Ah, had no idea.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Ah, had no idea.
The term "Concentration Camp" is largely associated with the Nazi camps. If you ask people what they associate with the term, that's the answer you are going most likely to get. It's either ignorant not to consider this association, or it was itended for people to make this association. Either way, it's a poor choice of words.
*pizza gate was real*
It’s ignorant not to know that they predate the Nazis by over 50 years.
No, that's just irrelevant. Relevant is what people associate with a word today. And I'd wager that most people don't associate "The Spanish" or "The Boer Wars" with the term "concentration camp".
“Bollocks” - just because something happened earlier in history, that doesn’t mean it is irrelevant. Think of the logical conclusion you’re making there.
You’ve literally just made the argument that people are ignorant.
DMT just makes you see shit like the 13 dimensions of string theory and multi-dimensional alien space elves.
It doesn't make you believe insane things like pizzagate.
Not necessarily. But here, I think it clearly is. What people mean and associate with terms changes over time. What the term may have been used for 50 years prior to the Nazis does not really matter. I think it is pretty clear that the main association with the term "concentration camp" for the vast majority of people today has to do with the Nazis and the Holocaust (another term that has undergone change) and little else. It's a basic rule of communication to consider how the audience will understand your choice of words. So, AOC either did not consider that people may understand her remarks in the context of Nazi concentration camps or she intended for people to understand the remarks this way. Either way, it is a poor choice of words in my opinion.
Technically, we are all ignorant of certain facts. I would not expect people to know the history of the term "concentration camp" and even then, I perfectly understand how people would still associate the term first and foremost with the Nazis. Afterall, the Nazi camps are probably the most well-known and inhuman camps in history and that's where the "full weight" of the term comes from in the first place.
And technically a concentration camp is more than just what Nazi Germans did.
I can’t believe you’re actually arguing this point.
I can’t believe you’re actually arguing this point.
I know, right? Since when did not knowing about something make something irrelevant?
What is my agenda, then?
I didn't claim you or someone else did. And if you had read the article, you'd know that this is not the point of the debate presented there.
I'm well aware of the cynical right wing appropriation of progressive terms to defend repressive and violent practises, both historical and current ones. And if you had taken a breather and cared to read my posts you might have got an idea where I stand on that matter.
So I have no idea what this has to do with what I was saying. What I was saying was: Historical ignorance is not the only imaginable reason to think the use of the term is not without its problems. (Because the overwhelming consensus here was that it's stupid, ignorant and/or bigoted to even bring this up.) There are arguments worth considering, and I'm certainly not talking of the ones you're referring to. I'm not even entirely sure where I stand on this issue - that would be the result of a discussion. But this was enough for you to go ballistic.
Last edited:
Did I say that? I hope not and I don’t think I did. I think I was just saying how his office has been rather quiet but I still detest him no matter what. What he’s doing here is clearly voter suppression as a poll tax is pretty stupid.
*that was the joke*
If it's not the worst example of a concentration camp, it's not a concentration camp is an absolutely terrible argument. Your basically using the most extreme example in order to whitewash lesser horrors.
Even worse, if people aren’t aware of it, then it’s irrelevant. This is not only one of the stupidest arguments I’ve ever heard of, it also sets an extremely dangerous precedence. No wonder right wingers want to ruin education.
I'm not trying to pick sides as the internal affairs of a foreign country should not be any of my business. I'd only like to point out that history can affect the meaning behind certain things, for example the swastika. Originally it was an ancient religious symbol and it had many different meanings behind it, depending on the culture or religion associated with it.
Nowadays the swastika is exclusively considered a hate symbol, derived from the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany. Saying all that, I'm not defending the awful situation that has been happening on the US borders, just trying to maybe explain how historical heritage can change perception about certain phrases, terms or visual symbols.
Hopefully I've explained myself well enough as my intentions is not to offend anyone's views and I'm still very new here. I'm doing my bachelor degree in political sciences, with my area of specialisation being international relations so I try to stay informed on what is going on around the world, which obviously includes the US. I seriously appreciate this part of the the Caf and threads like this one as it provides me with more points of view on different topics.
Do you mind elaborating?
Sure. I am doubtful that the symbol on his shirt means the same thing to him as it does to you or I. Just as I'm sure that a swastika on a flag in Piccadilly isn't usually used to express religious devotion I'm equally sure that the same displayed on a Jaian temple in Uttar Pradesh isn't an expression of Aryan might. I was agreeing with you regarding the changing of meaning while disputing the notion of exclusivity.
I know what you are saying but majority of people in the world don't see it like that. Show most a picture of a swastika and I bet that the most common association would be about nazism and WW2.
Even in that photo above the symbol is the phrase "white power". I agree that there are still cultures that have their own meaning behind it, but my point is more about the perception on a global scale.
