Whoopi Goldberg suspended for racist comments

Post Reply New Topic

I never really understood why Jewish people aren't considered white. Not that it matters.

I don't think what she said was dumb, though maybe it could have been worded better. Race might be the reason some give for hate, but it is their inhumanity to other people that is causing the problem. Her comments also seemed to include all the other people harmed by the Holocaust, who are usually ignored.

What she said was not hateful.

But it most certainly WAS dumb.

Racism was central to Nazi ideology. Further Nazism was part of the same evil strain in western thought that produced American style racism. And the German Nazis were actually quite influenced by American notions, like eugenics. Whoopi, who is quite steeped in the history of her own AfricanAmerican race in America, should (of all people) be aware of that truth.

I think the point she was making was that race is a superficial reason for their hate. These people are broken and will find some other scapegoat, whether it's based on race or not.

She said it in a way that implied that racism DOES apply to US history, but NOT apply to the Holocaust.

So obviously she DID NOT mean what you think that she meant. (Or if she did mean that she worded it so badly that it WAS quite stupidly phrased).

Because ...if that WERE what she meant then ...what she meant would apply equally to the US and to Holocaust, so there would be no reason to imply a difference between the two.

Yes it is.

It would be nice if there was some sort of flag on those people's posts to alert others to the prior racist behaviour... I personally consider such people (like those who purposefully post false information\lie in their posts, and those who publicly disclose personal communications - whether content or subject matter - as entirely lacking in integrity, and doubtless others would as well).

Well, I did say I thought she worded it badly.

The Final Solution is a difference, but otherwise are they significantly different? Aren't plantations just labor camps?

Now you're off on some other tangent.

My point is that someone like Whoopie Goldberg should be aware of the importance of...someone like Jesse Owens. Jesse Owens was the American Black olympic track star who humiliated Hitler at the 1936 Olympics because he singled handedly ruined Hitler's bid to make that Olympics a propaganda showcase for Hitler's ideology of "Aryan Racial Supremacy".

Strange that you see the need to tag/label posters on a public forum. Being fixated on your projections of a users past does not automatically mean other users share your views on the profile of the same user or the labels you apply.

You don't get to determine what is a lack of integrity and whom should carry that label.

Excellent point (I completely forgot that the holocaust included other victims).

Many thousands of descendants of the "Rhineland bastards" were sterilised because they had African ancestry. Many hundreds of thousands of gypsies were gassed during the holocaust.

Both gypsies and blacks were either sterilised or killed by the Nazis because of race.

There was a whole concentration camp just for women, as well. Many of those victims were further selected because they were communists or Jehovah's Witnesses.

What are you talking about?

First you say that his contention that the Holocaust did not involve racism...is "an excellent point".

Then you refute what he said by showing examples of how the Holocaust DID involve racism.

Are you contradicting yourself on purpose?

Given the moderators simply remove the racist posts (although this sometimes can take many days to occur), some form of lasting record would seem appropriate to allow members who join after the "event", as well as those members who didn't see the posts prior to their deletion, to see the type of person they are conversing with.

And besides, if a person were to see no problem with their use of racial slurs at the time the posted them (it is hard to imagine a person would post something like that in the hope\expectation of their post being deleted, so it is probable they hoped their words\views would remain public for everyone to see as long as the site existed), then they wouldn't see a problem if the post was removed and substituted with a tag to commemorate their views which had been removed.



If you read what I posted, I stated certain conditions (not a complete list, by the way) that in my opinion ("I personally consider") demonstrate a person to be lacking in integrity. I also noted that "doubtless others would as well" because I know many people who share my views around those actions I listed - This doesn't mean that others may not considerer those acts, which I see as demonstrating a person's lack of integrity, as being "commendable"...

Each person has their own understanding of what they see as ethical and unethical behaviour, after all, and nowhere have I stated (or suggested) that what I see as unethical acts (demonstrating a lack of integrity) is some universal view that all share.

Similarly, there is no "projecting of views" in what I stated - each "type" of action can be objectively evaluated:
Those who post racist slurs (regardless of whether they later try to lecture others on racism) is something that can be shown based upon facts\evidence.
Those who purposefully post false information\lie in their posts can be shown (in most cases - personal details are harder to verify) through simple research.
Those who publicly disclose personal communications - whether content or subject matter - is something that can be shown based upon facts\evidence.

But I'm not sure why you are getting so worked up over this - none of it would affect you, would it?

I never actually said that. I said Whoopi said that. The Nazis were unequivocal that jews = race
My response was that I forgot about gypsies and blacks who were also victims of the holocaust (you could also throw in Slavs who were racially profiled as well as subhuman).

I am just curious who else would want to snoop on a poster's history if they disagree with the content of their current post? Your proposal sounds like it would only benefit those whom want to conduct inquisitions of a personal nature.



No it's unnecessary because that's the moderator's job. I also think people should make up their own minds and if they wish to study the posting history of a particular member (I recall there was another member who did this regularly who is no longer with us).

We are all capable of being civil and taking each post on it's own merits.

Not the answer you're looking for but I will go through a post history if someone posts something trollish. I want to see their posting history and see what kind of people they are and I'd they have a history of doing similar behavior. If someone attacks me, it's natural to look through their post history. If someone posts something racist, I may go through their post history to see if this is something they always do.

Just as long as you do it in good faith and not looking for something to use in an arguement against them that is unrelated to the discussion.

Sure that's a personal prerogative. I think you can do this currently and search history of an individual poster's history.