Indians Should “Never Forget”By Harold A. MonteauIn 1996 I was invited to sit on a panel at a meeting of the National Association of State Legislators. Also speaking on the panel was a Jewish American politician from New York who has gone on to higher offices in his career and is still fighting a war of "containment" against the Indians in his state. When it came his turn to speak he proclaimed that the answer to the problems between the various states and Indian Tribes was "that Indians should take their rightful place in America and disappear into the mainstream." I stopped him, which I admit was rude, and told him that I was not going to sit there and let him state that the solution to Indian-State issues is that we Indians should "disappear." I told him that in taking that position he was advocating the genocide of American Indians. He became enraged, shouting "genocide!!…that's Buchenwald, that's Auschwitz! How dare you?" I responded that his position was a call to end the existence of American Indians, just slower than the murder of the Jewish people by the Nazi. He just could not believe that someone would equate his brilliant "final solution" for the "Indian Problem" to genocide.
Jewish people do not own the term "genocide." They certainly have every right to invoke their mantra, "Never Forge" when reminding the world that the Nazi tried to murder every Jew in Europe. However, the Jewish People must recognize that we American Indians also experienced murder our holocaust with some putting the casualty number at 20 Million or more. We have as much right to remind the world to "Never Forget" the holocaust that was perpetrated on the American Indian People and how, in this day and age, we still must fight off attacks on our homelands, our sovereignty, our people and our "race" that are meant to bring about our "disappearance."Why this isn't just one person's problem:
I wrote in this column several years ago about how the Jewish politicians from the State of Connecticut were inflicting their own "Final Solution" on the tribes in that state by attacking the right of the Schagticoke and Eastern Pequot Tribes to Federal Recognition. Connecticut's Senior Senator, Joe Lieberman, is an Orthodox Jew who remained in silent "complicity" while it happened. The Jewish Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal (who insults all our Veterans when he lied about his mythical Vietnam military service) now is seeking the Democratic nomination to run for the U.S. Senate. Having made a name for himself as an Indian Fighter, he just may be elected. No tribe should support him. To do so might be good politics but morally, it would be an aberration. He has been successful in "disappearing" Indian Tribes that had every right to Federal Recognition. His actions against the Connecticut Tribe represented an unprecedented state interference in the Federal-Tribal relationship. He used the backdoor influence he had with the Republican Party to get President Bush and his Interior Secretary to "de-recognize" two tribes that had just received Federal Recognition after decades of petitioning. In doing so he put those tribes "under such living conditions as are designed to bring about their disappearance as a distinct people."
The quoted language is the from the "Conventions against Genocide" that were put in place after the Jewish Holocaust during World War II. The Conventions recognize that murder is only one way to achieve the "disappearance" of a people.Comment: A nastier response to the unnamed Jewish politician might be:
The solution to the "Jewish problem" is for Israelis to take their rightful place in the world and disappear into the mainstream. I.e., disband the country of Israel and disperse. After you do that and prove it works, we'll consider disbanding our Indian nations. Until then, no.A commenter on Facebook adds:
Rob and Harold: to be at all fair, the article should mention the countless Jews, including politicians, who have supported Native nations and causes over the years.Good point. Consider it mentioned.
I think Monteau is criticizing only the politicians who demand support for Israel but won't provide equal support for America's Indian nations. That applies to non-Jewish as well as Jewish politicians.
Incidentally, it's hilarious seeing anti-Indian crusader Blumenthal caught in a bald-faced lie. Yeah, I cured the common cold...or had a common cold...or whatever. I hope the Democrats can find a better candidate who isn't a DINO (Democrat in name only).
For more on the subject, see
Should Indians Cling to Reservations? and
Genocide By Any Other Name....
31 comments:
I wonder what the politician's view on Israel is?
"The solution to the "Jewish problem" is for Israelis to take their rightful place in the world and disappear into the mainstream. I.e., disband the country of Israel and disperse. After you do that and prove it works, we'll consider disbanding our Indian nations"
Fits in well with my earlier point about Israel being a like a "reservation" for Jews who even now experience extreme intolerance, or even genocide, in the Middle East and elsewhere.