Saying that the Holocaust has fundamentally altered the meaning of “concentration camp” so that all other instances of concentration camps are rendered irrelevant is the equivalent of saying the Holocaust has fundamentally altered the meaning of “genocide” so that all other instances of genocide are rendered irrelevant.
Best to be upfront and honest about things so that people aren’t misled.
A concentration camp is a concentration camp if it fits the description of one, no matter where it is in the world.
A wheel on a car is still a wheel even though it was once associated with a horse and cart.
Pretty appalling behaviour from a Fascist Party Senator from Pennsylvania. There’s so much of this from them that it’s becoming the norm. What a nasty set of people they are. Another one who needs voting out.
I'm not saying it's fine, just pointing out that the change in meaning has happened due to the unparalleled devastation caused by the World Wars.
That's humanity for you, unfortunately. It's not the first time history has been rewritten, altered or forgotten.
Yeah, that was part of the reason I posted it. I ninja edited my post while you were responding to express myself more clearly.
Fair enough and sorry about that, I missed the edited part.
Another example of why it’s a poor argument is because it’s like saying 18-19th century chattel “slavery” has fundamentally altered the meaning of slavery as to render all other instances of “slavery” irrelevant.
I don’t think many folks agreed when the US attempted to call what happened in Rwanda something other than a genocide for political purposes. On that same note, it would also be wrong to call those camps at the border something other than what they are for political purposes.
Can you really compare anything to the losses caused by WW1 and WW2 though? We are talking about an estimated death toll from both wars of at least 65 million and at most around 150 million people. Adding to the fact the amount of oppression happening around the whole world during that time, the inhumane methods to exert power and rule, to torture and kill people, it's no wonder these events have totally changed humanity's views of many topics.
I'm not arguing that any of those things are good, I'm not saying you should not call the camps at your border for what they are. I'm simply just pointing out the reality of the world. It's not my fault that people are ignorant and uninformed about historic events. Perception of the masses is part of analysing why certain processes happen.
WW1 and WW2 have not rendered all other meanings of war to be irrelevant, so I don’t really understand why you’d go down that road...
Nor is it AOC’s... which is the exact reason why I took up for her choice of words against what JuveGER argued.
I'm honestly not going down any road but maybe I just cannot explain myself properly. I'm not condoning any sort of ignorance, my comments were about trying to provide a context to why it exists on a global scale.
Don't really understand what the issue is when I'm agreeing with you in principle.
I think we (who say it’s a perfectly apt description) know why ignorance exists, we just disagree that it should cause people to alter what they call things.
I think this point is important. If the perception of the masses is that these camps at the border are not atrocious then that allows them to continue and grow in their present form. Arguments such as *you can't call them concentration camps because they're not as bad as Treblinka* does less harm to people's perception of the Shoah than it does to the plight of those people currently interred in the 'hieleras' of Southern California. This is because from that point of view the argument now regresses from one addressing the present living conditions of actual people into a semantic one regarding preferred nomenclature. It's using the holocaust as a cloak, not as a searchlight.
*-* I know you're not saying this, just speaking more generally.
I understand and agree with you, but it's a widespread problem and it isn't limited to the US only.
I agree with you as well. However, at least in Europe, there is a very strong feeling that comparing current issues with the Holocaust demeans the horrors suffered by Jewish people and is considered being anti-semitic.
Not that the current topic actually tries to correlate between the two, but unfortunately, from my experience, many social groups use such situations to further their agenda, in this case a political one.
I know, bud. I studied history and political science, too.
To me, this says a better job of educating the public needs to be done, rather than the previous suggestion (not by you) of altering word choice.
Education is key to most social issues. It's difficult to find the right balance on most topics though, precisely due to the agendas (very often strongly opposing ones) that different social groups have, at least that's my opinion on it.
My main goal is to try to understand why such processes happen around the world, even if I'm a very emotional person by nature and take all the injustices to heart. What happens on the US border is just one of many actions of the American government that I have a serious problem with and dislike to - that concerns both internal and foreign policies. I say that without any intention to personally offend American citizens, because it's almost impossible to fight against the system (I've seen how it is in my country) and to battle against human greed, which can be derived from fear or just pure evil intentions and lust for power.
Our discussion has gone into being too philosophical, at least from my part, so I won't be derailing the thread any further, apologies for that.
Meanwhile thousands of kids are separated from their parents and people are still sufferring in concentration camps. In the USA. In 2019.
The Mongol conquest caused more loss as a % of global population than any other war in history.
I think the fact that people nowadays associate WW2 with genocide and concentration camps predominantly has to do mostly with recency bias.
It’s one thing to make an automatic association when hearing the word concentration camp and another thing to be offended by the word.