Is it fair to compare Muslim migrants to Jews in Nazi Germany?

[Kraenen]

With debates about immigration being stretched thin and rehashing the same arguments ad nauseum, it's no surprise we've come across comparisons to the Holocaust many times by now. In fact it's become a go-to defense for those in favour of immigration. But I think this needs proper support rather than being thrown into the discussion as an ace in the hole never to be questioned. There are some vague comparisons like xenophobia and racism, the scapegoating during poverty and so on. Yet these positions miss the glaringly obvious differences.

First, it is not fair to equate these two as Muslims are not an ethnicity but an ideology, and one which (based on Pew polling at least) is followed quite dogmatically in ME, Africa, Indonesia (some of which are sources of this immigration). The Nazi position on Jews was based on race myths and scapegoating for the loss of WW1. What is the current analog?

Second, the Jews are now subject not only to the possibility of NeoNazi racism, but Islamofascist racism and Jew-baiting. This is one of those vile ironies of history where two opposing racist and right-wing groups have a lot in common due to a common enemy. In some ways Muslims can be the aggressors, calling for Fatwas against novelists, threatening apostates with death, killing film makers they don't like, making terrorist attacks and threats against cartoonists in foreign countries and so on. It's also quite possible that Muslims would attempt to carry out attacks specifically against Jews (which have already been reported in Malmo). Yet the Jews didn't do these things, did they? It appears the comparison falls apart when you take a closer look, and when you're prepared to admit that different religions/ethnicities/cultures have significant and objective differences.

So I don't think it's fair to bring up the holocaust in the discussion on the European immigrant crisis. The Jews were accused of all sorts of things, yet these were fabrications and race myths. The reality is their current-day immigrant counterparts do have a much higher rate of crime, and their fundamentalists have carried out theocratic-fascist attacks on western liberalism, and are ultimately more comparable to the Nazis themselves than their Jewish victims.

Keep in mind nowhere do I say or intend to mean that "all brown people do/believe X". I urge you to take note that these are some members, but a significant portion of the group. Also that I'm not focused on discussing whether Muslims believe 'X' and whatnot, but that comparing the situation with Muslims in Europe to Jews during the Holocaust is too simplistic and doesn't work. With all that said, I don't know the whole story, so bring up any points you think are valid. Perhaps you have some ideas that work better than mine, or that counter what I've said and provide the opposing side a better argument.

[Deleted]

No its disgusting.

[Matchles]

Any group that faces certain death if sent back to their country of origin is fairly compared to Jews in Nazi Germany. And quite frankly your comparison with Muslims in Syria fleeing ISIS to extremists and terrorists that are killing them is quite disturbing.

[Deleted]

It all started with moderates and right wingers asking for some sanity in the number people are bringing in.
After that pathologically extreme left wingers used reflex impulses to call racist xenophobe etc anyone who showed even a bit less than 100% full agreement.

When one side takes extreme measures the opposing one will take even more extreme measures.

Naturally any moderate and right winger started to ponder the ideas OP is mentioning.

Congratulations left... you created the monster you're fighting now.
But I guess it's all fine and dandy since now you can spam that you're on the right side of history.

[Chetnik]

It all started with moderates and right wingers asking for some sanity in the number people are bringing in.
After that pathologically extreme left wingers used reflex impulses to call racist xenophobe etc anyone who showed even a bit less than 100% full agreement.

QFT /10chars

[chrisberb]

Why is it that you refer to them as "Muslim Migrants" rather than Syrian Migrants? Since the only recent refugees/migrants anyone is talking about is Syrians.

[Daethz]

no because jewish children dident grow up and suicide bomb every country they resided in on the planet meanwhile enslaving their own jewish women to the sextrade so they could buy bigger explosives to blow themselfs up with.

thats all islam right there.

[Endus]

First, it is not fair to equate these two as Muslims are not an ethnicity but an ideology, and one which (based on Pew polling at least) is followed quite dogmatically in ME, Africa, Indonesia (some of which are sources of this immigration). The Nazi position on Jews was based on race myths and scapegoating for the loss of WW1. What is the current analog?

Let's not move the goalposts. The Muslims in question are Arabs from the Middle East. There's a clear ethnoreligious aspect to this, same as with the Jewish people. They aren't protesting the immigration of Indonesian Muslims, or something.

And the position against the Syrian refugees is chock full of the same kind of myths and scapegoating, hence the comparisons.

Plus, if you really want to say "it's about the religion, not the ethnicity", then you're gonna have to deal with comparisons to the antisemitism that racked the Middle Ages in Christendom, where people accused Jews of drinking the blood of Christian babies and the like, which was absolutely religious in nature and origin. This isn't "better", despite what you think.

