, maybe we shouldn't do oppression olympics (like the person who invented that term said we shouldn't). My Jewish mother would deny other genocides at times in favor of saying only Jews which BTW, pissed me off. Don't be that person.
The point is Nazis were evil assholes, who wanted to take over the world with only Western Europeans by saying they were the "most evolved", but some of the hate wasn't all based in hating Jews. They have different points in history where they started.
Oh, and I have an Anthro paper on where the start of racism is. (As in by melanin density) And also discussions on Ethnic hatred v. Xenophobia.
I'm not denying that Nazis targeted the Jews the most, but I think what I'm aiming for is instead of trying to figure out who is the biggest victim is to combat the anatomy of hatred itself and why and how it happens so that one can combat it in other populations, such as towards Palestinians. Hatred isn't creative because often the same actions done towards people to oppress them repeat. Like Isaraelis repeating shooting Palestineans into pits which is what Russian Antisemites did to Jews. (Which my white Russian Jewish grandmother witnessed first hand. Repeating the trauma of your oppressors makes me irrationally angry.)
Also, one shouldn't deny others their victimhood in order to say their victimhood is bigger. I've seen it from Koreans and from Jews and I hate you both for doing it. From Koreans it's led to a path of anti-Blackness and racism. From Jews I've seen people in our community try to deny other genocides as "real". I have so much anger for both of those things, but I also understand it.
I think trauma, and I speak as someone who has other trauma should make one hyperfocused on ending hate, in general, rather than trying to pull out well, "I think I'm the bigger victim."
The root of homophobia is control and male fragility.
The root of antisemitism is mostly about people playing victim for borrowing money and saying they are bigger victims than Jews as they hung them, etc.
I don't think we should borrow from our oppressors.
But how hatred expressed itself in genocide and passive genocide should 100% be understood, unless you want it to repeat over again. And I would beg, really really beg people to not want it to repeat again.
I haven't seen a queer person say the Holocaust was only about queer people. I have, however, seen Jews deny that the other groups during the holocaust existed. And I say this as an insider. I've also seen Jews deny that PoC Jews exist in a hatred move.
So I'm calling out my fellow Jews and saying instead of superfocusing on antisemitism, which I'm not denying you exists, don't be the person that spills the soup everywhere, but understand at least the anatomy of hate before trying to rank victimhood.
... kay, so imma ignore all off topic talk and fallacies just like you ignored what this post is about and go straight to some parts that are somewhat relevant
"nazis saw homosexuality as something immoral that was disturbing reproduction of aryan race" and "everything nazis saw as wrong, including queers, they put as the fault of the evil jews" are not mutually exclusive statments. it was "we also hate queers, so lets put in on jews", not "we also hate jews, so lets put it on queers". it was "final solution to the jewish question", not the queer one. nazis where trying to wipe the world out from everything they did not like through the antisemitism.
both homophobia and antisemitism have been and still are elements of various hateful ideologies, organisations, governments etc, but it doesn't mean they are the core of them like it is with antisemitism for nazism. ku klux klan are known for hating huge number of various groups including both queers and jews, but also for example muslims and catholics. however the core for them is hate against black ppl, which is why when some act of violence happens to queers, you don't go around calling perpetrators kkk, bc it would be crazy insensitive and just plain stupid. same applies to nazism and that's what og post is about, that nazism doesn't exist without antisemitism, so ppl shouldn't throw it around left and right calling every bad guy a nazi.
nothing from me here goes into victim olympics. "but the institute for sexual science in 1933-" was put in the og post, bc this is something used by ppl to skip over and ignore antisemitism part of holocaust, which absolutely should not be ignored, as these are not separate issues in nazism. it does not mean that queers did not have it bad, but that within nazism their suffering was directly linked to jewish ppl. you perhaps have not seen anyone say it, but i have (and as i've noticed, so did some other ppl in the notes) which is why it was included in the og post, to cut from the start number of assholes, who would jump in with it as an argument.
also side note, but you going "oh but the nuance" followed by all that talk and then trying to boil down root of antisemitism to simply just "mostly people playing victim for borrowing money and saying they are bigger victims than Jews as they hung them" is really fucking weird, but that's just my opinion.
So you go by opinion rather than reference? I go by reference, but then brought up Jewish (that kind of Jew).
