This gets brought up every other thread on the subject of 'registries' for minority groups, but if you haven't you really should read IBM And The Holocaust:
The upshot is that Germany used their census data to figure out who is and isn't a Jew, but they also used records from synagogues, surname analysis, and other pre-war 'big data' sources along with incredible amounts of IBM equipment to compile their list of undesirables.
With the NSA, Donald Trump will have access to more information about the demographics of American populations and who comprises them than the Third Reich ever had about its own citizens. There will be no registries. And in the throes of a national security hysteria comparable to the fears of influence from anarchism in the early 20th century, there will be no internal will at these agencies to oppose him.
The thing of it was, while they made some very interesting connections they didn't particularly make one that IBM (America) directly knew about the literal holocaust.
Now, IBM definitely knew their technology was being used to catalogue specific groups, and thus that that technology was being used to facilitate mass involuntary migrations of those people. What I don't recall (I read this book when it first came out in 2001), is if they knew (or should have reasonably known) that those people were being killed. When I think of the Holocaust, I associate that more with the deaths of those people and less with the forced migrations/etc. Both are terrible, of course, but one is obviously far worse.
In any event, that's a very good book to read, even if ultimately I find culpability for IBM to be somewhat tenuous.
I'm glad I don't live in a country/world where anyone is proposing registering anyone, Muslim or Jewish.
New documents came out after the book was published that showed that IBM had specific punch cards for each concentration camp, each reason (homosexual, Jew, antisocial, gypsy,etc.) and for manner of death (natural causes, suicide, death by gas chamber).
The SS had to be trained, the machines had to be maintained, and the cards had to be updated. IBM engineers were on site at each concentration camp throughout most of the war.
whilst one is considerably worse than the other, both were morally repugnant and the 'lesser' offence would now be illegal due to discrimination laws (if they were not illegal then for other/similar reasons). So IBM should have had some awareness of what was happening. In much the same way that we consider Hacking Team selling hacking services to the Syrian government as essentilly being involved with the dissappearance or torture of political activists so we should hold IBM to account for their involvement.
Exactly. Which means the resistance to building a functional population registry does not prevent any wrongdoing but stops the society from getting any of the gains. Like having a meaningful way to prevent non-citizens from voting, avoid identity theft etc.
> With the NSA, Donald Trump will have access to more information about the demographics of American populations and who comprises them than the Third Reich ever had about its own citizens.
Because the NSA was in good hands during Obama right ? No Trump isn't Hitler and the USA aren't going to turn into the Third Reich, it will be no better or worse that the current situation under Obama. The US president doesn't have total power over this country.
No, but this new president is appointing a series of people with white nationalist leanings to a variety of posts within the government that do hold a lot of power. It is perfectly reasonable to be in fear right now. Action is always better, but it takes time to reel from and better understand this new threat to minorities and marginalized groups in the US
Ah the "white nationalist" narrative. I forgot about that one. There no "white nationalist" appointee. But I guess everybody who isn't a progressive is a "white nationalist" now.
Let me clarify. Jeff Sessions and Steve Bannon are capital R Racists. And now they are in positions of power. People are scared because these people are threatening. If you aren't scared, maybe you should talk to the people who are now living in fear rather than staying in your bubble of privilige. This isn't meant to shame you or put you down for being in a position of privilige, but instead encourage you to start looking at things more intersectionality.
Quick example, Mike Pence has come forward in favor of conversion therapy, a violent electroshock regiment combined with mental abuse to "convert" gay youth to being straight. It has an 800% increase in suicides among "outpatients." If you are straight, this might not scare you. But, if you don't have that privilege and identify as lgbtq+, you don't have as much as a choice but to be terrified that this man is one heartbeat from the presidency and has been promised by the president to have a large amount of influence in the administration.
Show me evidence that Jeff Sessions is racist, or that Mike Pence supports electrocution therapy. These are wild allegations with no factual basis.
The "articles" that you link are just opinion pieces that are themselves devoid of real evidence. Please call out in particular what evidence would lead you to make these vicious allegations against these two men.
Okay, here is an addition he made to a bill for providing government funding to help people with HIV/AIDs
"Congress should support the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act only after completion of an audit to ensure that federal dollars were no longer being given to organizations that celebrate and encourage the types of behaviors that facilitate the spreading of the HIV virus. Resources should be directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behavior."
If that doesn't scare you, I'm scared of you.
I'm tired of racists pretending to be victims and using the language of the left when they are called out on their bigotry, please stop perpetuating this.
