Intellectual Property

sleepy jack · 06-10-2009, 11:48 PM

I don't want this to so much be about music and what not but rather the extent to which one can claim a sense of intellectual ownership. In particular I want to talk about the Holocaust Memorial Park and the controversy surrounding that. Basically there was a plan to honor the other groups that suffered under the Nazi persecution (homosexuals, political dissidents, etc.) and it was argued that that was unacceptable as the holocaust was "uniquely a Jewish event."

There were other claims made that were more obviously absurd, for instance that the Jewish community owned the city park (which is exactly public property and belongs to no other group then the citizens of that city.)

Anyway back to what I was getting at. I just find it peculiar that they're claiming ownership over the Holocaust. I understand, the Jewish population were the largest victimized group but to treat it like somehow that means the other victims didn't exist or don't deserve the same level of honoring is offensive and bigoted. I don't understand how they can treat this event like it is somehow, "uniquely Jewish" there's no intellectual point to back that statement.

WWWP · 06-10-2009, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

Anyway back to what I was getting at. I just find it peculiar that they're claiming ownership over the Holocaust. I understand, the Jewish population made up the majority of the victims but to treat it like somehow that means the other victims didn't exist or don't deserve the same level of honoring is offensive and bigoted. I don't understand how they can treat this event like it is somehow, "uniquely Jewish" there's no intellectual point to back that statement.

I agree with this completely. I'm not sure what to say that you haven't already covered...

To ignore the rest of the groups who endured discriminative actions I think takes away from the overall impact.

Surell · 06-11-2009, 12:06 AM

They obviously feel that way because, as you said, they make up what I'm sure is a large majority of the Holocaust deaths. That doesn't make it right, though.

I don't know how much debate could come from this issue. Hopefully some.

sleepy jack · 06-11-2009, 12:09 AM

But the problem is that argument doesn't hold up. The majority of United States citizens are white; does that they deserve complete representation in society? Kind of a bad analogy but I've had a long day and I think it still illustrates the problem with their claim.

boo boo · 06-11-2009, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

I don't want this to so much be about music and what not but rather the extent to which one can claim a sense of intellectual ownership. In particular I want to talk about the Holocaust Memorial Park and the controversy surrounding that. Basically there was a plan to honor the other groups that suffered under the Nazi persecution (homosexuals, political dissidents, etc.) and it was argued that that was unacceptable as the holocaust was "uniquely a Jewish event."

There were other claims made that were more obviously absurd, for instance that the Jewish community owned the city park (which is exactly public property and belongs to no other group then the citizens of that city.)

Anyway back to what I was getting at. I just find it peculiar that they're claiming ownership over the Holocaust. I understand, the Jewish population were the largest victimized group but to treat it like somehow that means the other victims didn't exist or don't deserve the same level of honoring is offensive and bigoted. I don't understand how they can treat this event like it is somehow, "uniquely Jewish" there's no intellectual point to back that statement.

What a bunch of bullsh*t.

Of course the atrocities committed againsts the Jews is the only thing you ever hear about. In other words, the one group of people that doesn't offend fundamentalist Christians.

lucifer_sam · 06-11-2009, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

I don't want this to so much be about music and what not but rather the extent to which one can claim a sense of intellectual ownership. In particular I want to talk about the Holocaust Memorial Park and the controversy surrounding that. Basically there was a plan to honor the other groups that suffered under the Nazi persecution (homosexuals, political dissidents, etc.) and it was argued that that was unacceptable as the holocaust was "uniquely a Jewish event."

There were other claims made that were more obviously absurd, for instance that the Jewish community owned the city park (which is exactly public property and belongs to no other group then the citizens of that city.)

Anyway back to what I was getting at. I just find it peculiar that they're claiming ownership over the Holocaust. I understand, the Jewish population were the largest victimized group but to treat it like somehow that means the other victims didn't exist or don't deserve the same level of honoring is offensive and bigoted. I don't understand how they can treat this event like it is somehow, "uniquely Jewish" there's no intellectual point to back that statement.

it would be different if the other involved parties were just collateral damage, but the Nazis targeted plenty of other people, including Slavic Catholics, homosexuals, political dissidents, communists, Gypsies and generally anyone who seemed an anomaly in the stride for "a wholly German nation." to suggest that the Holocaust is uniquely Jewish is to invalidate the tragic losses for which plenty of other peoples suffered (in excess of 2 million).

this ignorant and disparaging effort for totality will undoubtedly be marked a stain upon the Jewish community's good will.

Surell · 06-11-2009, 12:17 AM

The argument definitely doesn't hold up, but these statistics show that the Jewish ethnicity more than likely made up 90% of those murdered in the holocaust, which, in their mind, gives them the ownership of remembrance of the event. But the way I see it is that the other groups that were targeted in the genocide should be given some respect as they aren't usually thought of when the Holocaust is mentioned.

sleepy jack · 06-11-2009, 12:25 AM

I don't really understand how one can claim ownership over an event. If it's because of their amount of involvement then the Nazis executed it. So doesn't that mean any surviving Nazis, or their ancestors, or Neo-Nazis, or anti-Semites should have a say in what goes as well?

lucifer_sam · 06-11-2009, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surell

The argument definitely doesn't hold up, but these statistics show that the Jewish ethnicity more than likely made up 90% of those murdered in the holocaust, which, in their mind, gives them the ownership of remembrance of the event. But the way I see it is that the other groups that were targeted in the genocide should be given some respect as they aren't usually thought of when the Holocaust is mentioned.

what the **** are you talking about?

those statistics don't even represent any other cultures; it's just expressing how many Jews were killed out of the total Jewish population.

Surell · 06-11-2009, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

what the **** are you talking about?

those statistics don't even represent any other cultures; it's just expressing how many Jews were killed out of the total Jewish population.

I never said it did, did I? That's why I said "more than likely". I don't know if you're jumpin to conclusions or just ignoring what I say after that.

What I meant by that was those numbers show large amounts of Jewish being killed, and I'm presuming they make up 90%+. I didn't feel like digging around for a webpage of statistics for every race; by all means, you can go ahead and look for one.

Also, wikianswer somewhat covers other people, not statistically though.