Here, counter to my own argument, but the work is rather newish:
In this episode, we talk to Julie Mell, an associate professor of history at North Carolina State University and author of the two volume bo
She also brings nuance to Nazis in Germany and the view of Jews as "rich" (though not true and I never argued it was true either). Her thesis is the newest so doesn't have all of the support yet.
But there are scholars that have a middle ground approach (whom she cites because she is a true academic):
Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism
This says that some Jews were money lenders (which no one disputes) and might have had some power in the economy, but not as much as reported.
But some Jews still prefer they were labeled usurers instead of lenders, but were helpful story since a lot of the scholarship came from fellow Jews.
The problem with her theory as Flora Cassen points out is that the evidence isn't strong enough to completely erase it.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26556480
Flora Cassen also doesn't present how much debt was in evidence to Jews versus Christians to Christians in her commentary on the books she presents. But this point is moot.
Stephen Frye (Jewish) and Professor Janega prefer the story of Jews as money lenders, but secretly helped Europe to grow, since the evidence on the other side is a bit thin.
Frye, is a bit thin as a reference, but I cited him since I thought I could dig up a clip from his old documentary, Fry's Planet Word. He talks about the Merchant of Venice in it and the origin of the ideas of Usury, etc and contrast points to it. I try not to link heavy academia, generally.
And it's true, they hung witches, but they also hung Jews in history while saying they were the true victims (which as I highlighted was ridiculous.) Synchronized later in history... but too long.
Root means origin story.
But let's say, Mell is correct and it dates to the 13th century (which oddly coincides with a lot of the institutionalized hate in Europe). Then she's trying to attribute it to the crusades, that would lead back to the Islamic Spain (Al Andalusia) which has been argued is the root of racism in another paper. (though again, root and exacerbating factors aren't the same thing). Reconquista, etc. Not rehashing that paper's arguments which were really good.
That's still a different origin story from how anti-queerness came to be, thus the anatomy of the hate is still going to be different and needs to be talked about differently and it has to break off into a different direction.
Honestly, I think it might be older than that... but meh, no proof on my side. (I mean, Romans also hated Jews, though for entirely non-economic reasons, but technically not dealing with Europe and dealing with Roman versions of xenophobia which gets complicated to sort as my Aunt (Jewish and a professor of Classical women's studies in Greco-Roman Art) BTW, liked to say. I have her whole lecture stored in my head.).
But still, my problem is that YOU DID NOT KNOW ANY OF THIS and still made a ranking statement. Instead, you did another post of hot takes. As I said, understanding the anatomy of hate, means understanding the origin of the hate and why and that's the nuance. Mell did her homework, even if there are contradicting sides. But in doing her homework, she also didn't rank.
My objection was to your original statement: "institute that was heavily centered around queerness, which was considered by nazis a symptom of jewish disease rotting the world, as literally everything that nazis didn't approve off."
as it it ONLY folded into antisemitism, and didn't have external factors and wasn't anything about queerness. Maybe it was an error in your writing, but that came off as soft holocaust denial, which I've seen Jews do.
What I was arguing was a nuanced approach that it can be BOTH and not SOLELY be about Judaism, and if you understand the roots of homophobia and of Judaism, you would STILL find different start points and reasons for it.
Centering around the thing, as your suggestion of KKK being about Black people, is not the same thing as OMG, it's only about Jews. Maybe not careful wording on your part but it stands.
It can be BOTH. Nazis could have hated that it was both run by a Jew and featured helping trans and homosexuality, but your wording indicated it was only about Jews, nothing else, which is why I backed it with the Centre of Holocaust Education's words. Verbatim, quoted.
BTW, I've seen plenty of trans and gay people go over particularly JoKing for being an asshat. But they do not spare her on the antisemitism, but what I'm suggesting is that because the Anatomy of hate for the *specific* type of hatred is different (though it often overlaps), that when they are focusing on trans/gay hate, they don't also have time to spend another 30 minutes on how hate against Jews work. The anatomy of the two work differently and are at the root very different things. So when a gay person highlights sexual science in 1933, they usually also cite he was a Jew. AND THEN MOVE ON. because that author is a ball of hate. But those same people I've also gone after her for being antisemitic. Anti-ace. Anti-women. Truly that woman is exhausting. People forget labels of hate she's spewed because her list is astoundingly long. And giving a lesson when you're doing a hot off the press "I don't like this statement by this woman and don't support it" on everything about WWII with high censors on both Twitter and Youtube censoring things like "Hilter", "Nazis", "White supremacy" (and even KKK), makes it really difficult to get into depth about anti-semitism without a ton of self-censoring, trying to get around the words like "Killing Jews". 'cause really, it's built to not talk about atrocities. It will delete your post.