I too, have had my run in with a couple of people that happened to be Jewish while in college, though I have to state that I do not condone nor accept all Jewish peoples as being anti-Native, but I also had to remind these two wealthy college kids that much of what was practiced against the Jewish people in discrimination and outright genocide happened here in America long before Europe. Think about it. The sterilization of women; the dividing and separation of families into labor camps; the literal corraling of humans in forts and prisons; the marking and identification of people by race still in use today; need I go on? It is not to say which atrocity seems the more legitimate, but ALL non-Native Americans forget what happened here, not just Jews. The Jewish people have more protection, money and political clout than any indigenous people across the globe and for me, they are the last people to talk to me about "genocide" when they have not learned the lessons of history and inflict militarism and murder as an only solution to dealing with Palestinians. It is after all, another mans land to which the Jews have claim to and make expansions to with the use of weapons. How is this different than Manifest Destiny in America quoted from the same religious zeal?
Where is our Hebrew brethren to help expose the corruptions and genocide we experience still? Ironically, between German people and the Jews, guess which one has an affinity and more understanding and respect towards the American Indian today?
Hitler was a monster yes, but I believe the need to suffer the complete German race for what he did is no different than what the United States did to tribes for one tribal members actions. Sitting Bull, Geronimo and other Indian leaders throughout American history were not solely punished as individuals, but their entire tribes and peoples were retaliated against as well. Where in history has the American people as a whole suffered for the acts of one or a few actions of its leadership or government in regards to the treatment of Indians?
There was never a Bureau of Jewish Affairs under the Department of War and there is definitely not an American Indigenous Defense League.
"....that much of what was practiced against the Jewish people in discrimination and outright genocide happened here in America long before Europe."
Did you really mean to say this? There was no Jewish presence in the entire New World until after 1492. Prior to 1492, there is a long and deep record of discrimination against Jews in Europe (on the part of Muslims and Christians. Genocide, pogroms, forced conversion, and everything.
"they are the last people to talk to me about "genocide" when they have not learned the lessons of history and inflict militarism and murder as an only solution to dealing with Palestinians"
This is an assertion so blatantly untrue as to perhaps be antisemitic. The Israeli main policy has been "live and let live", and Israel has only been forced to bomb the terrorists after repeated aggression from them. "Manifest destiny" is a concept alive in the minds of Israeli extremists, but it is not a policy: look at the retreat from Gaza.
Also, even now they should be the FIRST to talk about genocide, as there are major powers (Iran) and many others who still target them for discrimination.
Your claim that Jews aren't discriminated against because they are rich is a strong double-whammy of antisemitism. Still reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Your "Jews deserve it because they are rich" meme has a bloody history going back hundreds of years. Hitler made use of it. And guess what? Jews DID suffer genocide despite having "money and protection".
So, let's ask this,
If a people that has "protection, money and political clout" is not capable of being victimized by discrimination or genocide, then does this mean that it is OK to be racist or even murderous against the Pequots in the Northeastern US? This indiginous group is wealthy and has protection and political clout, after all.
Does this make them fair game, and deserving of the genocide and discrimination that you think Jewish people deserve?
Wow, Jews are so good at making enemies. I had a feeling Jews were discriminatory towards Natives. Heck, even SPLC the "source" on Hategroups and hate crimes incidents, rarely covers stories involving Natives. The recent hatecrime incident happened in Farmington, SPLC did not write about it. But now that ZOG hates Natives, I guess we can now "deny" that the Jewish holocaust happened, according to David Irving. I guess the White Supremacists are right, Jews simply CANNOT be trusted.
Don't support a Jew. The self-proclaimed "God's Chosen People".
~GENO~
Perhaps this man's point of view is the case of the opressed become the opressors because of established authority and social legitimacy has separated them from the root of their own opression, which has become an idealized struggle canonized by history? Perhaps the man that said this didn't grow up struggling to define and defend himself against others who would determine his worth based upon his religion so he feels safe enough to say such things without understand the hypocrisy of his beliefs?
TO DMARKS:
My point in stating that genocide happened in America long before the Jewish holocaust stands in that the methods against indigenous peoples was practiced before WWII on American soil against natives, NOT JEWS.
I'll take it a step further and state that the Germans may have even learned from America in dealing with the "Indian problem" and that many of those methods are still in use today. Ever heard of Eugenics? Did you know there were 24 states here in the US that lobbied successfully for sterilization of the "unfit" during the late 1920s?
Look at some of the voting practices states continue to use in small towns and counties across the USA today.
This might seem like fiction for you, but there are still areas in "the greatest nation on earth" that deny freedoms and rights for minorities and women still.
You miss the whole point of the original argument.
Racism and discrimination comes from all sides dmarks, and even from within each of our own groups. My point is that the Jews have collective organizations and resources to combat injustice whereas Indians do not. There is even a word for it, "anti-semitic".
