English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why is one considered Holocast and one is not.

2007-07-28 06:29:19 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

22 answers

there is none, there both the same equality of hurt and death nomatter how you add up the numbers. both events are evil

2007-07-28 07:25:38 · answer #1 · answered by john constantine 2 · 1 3

The difference was that the Americans were not trying to commit genocide with the blacks. Hitler's goal was to make the jews extinct.

The Americans didn't want to kill the blacks just make them work in subjugation. Which would you rather do, be a slave or be starved, beaten, and then placed in a gas chamber and murdered.

Not that it is right, but the American slave owners considered the slaves to be expensive property. The Jews in Hitler's Germany were not even considered to be that.

Main Entry: ho·lo·caust
Pronunciation: 'hO-l&-"kost, 'hä- also -"käst or 'ho-l&-kost
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin holocaustum, from Greek holokauston, from neuter of holokaustos burnt whole, from hol- + kaustos burnt, from kaiein to burn -- more at CAUSTIC
1 : a sacrifice consumed by fire
2 : a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire
3 a often capitalized : the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II -- usually used with the b : a mass slaughter of people; especially : GENOCIDE

Hope this helps.

2007-07-28 06:43:28 · answer #2 · answered by Batty1970 2 · 2 0

The Nazi's treatment of the Jew was wholesale slaughter. The importation of Africans to North America was for commerce, those human were at least of monetary value, the ones that survived the trip that is.

The Africans were valuable labor. The Nazi's saw no value in the lives of Jews. They were considered expendable.

I think the difference lies in the intent of the abusers. Complete annihilation was the goal of the Nazi's. The Americans wanted cheap labor, death and dehumanization just came with.

2007-07-28 06:42:54 · answer #3 · answered by Equinoxical ™ 5 · 2 0

I have always ALWAYS thought the same blasted thing. Not to mention what was done by the "settlers" to the native American Indians. They were holocausts, one and all, and yet a memorial is resurrected to the Jews -- when in addition to Jews, how many gypsies and other non-Aryan races were also threatened with extinction?

I was born and raised a Jew, but I still feel "The Holocaust" was not the one and only -- and IMHO, not the worst. I find the Native American Indian holocaust to be the worst. It has never ended. It continues, as their land remains reduced to Reservations and their heritage and lineage to alcoholism and casinos. Oh, and the occasional television commercial where we see a hint of the truth of how they must really feel (canoeing down the river, seeing the destruction of their land, tear slowly streaming down the cheek).

2007-07-28 06:40:11 · answer #4 · answered by Shihan 5 · 0 1

There are similarities and differences. Many do refer to slavery as a Holocaust. However the goal of slavery was economic, to obtain cheap labor. The goal European Holocaust initiated by Hitler was to wipe out a particular group (or groups) of people. The slave owners didn't have the same goal because it would have defeated the purpose. Slavery also lasted a couple of centuries, as opposed to less than 10 years in Germany.

2007-07-28 06:41:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

As absolutely horrible as both are there is a difference. Hitler intentionally devised all the elements that took place during the holocaust.
But yeah, I can understand why you would think that we treated the slaves just as horrific and in some cases it was just as horrific. But there are still extreme differences with what Hitler set out to do and what he actually had done.

What I think might be a better question to ask is why does any race think there any better than another?

2007-07-28 06:40:12 · answer #6 · answered by MLJ 6 · 1 0

I'd also like to know what's the difference between what happened at the Salem witchtrials, and the violence that was perpetrated against the Jehovah Witness's in the 40's.

My guess is that history is written by the victors.

Don't get me wrong, I am happy to live in America, I think it's virtues outweigh it 's vices, but we are by no means perfect. No society is. I don't think we should gloss over our own wrong doing, either currently or historically.

2007-07-28 06:34:52 · answer #7 · answered by queenthesbian 5 · 2 0

The real holocaust is the death toll from killing in the name of God. It continues to this day and mankind is not supposed to talk about it. With all due respect, by comparison it makes Slavery & the Concentration Camps look like a picnic.

2007-07-28 06:41:32 · answer #8 · answered by liberty11235 6 · 0 2

Slavery lasted much longer,a better analogy would be with the genocide of the native americans.BTW,Sparky, slavery was not an employment situation.

2007-07-28 06:38:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Not much. The only real difference is history is decided by the winners. The Nazis lost.

2007-07-28 06:33:55 · answer #10 · answered by grnlow 7 · 2 2

The Holocaust resulted in a lot of innocent people being murdered in death camps. Strangely, many American slaves had fairly decent lives despite the nature of their employment situation. While NEITHER was the proper way to treat other people, the Nazi Final Solution was considerably less humane, in my opinion.

2007-07-28 06:33:32 · answer #11 · answered by Sparky 2 · 7 3

fedest.com, questions and answers