Tennessee School Board Bans Holocaust Graphic Novel

[ZiprHead]

I can see where she's coming from if you look at it from the perspective of a black person.

Serious question: what makes white Jewish people a differant race from other white people?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

American Jews, Race, Identity, and the Civil Rights Movement

This is an interesting related article.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'm totally with you on this. "Keeping the Sabbath" was billed as a religious notion, but I don't think it is. People need to spend a little time doing stuff besides chasing the Almighty dollar. One day every seven is a good balance. We may as well all choose the same one, so we can plan accordingly.

Doesn't matter if you're doing family stuff or hiking or indulging in your postage stamp collection. Do things you're drawn towards, instead of stuff you feel required to do.

There's a good, secular, reason for Sabbath.
Tom

1) Putting it on Sunday is clearly religious.

2) You're making an argument that jobs should not be 7 days/week--something I think is a good idea. We already require overtime for more than 40 hr/wk, I'd like to see the same concept applied to over 5 days/wk. That says nothing about whether businesses can be 7 days/week, though--it's not the same people every day!

Honestly, it doesn't matter whether sunday's use originated in religion.

There's game theory behind it, and when there's real reasons it stops being religious:

It works best when this day is COORDINATED.

It works best when this day is adjacent to another day people often have off work.

It works best when people have had the opportunity to get it out of their systems just prior.

It works best when it can be coopted to solve some other problem as well.

Sunday is a coordinated day, adjacent to and after a number of other days, after which it is beneficial to prevent hangovers.

There's nothing religious about this presentation. It just makes a lot of good sense that those who man the stores that sell drugs get their day off with everyone else, and that this break in availability terminates the pattern of drinky nights that kicks off with the weekend.

 

[laughing dog]

I can see where she's coming from if you look at it from the perspective of a black person.

Serious question: what makes white Jewish people a differant race from other white people?

Ask the Nazis, because they certainly believed it and acted on it because they did not view "race" as solely defined by skin color. In fact, if you look at history, many peoples, including Jews, had that view.

While I understand Ms. Goldberg's viewpoint, it is a rather narrow one from a historical point of view.

 

[thebeave]

I can see where she's coming from if you look at it from the perspective of a black person.

Serious question: what makes white Jewish people a differant race from other white people?

Its a fair and reasonable question. And not one I am going to able to answer coherently, so I would pass that question off to someone who knows the subject well. It's complicated. I think a lot of Jews even have trouble defining what makes a person Jewish, as there are religious Jews, cultural Jews and ethnic/racial Jews. And all or some of the above. Hell, I can't even tell you what defines a man, or what defines a woman anymore these days without causing some sort of shitstorm by someone.

The point laughing dog makes is spot on. Hitler believed Jews to be a specific race, and was determined to exterminate them on that basis. Thus, making the Holocaust about race, unlike what Whoopie claimed.

 

[Toni]

I can see where she's coming from if you look at it from the perspective of a black person.

Serious question: what makes white Jewish people a differant race from other white people?

Its a fair and reasonable question. And not one I am going to able to answer coherently, so I would pass that question off to someone who knows the subject well. It's complicated. I think a lot of Jews even have trouble defining what makes a person Jewish, as there are religious Jews, cultural Jews and ethnic/racial Jews. And all or some of the above. Hell, I can't even tell you what defines a man, or what defines a woman anymore these days without causing some sort of shitstorm by someone.

The point laughing dog makes is spot on. Hitler believed Jews to be a specific race, and was determined to exterminate them on that basis. Thus, making the Holocaust about race, unlike what Whoopie claimed.

Of course, it wasn't just Hitler and the German people who supported him, or even the other Axis members who clambered on board. Remember that the US did not throw its arms wide open, welcoming Jewish refugees from the horrors leading up to and during the beginning of WWII.

Some of us around here might remember that up north, above the Mason-Dixon line, there were plenty of 'restricted' clubs and resorts. How do we think the Catskills became such a draw for....Jewish people? https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/borscht-belt-hotels-catskills/

I admit that I am a little appalled at what Whoopi said. I would have thought she would know better. In the US, Jews have not been treated nearly as badly as black people or brown people but they also have not necessarily been considered 'white.' Even I know that, and I grew up in an extremely homogenous county in Baptist Country.