We can go round and round about Israels use and perpetual ties to the defense industry, but in the end, the Jewish state and it rationale parallels that of the US in its dealing with the Indian and his lands.
I did not claim ALL JEWS as being affluent, only two college kids, but you seem to have your mind made up.
I argue history with anyone, natives included, if it sheds some light on, or raises some healthy debate.
T-Card:
"My point in stating that genocide happened in America long before the Jewish holocaust"
No, you did not specify the Holocaust of the mid 20th century. You referred to "Europe", which indeed has a long history of genocide against Jews pre-dating the Nazi Holocaust, and pre-dating Columbus.
"I'll take it a step further and state that the Germans may have even learned from America ..."
An interesting point, which has bene made by Rob in this blog in the past.
"but in the end, the Jewish state and it rationale parallels that of the US in its dealing with the Indian and his lands."
The rationale actually lies with Israel's enemies, and not with Israel. Few in Israel want to expand Israel at all. But this nation's enemies openly boast of claims of a sort of manifest destiny, and desire to sweep the pesky Jews away.
When I mentioned Europe, I meant WWII and the Nazis "systematic" elimination of a people during that time with relationship to the systematic elimination of Native peoples on this continent; its structures and laws set in place to rid Europe of Jews.
The complete western hemisphere was, and is homeland to indigenous tribes for over thousands of years, hopefully we can agree to this. Where I am coming from is that western Europe, where much of the holocaust took place, is not homeland to the Jewish people. Europeans, like American Indians, are tribes divided by languages and cultures, but they all fought, and still fight, for that real estate.
If you cannot understand the difference between how far Jews have gained throughout history from his sufferage and survival compared to how much the indigenous nations continue to lose and suffer today, you fall in with the rest of America's continued ignorance.
You seem to think that the Jewish people are the sole recipients of atrocity in history and that is what you have in common with the politician in question.
How you claim Israel to being "like a reservation" is an insult as well. The Jewish people chose that plight and land dmarks, natives were put on reservations at gun point.
I know of only one historical genocide against Jewish people in Nazi Germany.
I want you to tell me when else in the history of mankind where more than 6 million Jews were systematically destroyed in a short period of time, how long it lasted, and whom were the perpetrators against the Jews.
Then do your research on the body count of dead Natives on this continent and further south in Mexico, Central and South America. I am sure the death toll exceeds 6 million.
I'm a Jew, and I will fully admit that some of my brethren tend to get mental about Israel. Part of that may be because most of us are only a generation or two removed from the Holocaust; we've heard the stories directly from our parents and grandparents about separation, experimentation, work camps, and toddlers being burnt alive.
But I think any group of persecuted human beings would act similarly if given their "own" land and the opportunity to arm themselves to protect it. Not saying it's right, but it's not just a "Jewish" thing. In Montreal, the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake evicted all non-Natives from its reserve, including friends and partners of its residents. It's not murder, but it's not right. Yet, I can understand the position of the Council of Kahnawake, even if I don't agree with it.
Obviously, not all the Mohawks on the reserve agreed with that decree. Some moved away. And there are many Jews (myself) who are aware that what the Natives went through is nothing less than genocide, and have no desire to see the same thing repeated over in Israel.
I think I still retain the "right" to talk about the genocide of the Jewish people, especially since it wiped out relatives I might have met and learned from in my lifetime. They died horrible deaths regardless of my position on Israel. To suggest that the Jewish people should cease talking about the Holocaust in any circumstance is, in fact, a pretty thoughtless thing to say.
(Incidentally, my grandfather is a survivor from Dachau, and he's against the suffering the Palestinians are going through for the sake of a Jewish state. Many death camp survivors feel the same way; they went through some of the worst acts a human being could experience, and they wouldn't wish the same on anyone.)
We are discussing this man's point of view as if he represents his "people" and allowing what he said to start a debate and judgement of history instead of calling to task the man and his beliefs. No one should forget history and no one should ask another nation to forget their own. No one should ask others not to continue their struggle to heal what that history has done to them or not to try and claim their beliefs, faiths and traditions when history has all but destroyed that connection. Before that man issued his statement he should have sat down and examined his and his people's history for comparisons not contrasts. If he had perhaps he would have realized that his words might be mirroring the sentiments of those that historically began a process of removing those who have a right to "be" as they are and who they are.
Jewish Tribal: You should do some reading on the history of genocide against Jews in Europe prior to the Nazi Holocaust. Yes, it did happen in a major way. Here is one of hte major examples.