I see nothing about electrocution therapy in there. I don't agree with Mr. Pence'a traditional view of homosexuality, but you're attacking a straw man.
>I'm tired of racists pretending to be victims and using the language of the left when they are called out on their bigotry, please stop perpetuating this.
Being a leftist doesn't give you a license to lie. Give me a break.
If he weren't a highly public figure, you would be guilty of libel for your original post.
What do you think those institutions are? Do you really believe that gay kids can be converted into being straight?
Here's some more reading about Mike Pence and human rights:
>Do you really believe that gay kids can be converted into being straight?
Woah there. All I did is point out that you're lying about Mr. Pence supporting "electrocution therapy" in particular. Now you're accusing me of supporting gay conversion therapy.
Your tactic of falsely smearing and impugning the reputation of everyone that you disagree with is frankly disgusting.
I don't believe in gay conversion therapy and actually support gay marriage, but I shouldn't even need to say that because it's not relevant to this discussion. The value that I'm advocating for here is honesty and good faith debate.
The topic of conversion therapy absolutely is relevant to the discussion, because Mike Pence is on recorded for not only supporting in the abstract -- but in having it mandated via federal legislation.
Sexual conversion therapy sounds nuts to me, and I bet the majority of the country. If it comes to that point (where actual federal legislation is a possibility), I assure you many of us will be protesting in the street. I, personally, consider it as likely as me being killed by a terrorist (i.e. not very).
The allegation that Pence supported electroshock therapy appears to be unfounded. However, it's now well-established that back in 2000, at least, his campaign was in favor of state-mandated "conversion therapy". Do you really want someone like that as VP?
As to Sessions, per WP:
Figures also said that Sessions had called him "boy," which Sessions denied. Figures also testified that two assistant prosecutors had also heard Sessions, including current federal judge Ginny Granade. Granade denied this.[24][16] He also testified that "Mr. Sessions admonished me to 'be careful what you say to white folks.'"[25] Sessions was also reported to have called a white civil rights attorney a "disgrace to his race."[27]
In addition to his joke about the KKK, his undisputed reference to the NAACP as "un-American" and "Communist-inspired" and his open contempt for civil rights legislation, generally. It's also really hard not to interpret his remarks that "almost no one" coming from the Dominican Republic had useful skills to offer as not indicative of a racist mindset.
It's good that we all seem to be on the same page about Steve Bannon, at least.
1. Mr. Pence did not support "state-mandated" conversion therapy. There's a long way between giving funding to organizations that offer a service, to mandating that people partake in it.
2. I'm not convinced by the smears against Mr. Sessions. His record, which includes desegregating schools and prosecuting the case that led to the execution of a KKK member responsible for a hate crime, speaks more of him than some unsubstantiated allegations and a joke. The NAACP is way more than a civil rights organization. They are very political and do not have unanimous support even among blacks. His comments about the socioeconomic makeup of immigrants from the DR has nothing to do with race. It is actually a very valid point to be critical of low-skill immigration when the US has a tragic surplus of low-skill labor.
3. The accusations against Bannon are the most ridiculous of all. He's someone with a history of service to country. Many Jews, gays, blacks, and hispanics have all come out in his defense.
1. Mr. Pence did not support "state-mandated" conversion therapy. There's a long way between giving funding to organizations that offer a service, to mandating that people partake in it.
"Mandated" in the sense of being presented as a requirement for life-saving medical treatment. In fact, it's hard to get more "mandated" than that.
I'd go on, but the logic in your other points is similarly muddled.
In fact there are, including Steve Bannon. There also are religiously prejudiced appointees, such as Michael Flynn and Jeff Sessions. IIRC, that's 3 of the 4 appointees announced so far.
I'm not sure what you mean. If you are adding to what I said, I agree. If you mean that your comment contradicts what I said, that doesn't make sense to me.
Also: The war on drugs is to some extent oppression of minorities, who are disproportionately targeted both by law (their vices get serious jail time, others' get treatment; look at the former crack/coke disparity, prescription drug abuse, and the focus on treatment and compassion now that heroin is a rural problem) and by law enforcement and the judiciary, where racial bias is well-established in research.
I believe that there is evidence that Nixon explicitly said he was pursuing it for that reason (also to go after people on the left).
If you'll notice, everything in that statement was strictly factual. While the Mussolini vibes Trump gives off are moderately concerning, I'm much more concerned that our government is already configured such that you can plop a dictator in the cockpit and they don't have to do any extra work for totalitarian surveillance.