 

[ZiprHead]

American Jews, Race, Identity, and the Civil Rights Movement

This is an interesting related article.

Thanks for that. An interesting read.

 

[ZiprHead]

I can see where she's coming from if you look at it from the perspective of a black person.

Serious question: what makes white Jewish people a differant race from other white people?

Its a fair and reasonable question. And not one I am going to able to answer coherently, so I would pass that question off to someone who knows the subject well. It's complicated. I think a lot of Jews even have trouble defining what makes a person Jewish, as there are religious Jews, cultural Jews and ethnic/racial Jews. And all or some of the above. Hell, I can't even tell you what defines a man, or what defines a woman anymore these days without causing some sort of shitstorm by someone.

The point laughing dog makes is spot on. Hitler believed Jews to be a specific race, and was determined to exterminate them on that basis. Thus, making the Holocaust about race, unlike what Whoopie claimed.

Of course, it wasn't just Hitler and the German people who supported him, or even the other Axis members who clambered on board. Remember that the US did not throw its arms wide open, welcoming Jewish refugees from the horrors leading up to and during the beginning of WWII.

Some of us around here might remember that up north, above the Mason-Dixon line, there were plenty of 'restricted' clubs and resorts. How do we think the Catskills became such a draw for....Jewish people? https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/borscht-belt-hotels-catskills/

I admit that I am a little appalled at what Whoopi said. I would have thought she would know better. In the US, Jews have not been treated nearly as badly as black people or brown people but they also have not necessarily been considered 'white.' Even I know that, and I grew up in an extremely homogenous county in Baptist Country.

According to the article Don posted, white Jews were not considered a differant race until a huge influx of immigrants from Europe, both Jews and Irish. It started as a derogatory-based means of othering "those" people from "us" people in the mid 19th century. Then Hitler turned up the dial to 11 in the early 20th century.

So technically on a scientific basis it would appear WG was correct about that part of her argument. Her argument concerning Germany was quite the stretch.

 

[Elixir]

Growing up I didn't know much about my father's family.
He was born in 1896 (20+ years before my mother) and I never knew his parents.
Now I have learned that his father was an immigrated, orthodox Ashkenazi Jew.
My mother was raised as an Episcopalian by an Idaho farming family. I never knew what that actually meant, despite having been forced to attend Catholic and several protestant churches at least once each, as well as a Quaker Meeting, a Jewish Temple and some Eastern (probably Hindu but I don't remember enough about it to be sure).
I was raised "agnostic" by parents who were actually agnostic, so I was agnostic until I found my own way to atheistic agnosticism. Along that journey I was variously informed that I couldn't be Jewish because "your mother has to be Jewish and she's not" and couldn't be Episcopalian because "your father has to be ... ".

So - yeah. Apparently, Jews don't even know who "their people" are, despite a seemingly irrational desperation to have a "their people".
But Episcopalians are (were? It's been a while) not much better about it.
Catholics, for all their heinous faults, do seem to at least have a set of bars that some atheistic agnostic COULD in principle clear and become a Catholic if they so desired for some insane reason... And Ivanka "became" a Jew ... ??? Have things changed? Or another case where the rules don't apply to Trumps?

 

[Toni]

J

Growing up I didn't know much about my father's family.
He was born in 1896 (20+ years before my mother) and I never knew his parents.
Now I have learned that his father was an immigrated, orthodox Ashkenazi Jew.
My mother was raised as an Episcopalian by an Idaho farming family. I never knew what that actually meant, despite having been forced to attend Catholic and several protestant churches at least once each, as well as a Quaker Meeting, a Jewish Temple and some Eastern (probably Hindu but I don't remember enough about it to be sure).
I was raised "agnostic" by parents who were actually agnostic, so I was agnostic until I found my own way to atheistic agnosticism. Along that journey I was variously informed that I couldn't be Jewish because "your mother has to be Jewish and she's not" and couldn't be Episcopalian because "your father has to be ... ".

So - yeah. Apparently, Jews don't even know who "their people" are, despite a seemingly irrational desperation to have a "their people".
But Episcopalians are (were? It's been a while) not much better about it.
Catholics, for all their heinous faults, do seem to at least have a set of bars that some atheistic agnostic COULD in principle clear and become a Catholic if they so desired for some insane reason... And Ivanka "became" a Jew ... ??? Have things changed? Or another case where the rules don't apply to Trumps?