You seem to be engaging in something similar to Blumenthal: where you weigh genocide against Jews vs genocide against Natives, in some sort of either-or situation. You tip the scale one way, and he tips it another.
I consider both to be serious, and acknowledging one does not mean forgetting the other.
"Where I am coming from is that western Europe, where much of the holocaust took place, is not homeland to the Jewish people."
And, really, really, what is your point on THIS one? That genocide is OK or less serious if someone's long-ago ancestors were not born in a place? By doing this, you have justified/downplayed the atrocities against the Lakota of the Great Plains. The Lakota were historically from Minnesota instead of the northern plains, after all. I, myself, cannot look at those horrific photos of the frozen victims of Wounded Knee and think "well, they really should not have left Minnesota, so it's not really so bad". That is exactly what you are doing with your point of downplaying genocide in Europe against native-born ethnic "aliens".
"You seem to think that the Jewish people are the sole recipients of atrocity in history and that is what you have in common with the politician in question."
This is a flat-out false accusation. I have never downplayed the genocide against Natives or other victimized groups. But you have gone down a path of whitewashing genocide with the "it's OK if your ancestors were not born there", "it's not so bad if you are rich" and other moderating excuses.
Anon said: "To suggest that the Jewish people should cease talking about the Holocaust in any circumstance is, in fact, a pretty thoughtless thing to say."
This "suggestion" made to you is the type of thing Pat Buchanan and Holocaust deniers like to say.
No dmarks; you still do not understand what I am saying. What I am saying is that the North American continent is homeland to indigenous peoples long before Columbus or the Norsemen.
I am not fueling your tirade about Jews and Native Americans. Give it a rest. We are, after all, talking about a Jewish politician here, not me or you.
You seem to have selective cognitive reading skills and do not understand plain English.
Before Nazi Germany, there was a holocaust that took place in American involving the deaths of more than 6 million natives. For any Jewish American to not grasp that fact lives in denial no different than ANY American that believes there was no Jewish holocaust in Europe during WWII.
There, I said it. How does this make me anti-semitic by simply stating a truth no different than saying racism exists in all walks of life, natives included?
Racism is a conditional and learned behavior.
And why do you keep bringing up the "RICH is ok mantra"? I will say this for the third and last time dmarks;
"I DO NOT CONDONE NOR ACCEPT ALL JEWISH PEOPLE AS BEING ANTI-NATIVE, BUT I HAD TO REMIND THESE TWO wealthy COLLEGE KIDS"
2, I said two college kids that dmarks is saying I said ALL JEWS are rich?
I give up! Someone else talk to this guy.
You are the one with the problems, and are forgetting what you say.
"2, I said two college kids that dmarks is saying I said ALL JEWS are rich?"
Actually, this came from your claim that because Jews were rich/etc, they should be the last people to talk about genocide. If the victims are "rich", then genocide is OK.
This was YOUR claim, in the third comment. It had nothing to do with the college kids.
"What I am saying is that the North American continent is homeland to indigenous peoples long before Columbus or the Norsemen."
No one ever denies this. But you have a clumsy "English as a third language" way of making your points. Why else would you make the claim that no genocide against Jews occured in Europe prior to the Nazis as part of this?
"I give up!"
That, you should. You have imcredibly poor reading comprehension skills and a lousy grasp of history.
Elie Wiesel thinks the term "genocide" is exclusively Jewish. Even if it was first applied to what the Turks did to the Armenians.
A wrong thing to say, if it is true. Do you have a quotation from Weisel on this? It would be surprising, since he has been rather outspoken against other instances of genocide.
I quickly found this page, in which Wiesel speaks out against the genocide in Darfur. He quotes someone using the genocide word, and he does not "correct" it (i.e. add that it is a word only fit for the Nazi Holocaust). This already proves you wrong. No doubt there are other quotations like this.
dmarks cannot answer any of my questions about the death toll of 6 million Jews during Nazi Germany compared to the indigenous peoples of the Americas body count; nor can he answer to my question about Eugenics in America at the turn of the 20th century; nor can he answer my question about which other holocaust before Nazi Germany that exceeded 6 million deaths of Jews. Why is it I have tried to answer your questions dmarks and explain my views, but you seem to hide behind your "privileged" and somewhat supremist attitude. I thought we were here to communicate, but you seem to be nitpicking and dissecting my words while you remain "protected" in your views?
Are you another American imperialist, ignorant, yet unyielding to other views here?
I have tried to meet you halfway, but you seem to be angry and frustrated person.