Also you're right, the president does not have total power over this country. Which is why it's fortunate for the president elect that he has a cooperating house and senate.
As a Muslim American, I am absolutely in awe, and simply shocked that something like this has come up at all. If this trend continues, I will definitely leave the US as soon as I finish up my degree.
Last week, my state Georgia tried to pass a bill that would effectively ban wearing the hijab (headscarf) in public. Thankfully, there was a huge amount of backlash and the bill was withdrawn.
FWIW, most other Americans support you and share your shock and outrage. Clinton won a majority, remember, despite being targeted by domestic and foreign security agencies, as well as by the Murdoch/Fox empire and the rest of the right-wing demonization machine. Obama is very popular. (EDIT: That's not meant to be partisan; it's just clear data that many people oppose religious hatred - many Republicans do too.)
I hope people get organized now. I hope bad things don't happen, but only by being organized can people act to protect their rights. As a simple example, look at the NRA.
As far as I know, your comment is wrong. Many Republicans have openly repudiated Trump and racial/ethnic/religious discrimination. If you mean that Trump won nearly half the vote, remember that Trump is extraordinarily unpopular - IIRC around two-thirds of Americans strongly dislike him - and not every one who likes him will support all his policies. Also, about 40% of Americans don't vote.
Finally, I strongly believe the great majority would do the right thing, believe in the golden rule, and object to hurting others. They need to be manipulated into supporting oppression through fear and propaganda and through dehumanizing the victims.
I am a Muslim too. I faced more everyday discrimination and derision in my native India than I ever faced here in the United States. Sure is an occasional bigot who calls me a terrorist and asks me to go back , but that is nothing compared to state-sponsored ethnic cleansing pogrom in Gujarat only a couple of years ago. I have friends here from the middle east who claim the same and know shia vs sunni vs whatever animosity is much worse that a registry could ever be. You just need to look at post war Iraq where fundamental US mistake was underestimating how much these people hate each other and everyone else.
I remember when I was a kid people wouldn't rent a place to us because we were muslims, something that is still widely practiced in India. Vast majority of Americans are not bigots and as a society they have enacted anti-discriminatory laws that are heavily enforced at all levels of society. You have legal recourse here if you are discriminated against, something that's unimaginable in India.
I am aware of the atrocities that are committed against Muslim/Sunni/Shia/Ahmadi/etc. minorities all over the world and in no way do I condone such policies. I am truly sorry for what you had to go through, brother/sister. There is always someone who had it worse, I guess.
And yes, I completely agree; it's much better in the US right now. But if this "plan" goes through, what do you think will happen next? Do you really think that they'll stop there and call it a day? Probably not.
A place that doesn't have a Muslim registry? My current goal is Sweden, if I can find a suitable research position in my field after I graduate.
Worst case scenario, I can go back to my home country Tunisia. I'm proud that Tunisia is making progress towards becoming the Middle East's first post-Arab Spring success story.
For now, I'm happy in the US. It's a great country and I'm proud to be an American :)
I fail to understand why a Muslim would think Sweden is more welcoming toward the Islamic culture and than the US. It isn't. People need to stop thinking Northern European countries as havens of tolerance and multiculturalism. Because aside from England, they are not. Especially Sweden and Denmark.
Currently, perhaps not, what with the refugee crisis and all. I still think it's not as bad as you describe it; I know of several Muslims who live there and really like it. But if the US ends up continuing on this path, I think Sweden would be a great option.
Yep, that's also a great option, but I like the proximity of Sweden to Europe and to my country of origin Tunisia. It makes visiting family much less of a hassle.
I'm not trolling, but I'm not sure I follow. I know that some European countries are embracing the far-right, but I have not heard anything about Sweden specifically.
The kindest thing I can say is that the relationship between Muslims and Europe is beyond troubled. You're in a bubble.
Without self identifying as a Muslim, go to a random variety of forums and ask the question "What is the future of Europe and Islam" or just "Europe and Muslims" in search engines.
Sweden has accepted more muslim immigrants than most countries in Europe, and there are a lot of Swedes who aren't happy about it. There was an incident last year where a gang ran through the Stockholm train station randomly beating immigrants. I haven't been there for a couple years, but things sound pretty tense.
Obviously, that's what democracy is for. But if the laws are passed and the damage is done, I would choose to leave; in a sense, that is my form of protesting. I refuse to contribute to a society that has decided - by rule of law - that I'm not welcome because of my beliefs.