It is possible to convert to Judaism. Orthodox Jews won’t consider you Jewish but Reformed Jews will. Oh, and so will Nazis.

Some people are flexible about it. My father was once making some vaguely antisemetic remarks to me and I informed him that his grandchildren’s great grandfather was Jewish and if that was a problem for him, he never had to see them again. Funnily enough, it turned out not to be an issue and at least within my hearing there were no more such remarks.

 

[thebeave]

Growing up I didn't know much about my father's family.
He was born in 1896 (20+ years before my mother) and I never knew his parents.
Now I have learned that his father was an immigrated, orthodox Ashkenazi Jew.
My mother was raised as an Episcopalian by an Idaho farming family. I never knew what that actually meant, despite having been forced to attend Catholic and several protestant churches at least once each, as well as a Quaker Meeting, a Jewish Temple and some Eastern (probably Hindu but I don't remember enough about it to be sure).
I was raised "agnostic" by parents who were actually agnostic, so I was agnostic until I found my own way to atheistic agnosticism. Along that journey I was variously informed that I couldn't be Jewish because "your mother has to be Jewish and she's not" and couldn't be Episcopalian because "your father has to be ... ".

So - yeah. Apparently, Jews don't even know who "their people" are, despite a seemingly irrational desperation to have a "their people".
But Episcopalians are (were? It's been a while) not much better about it.
Catholics, for all their heinous faults, do seem to at least have a set of bars that some atheistic agnostic COULD in principle clear and become a Catholic if they so desired for some insane reason... And Ivanka "became" a Jew ... ??? Have things changed? Or another case where the rules don't apply to Trumps?

Well, Sammy Davis Jr "became" a Jew*, so go figure. Ivanka likely became a Jew because her husband is Jewish. So, have a lot of people ("Dr" Laura is another one that comes to mind).

* per Wikipedia:

One day on a golf course with Jack Benny, he was asked what his handicap was. "Handicap?" he asked. "Talk about handicap. I'm a one-eyed Negro who's Jewish."

 

[Elixir]

I’m already a human. The repercussions of that alone are enough to keep me from wanting to join other groups.

Orthodox Jews won’t consider you Jewish but Reformed Jews will. Oh, and so will Nazis.

IMHO nobody in their right mind should should intentionally number themselves among those marked for extermination in any time and place where Nazis are in charge. Especially if they have the choice to not do that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not really. It needs to be the most convenient day community wide. In some communities, Saturday would be better—it would better accommodate the religious beliefs and cultural traditions of the dominant groups abs allow everyone family time. In other communities, Sundays work best to accommodate religious beliefs of the dominant group as well as to allow everyone family time.

To me, it dies t matter if the original purpose was to accommodate religion. It matters that culture, community abs commerce have been centered around a week that allows at least one day where most people are able to observe a day of not being at their jobs. Whether they spend it worshipping, fishing, cleaning out the attic, barbecuing or weeding grandma’s garden is nobody’s concern. But in order for it to wirk, it needs to be a commonly held day/days off for most people.*

Obviously some people would need to staff essential wirk: healthcare, public safety, etc. and some people would prefer a different day of rest to better accommodate their religious practices, family time, cultural customs, etc.

Why does it need to be community wide? There are some people that can't have the day off so something truly community wide isn't possible. It's less of a load on the recreational facilities if different people have different days off.

 

[Toni]

Not really. It needs to be the most convenient day community wide. In some communities, Saturday would be better—it would better accommodate the religious beliefs and cultural traditions of the dominant groups abs allow everyone family time. In other communities, Sundays work best to accommodate religious beliefs of the dominant group as well as to allow everyone family time.

To me, it dies t matter if the original purpose was to accommodate religion. It matters that culture, community abs commerce have been centered around a week that allows at least one day where most people are able to observe a day of not being at their jobs. Whether they spend it worshipping, fishing, cleaning out the attic, barbecuing or weeding grandma’s garden is nobody’s concern. But in order for it to wirk, it needs to be a commonly held day/days off for most people.*

Obviously some people would need to staff essential wirk: healthcare, public safety, etc. and some people would prefer a different day of rest to better accommodate their religious practices, family time, cultural customs, etc.