Go to time out and chill for a minute, maybe you'll make sense then!
Now, what about your point that genocide is OK or somehow diminished if the people being killed are not indigenous? Your point about Jews not being native to Europe fits in perfectly with Nazi writings about how Jews were an alien menace sullying the pure Aryan homeland.
"dmarks cannot answer any of my questions about the death toll of 6 million Jews during Nazi Germany compared to the indigenous peoples of the Americas body count"
I don't touch this one because I refuse to buy into your antisemitic reasoning that weighs the New World genocide against the Nazi holocaust. I see both as rather horrific, and don't trump up one with the goal of diminishing the other.
"nor can he answer to my question about Eugenics in America at the turn of the 20th century"
There's not even a debate about that.
"but you seem to hide behind your "privileged" and somewhat supremist attitude."
Name one example of such an attitude. You can't. The reality is that you were caught in some outrageous whoppers, like saying yourself that because Jews are rich that they cannot speak of genocide.
"I thought we were here to communicate, but you seem to be nitpicking and dissecting my words while you remain "protected" in your views?"
Which views am I protecting?
"Are you another American imperialist, ignorant, yet unyielding to other views here?"
I admit, I am unyeilding in opposition to your clear assertions that genocide is OK if the people are not "indigenous" and that it is OK of the victims are rich.
"I have tried to meet you halfway, but you seem to be angry and frustrated person."
Any step toward your antisemitic lies is foolish. I pretty much agree with everything you say about what happened to Natives in the New World. Why do you seem to think that it is necessary to lie about and excuse what happened to Jews in Europe in order to talk about this?
You are still locked into the silly idea that in order to speak the truth about the New World genocide, that it is necessary to excuse or diminish the genocide against Jews in Europe.
Sorry, it is not either-or.
Tribal's personal opinion justifying genocide against a group perceived as "rich" in stereotype:
"The Jewish people have more protection, money and political clout than any indigenous people across the globe and for me, they are the last people to talk to me about "genocide"
Tribal's bringing up the idea that Jews did not belong in Europe in the first place as part of a general argument to excuse/diminish genocide:
"Where I am coming from is that western Europe, where much of the holocaust took place, is not homeland to the Jewish people."
Sorry, it is not "nitpicking" to point out your arguments which attempt to diminish the seriousness of genocide for reasons which include (1) the victims are rich and therefore deserve it and (2) they didn't belong there.
You keep bringing up the RICH issue. Where did I write that ALL JEWS ARE RICH? What I said was that I encountered "TWO WEALTHY college kids" and DMARKS keeps on this endless rant about me CALLING ALL JEWS RICH!
Enough already!
We were debating a politicians "ANTI-indigenous" views, and DMARKS has turned this into a witchhunt for anti-semitic content and grammatical correctness!
He reminds me of Glenn Beck whom always ends up spinning something into relations with Nazis or Hitler!
You say there is no debate about Eugenics, but you choose to not allow someone else to make a point or have an opinion about anything.
Maybe you are arguing with yourself!
Since you bring so much to the table about Jews being the sole recipients of holocaust and to heck with the CURRENT plight of Native Americans, all I am stating is that the Jewish community in America, TODAY, holds alot more cards and privileges, rights and protections than American Indians and you are having a hissy fit over this fact!
Offer some positive feedback instead of negativity. We natives get enough of that from the media, hollywood, every legal jurisdiction from the Whitehouse to the outhouse; history books and the academia; sports mascots; even the Bureau of Indian Affairs, now we have you, MR DMARKS, preaching to us about just how pitiful and oppressive the Jewish existence is and has been since time memoriam.
Surely, there is some common ground of existence between us besides your bickering and whining!
Tribal's quotation in which he specifically invokes the rich stereotype:
"The Jewish people have more protection, money and political clout than any indigenous people across the globe and for me, they are the last people to talk to me about "genocide""
"....witchhunt for anti-semitic content..."
Witch hunts refer to false accusations. It's hardly a witch-hunt when you yourself use antisemitic stereotypes/excuses involving Jews having money (your word for rich) and not belonging in Europe.
"all I am stating is that the Jewish community in America, TODAY, holds alot more cards and privileges....,"
And while you repeatedly claim to run away from the Jews = rich stereotype, you re-word it and invoke it AGAIN. The modern stereotype of the "rich Jews" is alive and well in the Stormfront/white supremacist crowd, and with you.
"Offer some positive feedback instead of negativity."