I've seen 1 hour and a half videos covering the hatred in JoKing and the commenters will still say, "But you forgot..."
Since more people are going for soft Holocaust denial, trans people are forced to explain how anti-trans works and history around Nazi hatred of trans people, but it's quite a different from anti-semitism, this doesn't mean a flat out denial.
The little mustached man, and sometimes filler words have to come into effect as the algorithm will work against you and censor your post.
But fairly sure ethno-nationalism isn't censored. (I know how unfair that is).
BTW, I 100% mean it when I say that Gustav Freytag was an antisemitic, wanting to genocide Polish people, pre-fascist. Because I have the textual proof. But on Twitter and on some other apps I have to self-censor. I can't say the word genocide. I can't say the word anti-semitic (I have to say hates Jews), and I certainly can't say the word fascist. I can say he was an Ethnocentric Ethnonationalistic pro-German who hated all other countries. But I can't say things like the Nazis would have loved him, and I don't forgive him for marrying someone Jewish because his mind didn't change overly much.
Not calling everything Nazis is fair, not realizing the algorithms work against talking openly about genocide is 100% fair (It censored my talk of what the Japanese did to Koreans when I was on Twitter), bad wording, I can forgive. Saying that it's only about Jews and no other group without understanding the nuance of hate, I can't abide by.
And still, Nazis were heavily influenced by the US's genocidal/white supremacy PoVs.
My Mom liked to point to various people on TV and say he's Jewish, she's Jewish, and also, they should mention he's a Jew or this is about Jewish suffering. But sometimes ya gotta move on with it when the subject changes. When trans people talk about Nazis' treatment of trans people, doesn't mean they believe it's the only one, but the reasons why are entirely different and time crunch on social media. (This nuance was lost on my Mom. Also couldn't reach for survivor over victim.)
Still, thesis stands, before you rank, understand the anatomy of hate. Your original statement ranked intentional or not, it didn't say both at the same time. It said one instead of the other.
jfc it's like you read half the sentence and based on that decide what is the argument of the other person, their intentions, knowledge.
yes, it is my OPINION that it's weird to talk about NUANCE, spend a lot of time on unrelated to the actual topic talk and then BOIL DOWN root of antisemitism to SIMPLY JUST mostly ppl being mad at having to pay back jews. no matter how hard you try to twist it, it does not mean that i didn't know about about jews lending money being one of the things that were pissing some ppl off and used as justification for hating jews. it simply means that boiling down like that such a big and complex topic is weird imo. esp since jews were ostracized and targeted wherever they went and lived as minority, since pretty much the start of judaism.
and once again no matter how hard you try to twist it my og statement does not say "one instead of the other". firstly, bc it's not on its own, but within the context of the entire post, but also even in the sentence that you quote "institute that was heavily centered around queerness, which was considered by nazis a symptom of jewish disease rotting the world, as literally EVERYTHING THAT NAZIS DIDN'T APPROVE OFF" along with the very next one "EVERYTHING THAT NAZIS VIEWED AS WRONG was the fault of evil jews". so no, it does not say "this or that", it says "we also hate this so let's blame them for it". at no point i am negating nazis' hatred towards various groups. to put queers as the fault of jews, you gotta hate them first, fucking logical duh. instead what i'm saying is that they tied all these things/groups to jews, which is why when talking about nazism you cannot untie antisemitism from the conversation. and i don't have to go into nazis every fuckass reasoning for hating whatever thing/group, bc that's not the point here, however me not going into those details of reasonings does not mean i think they do not exist or that i'm unaware of them.
kkk is centered around racism against black ppl, and nazism is centered around antisemitism. it does not mean nazism is "OMG, it's only about Jews", which you try so hard to put into my mouth, but that jews cannot be written out from the discussion around nazism no matter how uncomfortable it makes ppl, just like black ppl can't be written out from the discussion about kkk. and there is plenty of ppl, who are uncomfortable with antisemitism or even antisemitic themselves, who skip over jewish genocide, bc they need just a part about violent homophobia for example.
once again, og post is about how you cannot call every bad guy a nazi, bc nazism specific characteristic is being centered around antisemitism, something that cannot be written out from it.
"Maybe not careful wording on your part", "Maybe it was an error in your writing" or maybe it's an error in your reading ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