Why does it need to be community wide? There are some people that can't have the day off so something truly community wide isn't possible. It's less of a load on the recreational facilities if different people have different days off.

That's true --there will always be people who must work on any given day. But when there are days when MOST people have the day off, things slow down in general, which is nice. And it is really difficult to find a quiet, work free day for the whole family when different members have different days off.

 

[bilby]

I'm totally with you on this. "Keeping the Sabbath" was billed as a religious notion, but I don't think it is. People need to spend a little time doing stuff besides chasing the Almighty dollar. One day every seven is a good balance. We may as well all choose the same one, so we can plan accordingly.

Doesn't matter if you're doing family stuff or hiking or indulging in your postage stamp collection. Do things you're drawn towards, instead of stuff you feel required to do.

There's a good, secular, reason for Sabbath.
Tom

1) Putting it on Sunday is clearly religious.

2) You're making an argument that jobs should not be 7 days/week--something I think is a good idea. We already require overtime for more than 40 hr/wk, I'd like to see the same concept applied to over 5 days/wk. That says nothing about whether businesses can be 7 days/week, though--it's not the same people every day!

I get paid overtime rates for any work on Saturday (150%) or Sunday (200%), and for any work in excess of 37 hours in a week.

And it's cumulative; If I work more than 7h38 on Saturday, I get double time (50% of standard time for Saturday, plus 50% for more than 7h38, plus my base wage).

I worked on New Years this year, until 2am on Saturday 1st January, and was paid 350% of my base rate for the first 5h38, and 400% for the last two hours (it's a gazetted Public Holiday from 6pm to midnight on 24th and 31st of December in Queensland).

Given the massive productivity gains due to automation since the 40 hour week was introduced in 1947, (and subsequently the 38 hour week in 1983), it would make sense to me to make the working week 32 hours, typically including three full days off, with a maximum 8 hour workday.

There's nothing particularly fundamental about the traditional seven day work week with a half day off on Sunday - as was the norm for centuries in North Western Europe; Nor about a six day week with Sunday off, or a five day week with Saturday and Sunday off.

Working four days in seven, with suitable compensation for voluntary overtime beyond that, seems completely reasonable to me. We work to live, not the other way around.

If we made the weekend Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, that would make most major religions happy, and align the working week between Europe and the Middle East; Better still, we could make Saturday Sunday and Monday the weekend, which would annoy the Muslims, and provide a huge economic stimulus by forcing Garfield merchandise to be re-issued with an "I hate Tuesdays" slogan.

 

[repoman]

There is an A.I. gaydar that can be dangerous in many anti-gay places. But is there an A.I. Jewdar that scores well above chance, especially for certain subsections of Jewish people?

 

[TomC]

I get paid overtime rates for any work on Saturday (150%) or Sunday (200%), and for any work in excess of 37 hours in a week.

And it's cumulative; If I work more than 7h38 on Saturday, I get double time (50% of standard time for Saturday, plus 50% for more than 7h38, plus my base wage).

I worked on New Years this year, until 2am on Saturday 1st January, and was paid 350% of my base rate for the first 5h38, and 400% for the last two hours (it's a gazetted Public Holiday from 6pm to midnight on 24th and 31st of December in Queensland).

Given the massive productivity gains due to automation since the 40 hour week was introduced in 1947, (and subsequently the 38 hour week in 1983), it would make sense to me to make the working week 32 hours, typically including three full days off, with a maximum 8 hour workday.

There's nothing particularly fundamental about the traditional seven day work week with a half day off on Sunday - as was the norm for centuries in North Western Europe; Nor about a six day week with Sunday off, or a five day week with Saturday and Sunday off.

Working four days in seven, with suitable compensation for voluntary overtime beyond that, seems completely reasonable to me. We work to live, not the other way around.

If we made the weekend Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, that would make most major religions happy, and align the working week between Europe and the Middle East; Better still, we could make Saturday Sunday and Monday the weekend, which would annoy the Muslims, and provide a huge economic stimulus by forcing Garfield merchandise to be re-issued

Y'all sound like a bunch a pinko commies. No wonder you don't care about Sabbath. /snark

I sincerely wish the U.S. had such pro-labor policies. You might be surprised by how many people here work 7 day weeks, without overtime or paid leave or insurance. Because it's more profitable to hire two part time employees than one full-time employee and pay benefits and overtime.