What is there positive to say about such blatant and typical antisemitic stereotypes? Similarly, I have nothing positive to say to people who invoke/push stereotypes against Natives, blacks, other races. Sorry, I don't see anything good about it.
"now we have you, MR DMARKS, preaching to us about just how pitiful and oppressive the Jewish existence is and has been since time memoriam."
The facts of the holocaust are well known. It is only the neo-Nazis and fellow-travelers like yourself who say that the Jews deserve it.
"Surely, there is some common ground of existence between us besides your bickering and whining!"
Sure. Let go of the hatred for Jews. Speak instead of atrocities against Natives. It IS possible to do so without parroting David Duke. Your racism is unnecessary.
Hint: Check the original post, by Rob. He is able to speak of this, to condemn Blumenthal, without bashing Jews, and without using common negative stereotypes of Jews as his basis for argument.
"...but you choose to not allow someone else to make a point or have an opinion about anything."
When the opinion is flat-out incorrect and racist, of course I will point it out. Stupidity deserves to be called on.
Finally,
"He reminds me of Glenn Beck whom always ends up spinning something into relations with Nazis or Hitler!"
Not quite relevant, really. Beck overuses it. Here, I am specifically referring to your use of two common antisemitic stereotypes that Hitler actually used. This is a far cry from Beck saying that Obama is Hitler because of the healthcare plan/.
Your mere mention of Beck here shows that you are not thinking before you type.
TO DMARKS:
You are escalating this argument from a Jewish politicians words against natives to outright calling me antisemitic.
I have asked you to bring solutions to this debate, you refuse.
I have asked you for answers to questions, you refuse.
Now you outright claim that I am repeating Hitlers words.
Give me the line, the page number and the book.
It is easy to blame one man on the systematic destruction of a people, but he had help.
That is my point of this whole argument. You keep singleling out Hitler, but you forget the anti-semiticism that festered in the masses before he took the reigns to destroy a population.
The American Indian has enemies from all sides in this society. Take your furor for divisiveness and namecalling at me and aim it at the powers that be.
I can be educated and changed from an ignorant antisemitic man into a more positive ally of your cause, versus the monster you make me out to be.
And what about you?
Will you always fall into the population of America that says Native Americans are just fine and the Jews have always been and will always be the victims of history?
Your hiding behind history while it is happening to my people right here in this country.
Kill the Jew, Save the man.
(taken from America's philosophy towards the "Indian problem")
"Will you always fall into the population of America that says Native Americans are just fine and the Jews have always been and will always be the victims of history?"
Why do you insist on linking the two? To keep going with your tired idea that it is an either-or situation?
"Kill the Jew"
I know you are sarcastic, but it does kind of fit in with your voicing support for old antisemitic and Nazi ideas about Jews being rich and being an alien menace in Europe.
Are you even capable of discussing Native history without bashing Jews? You insist on repated Jew-bashing.
"You are escalating this argument from a Jewish politicians words against natives to outright calling me antisemitic."
I am merely pointing out the facts. The rich Jew antisemitic slur is a major and common one. You have said it not once, but twice. Your introducing the consideration of whether Jews are "native" to Europe into consideration of whether or not it is genocide is another.
The escalation was entirely of your doing. As I pointed out, Rob was capable of criticizing the politicians without getting antisemitic. And quite quickly you chimed in, justifying genocide ("they are the last people to talk" of it) because Jews are supposedly rich.
"It is easy to blame one man on the systematic destruction of a people, but he had help."
Actually, you were the one singling out Hitler. I pointed out the fact of a long history and legacy of genocide against Jews that predated Hitler and 1492. Your reaction was to justify it because Jews were not native to Europe.
"Your hiding behind history while it is happening to my people right here in this country."
I hide behind nothing. Yet you repeatedly insist on racist hatred of Jews and using major stereotypes. These have nothing to do with genocide against Natives. Grow up, nazi-boy.
(By the way, if you really insist on me "proving" that your stereotypes of money-grubbing Jews who do not belong in white homelands are part of Nazi ideology, I will do that. I'm just aghast that someone can be so wilfully ignorant of history.)
By the way, here is some education:
How did the nazis depict Jewish people in a negative light?
"The stereotype of the rich Jew, money lender, 'loan shark' in today's thinking had been shown in Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" character, Shylock.The Nazis used this idea to explain the fact German banks failed and the economy was in ruins, by blaming Jewish bankers for Germany's problems in the 1920's."
The justification for genocide you alluded to when you mentioned that Jews are not indigenous to Europe is touched on with the paragraphs about Jews as a corrupting outsider influence.
Post a Comment