Second, the Jews are now subject not only to the possibility of NeoNazi racism, but Islamofascist racism and Jew-baiting. This is one of those vile ironies of history where two opposing racist and right-wing groups have a lot in common due to a common enemy. In some ways Muslims can be the aggressors, calling for Fatwas against novelists, threatening apostates with death, killing film makers they don't like, making terrorist attacks and threats against cartoonists in foreign countries and so on. It's also quite possible that Muslims would attempt to carry out attacks specifically against Jews (which have already been reported in Malmo). Yet the Jews didn't do these things, did they? It appears the comparison falls apart when you take a closer look, and when you're prepared to admit that different religions/ethnicities/cultures have significant and objective differences.

A great many refugees don't do those things, either. The overwhelming majority. And yes, Jewish practices have been deemed offensive or hostile, in the past. Really, the entire point is that you're targeting and slandering innocent people, just because they happen to be Muslim, because other Muslims may have behaved poorly. That's no different, because it's the same issue as with antisemitism; these people are innocent. They have done nothing. Actions by other individuals do not in any way whatsoever matter. Trying to apply the actions of some individuals to judge the merit or value of others is, literally, prejudice.

[Xarkan]

Is it fair to compare Muslim migrants to Jews in Nazi Germany?

No.

Saving Jews was noble and nice, an act of kindness, often done by people that did not help cause the problem. Those who helped were good and decent people.

Helping Syrian refugees is mostly obligation, it is part of cleaning up a mess we helped cause. There is no saint hood here, only possible moral change is towards moral bankruptcy by declining to do ones part of cleaning up ones mess.

[Dextroden]

Trying to apply the actions of some individuals to judge the merit or value of others is, literally, prejudice.

You mean like lumping anyone who had trepidations about this level of immigration with actual racists?

[Xarkan]

You mean like lumping anyone who had trepidations about this level of immigration with actual racists?

Some [people in some] countries are just silly when they say it.

I mean [people in] Sweden and Germany do have cause to fear but [people in] other countries like the US fearful about their .. what.. 10 or 15 thousand syrians they might get is hilarious. The numbers matter. Per capita of course.

[Endus]

You mean like lumping anyone who had trepidations about this level of immigration with actual racists?

Not at all, since I'd be evaluating people with such trepidations for their own specifically stated beliefs and outlook, not ascribing anything to them that they didn't clearly express themselves.

[Dextroden]

Not at all, since I'd be evaluating people with such trepidations for their own specifically stated beliefs and outlook, not ascribing anything to them that they didn't clearly express themselves.

And the position against the Syrian refugees is chock full of the same kind of myths and scapegoating, hence the comparisons.

Chock full.

[Powerogue]

First, it is not fair to equate these two as Muslims are not an ethnicity but an ideology

Considering how, in many places, if you attempt to leave the religion you're killed, and you're indoctrinated from a very young age, they might as well be the same thing.

The comparison would imply that we have a force actively trying to round up and rid the entire world of muslims. To my knowledge they're fleeing war, but that still isn't really on the same scale.

I don't think it's an accurate comparison at all. They may be fleeing awful conditions but they're not being hunted.

What was the purpose to this comparison anyway?

[Endus]

Chock full.

I really don't see the point you're trying to make, given that I wasn't attacking anyone with either post, which is what you're claiming I was doing.

[Shadowmelded]

No-one's saying that every facet of the two situations are directly comparable, but that the same rhetoric is being applied that can potentially lead to the same kind of atrocities occurring. The Nazi's didn't start off gungho about their antisemitism. It was a gradual process. Saying that there are no similarities at all is either extremely naive or extremely disingenuous.

I mean compare;


to



and try and tell any intellectually honest person that there's no resemblance with a straight face.

[Deleted]

Nop. Because the "refugees" should go to their muslim brothers country if they want to integrate easy. Going to Europe will just create issues since most of the time they will keep segregated into their own community, so they won't integrate, they will feel left out and extremist will breed.

I am fine with donating money so they can make a life in Turkey or other muslim country. It's also cheaper for them to live there so like for each "refugee" hosted in Europe you could prob host 2x if not 5x in Turkey or similar safe middle eastern country.

And EU could help them boost the economy and have jobs. Tourism is an easy way to do it. Cut all fees for vacations in Turkey and you will make it dirty cheap for europeans to make a holiday there. That means more people will cater to them, more jobs, etc.

[Dextroden]

I really don't see the point you're trying to make, given that I wasn't attacking anyone with either post, which is what you're claiming I was doing.

I didn't claim you did until you asked. I was just pointing out calling anyone who isn't 125% on the immigration train a racist, islamaphobic nazi is really fucking prejudiced.

[Deleted]

and try and tell any intellectually honest person that there's no resemblance with a straight face.

The difference is all rats vs some rats.

I'm kinda suprised that the argument of cultural enrichment was used back then too o.O
The subtitle says roughly that the world should thank us for setting those wonderfull culture carrier free and offering them back to the remaining world.

[Shadowmelded]

The difference is all rats vs some rats.

Dehumanizing people played it's part in facilitating the holocaust. It's hard to take anyone seriously who claims to be morally superior when they engage in such illiberal rhetoric. You'll also note that even the non-rats are treated with disdain, with the guy in the background with an unkempt beard and Pashtun sporting what appears to be a rifle on his back.