I'm no purist. I recognize that there are people who would really prefer days off when most people are working. And jobs that still need doing, 24/7. But lots of social activities would be facilitated by a generally recognized day of the week for a community work slow down. That's really all I'm talking about.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

There's a phenomenon I actually see extremely commonly when literature is used to teach history to middle school and high school students. Let's call it "pajamafication."
So a school district nixed Maus from their curriculum, to be replaced by something more "age-appropriate." IIRC they didn't cite a specific replacement title, but it will probably be something like John Boyne's "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas."
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is tailor-made for classroom use. It's taught at countless schools and it's squeaky-clean of any of the parent-objectionable material you might find in Maus, Night, or any of the other first-person accounts of the Holocaust.
It's also a terrible way to teach the Holocaust.

I'm not going to exhaustively enumerate the book's flaws--others have done so--but I'll summarize the points that are common to this phenomenon in various contexts.
First, obviously, the context shift. Maus, Night, et al are narrated by actual Jews who were in concentration camps. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is narrated by a German boy. The Jewish perspective is completely eliminated.
Second, the emphasis on historical innocence. Bruno isn't antisemitic. He has no idea that anything bad is happening. He happily befriends a Jewish boy with absolutely no prejudice.
Thus we're reassured that you too, gentle reader, are innocent. You too would have have a childlike lack of prejudice and you too would be such a sweet summer child that you would have no idea the place next door is a death camp.
In Maus, by contrast, the children are not innocent. They are perpetrators of injustice just like adults.

 

[thebeave]

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

There's a phenomenon I actually see extremely commonly when literature is used to teach history to middle school and high school students. Let's call it "pajamafication."
So a school district nixed Maus from their curriculum, to be replaced by something more "age-appropriate." IIRC they didn't cite a specific replacement title, but it will probably be something like John Boyne's "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas."
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is tailor-made for classroom use. It's taught at countless schools and it's squeaky-clean of any of the parent-objectionable material you might find in Maus, Night, or any of the other first-person accounts of the Holocaust.
It's also a terrible way to teach the Holocaust.

I'm not going to exhaustively enumerate the book's flaws--others have done so--but I'll summarize the points that are common to this phenomenon in various contexts.
First, obviously, the context shift. Maus, Night, et al are narrated by actual Jews who were in concentration camps. The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is narrated by a German boy. The Jewish perspective is completely eliminated.
Second, the emphasis on historical innocence. Bruno isn't antisemitic. He has no idea that anything bad is happening. He happily befriends a Jewish boy with absolutely no prejudice.
Thus we're reassured that you too, gentle reader, are innocent. You too would have have a childlike lack of prejudice and you too would be such a sweet summer child that you would have no idea the place next door is a death camp.
In Maus, by contrast, the children are not innocent. They are perpetrators of injustice just like adults.

This isn't right. Art Spiegelman (author of Maus) was born in 1948, after the Holocaust. It was his father who was in the concentration camp, so its a second hand account. The author of Night was an actual survivor of the Holocaust. There are other errors in that article as well, like calling Maus a "true story", which is a kinda weird thing to say given its a cartoon about cats and mice.

The other main point is that apparently (per Jimmy Higgins), the McMinn County school board chose Night as its backup plan to Maus, though I haven't been able to verify it separately via another source. The more I compare the two, the more I lean toward Night being a better narrative of the Holocaust than Maus. Using cats and mice in a comic book form as a stand-in for real people makes it seems like an attempt to whitewash the horrors. Kinda like how "Let's Go Brandon" is a G Rated way to say the R Rated "Fuck Joe Biden".

 

[TomC]

There's two things about this that makes the whole episode look like so much political grandstanding to me.

One is that the school whatever group cannot possibly ban anything. We live in a world where a determined 4th grader could download hardcore S&M porno while sitting in the back of arithmetic class. Making a big deal out of taking the book out of the school library and curriculum is little more than an advertising campaign for the book.

Also though, I remember that book. It's darned intense. I'd like young people to have access, but think it should come with adult supervision and guidance and discussion, in an age appropriate way.

What makes this idiotic is that the school people are mounting an advertising campaign for a book that the kids still have access to. But they're depriving the kids of guidance and context.
Idiots.
Tom