Wait.. you want to go back to a country where women cannot travel without their husband's permission because some state tried to pass a law against head scarves. I am guessing you are a man?
You're very skilled at drawing hasty conclusions, it seems!
I said that I will probably leave the US if the trend of anti-Islam policies continues, not solely because of the proposed headscarf ban.
And nowhere did I state that Tunisia is perfect. It still is a fledgling democracy after all, and there is much left to do to get there. But this doesn't mean I wouldn't live there if I had no other option.
>I will probably leave the US if the trend of anti-Islam policies continues, not solely because of the proposed headscarf ban.
Sorry didn't mean it to be a 'gotcha' comment. I am just surprised that you would even propose Tunisia. US would have to propose and pass hundreds of absurd laws against women/Muslims to get anywhere close to Tunisia. Do you really believe US is going down the path which would lead to banning Muslim women from public sphere. Would you still go back to Tunisia if you were a woman?
You act so surprised at proposed head scarf ban( which did not pass even in red Georgia) yet you see nothing wrong with Tunisians trying to ban Islamic political parties[1].
> I am just surprised that you would even propose Tunisia.
In case you missed it, I am a Tunisian myself, so it's only natural that one of my options is Tunisia.
Do you have something against Tunisia in particular, or what exactly? You seem to be personally offended that someone would consider living in Tunisia, which is quite odd to be honest. Tunisia is way ahead of virtually any other Middle Eastern country.
> Would you still go back to Tunisia if you were a woman?
Tunisia is one of the best countries in the Middle East when it comes to women's rights. It is ranked 46th in the world when it comes to gender equality. We have around 30% female participation in parliament. Women have had the right to vote since Tunisia's independence from France in 1956. Abortion was legalized in 1965, almost a decade before the US. Female birth control was legalized in '62. I can continue if you like ;)
Are you mixing up Tunisia and Saudi Arabia?
And by the way, I visit Tunisia every summer, so it's not like I've been away for years or something.
> you see nothing wrong with Tunisians trying to ban Islamic political parties
Tunisia is in a very sensitive spot right now. Domestic terrorism and extremism is a huge threat right now. Two political figures have been assassinated since the revolution. The government is therefore trying its best to control potential threats.
Not wanting to contribute to a country that actively discriminates against you is totally understandable. Hopefully it won't get to that point here in the states, hopefully we can remain welcoming to people from everywhere. Thanks for your patient responses.
We're not bystanders; our industry is the most important facilitator of this problem and we understand the causes, implications and solutions far better than anyone. We have a serious responsibility to our fellow citizens, just as the food industry has a responsibility not to poison everyone. What are you and your company doing about it? You have 2 months lead time before your competitor starts rolling out their products:
* Is your company minimizing and anonymizing user data? Is it implementing end-to-end encryption?
* If your product is hard for users to avoid (e.g., an ISP is hard to avoid, a casual game is not), do you provide a way for users to utilize it confidentially?
* Users need private alternatives, which means that FOSS projects need a lot of help making their products much more usable and reliable; can you help out?
If you are thinking, 'my little portion won't solve the problem', you're right. Nothing gets done in a democracy unless people all do their little portions, and unless they organize. The United States is the 'Land of the Free' only if its citizens make it that way.
The prospect even more terrifying than a show-up-and-be-recorded registry is that governments and private companies already have all they need to secretly create that registry overnight.
Facebook already has all of this data, for users and many non-users.
"Graph theory" of the sort that's used in social network analysis will become the lie detector test of the 21st century -- junk science based on a poor interpretation of elementary mathematics applied to dubious data sets.
Good job everyone for letting the government gain so much power. I've said it before and I'll say it again: monolithic governments that have fingers into every aspect of your lives are dangerous.
Concerns about privacy were considered theoretical by so many for so long. At least now we know the theory, but we need to implement and deploy it ASAP.
The upshot is that Germany used their census data to figure out who is and isn't a Jew, but they also used records from synagogues, surname analysis, and other pre-war 'big data' sources along with incredible amounts of IBM equipment to compile their list of undesirables.
https://www.amazon.com/IBM-Holocaust-Strategic-Alliance-Corp...
With the NSA, Donald Trump will have access to more information about the demographics of American populations and who comprises them than the Third Reich ever had about its own citizens. There will be no registries. And in the throes of a national security hysteria comparable to the fears of influence from anarchism in the early 20th century, there will be no internal will at these agencies to oppose him.