I agree with you. This was clearly an over-the-top comparison, and in our politically correct universe that didn't go over well. The "rich" face nothing remotely close to the persecution that Jews faced in Nazi Germany.
That said, as someone who has inadvertently made over-the-top comparisons myself when something bothers me greatly, I don't think he deserved the backlash he received. The problem with the PC movement is that context is completely lost. If you interpret everything you see and hear literally, as the PC crowd does, you will find yourself outraged several times per day over nothing.
He was trying to say that there is a mob mentality when it comes to the richest people in the US. The public seems hate them but have no real justification for it. In that sense, hatred of the rich is no different than the hatred displayed by racists, anti-Semites, and other such closed-minded groups. The results of that hatred aren't as extreme - at least not yet - but the hatred itself is based in the same ignorance and flawed thinking.
I find the dismissal as "PC" of all valid criticism against the privileged offensive.
In what context would his comparison of the rich 1% and the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany make sense? The 1% rule. The Jews were historically persecuted and derided and faced discrimination... real discrimination, not mean words.
The "mob mentality against the rich" is inconsequential. The rich and privileged by definition hold all the cards. You can say mean things against them -- well, as much as the mass media in their power will allow you, anyway -- and what does it matter? They are still rich and you're not. This is like saying that it's mean the slaves are saying bad things about their masters; or that it's mean that the peasants are insulting their king, who after all takes care of them. It's ridiculous. Not only do the rich have everything, we also have to be careful not to offend them? We also have to admire them as heroes?
The public has "no real justification"? Really? Besides this being a tiny group of people who hold the vast majority of wealth and power?
In what context would his comparison of the rich 1% and the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany make sense?
You're making my point for me. If you take that statement literally, it is clearly over-the-top. There are other over-the-top statements in common use today that when taken literally would evoke extremely emotional reactions. Example: "I just went in there to talk to her and she bit my head off". If you took that literally, you might respond with horror or outrage that someone had bitten your friend's head off, and confusion over how they had their head bitten off just moments ago and yet somehow had it sewed back on in time to relay their horrific experience to you. When it came to light that your friend was referring to being yelled at and did not actually have their head bitten off, family members of individuals that have died from decapitation might organize protests against your friend for comparing being yelled at to the terrible deaths that their loved ones experienced. There would be calls for him to be fired from whatever job he had. How far should we carry this?
Tom Perkins didn't literally mean that rich people are being rounded up and killed. The PC crowd, however, apparently had nothing else to be outraged about that week, and jumped all over it, saying that he somehow considered his plight to be similar to that of Jews in Nazi Germany. His point was that the general public has an irrational hatred of the rich, just as the Nazi hatred of Jews was irrational.
I'm not making a point for anyone, I'm asking a question (and please, stop it with "the PC crowd". It's simply a way of dismissing criticism).
I get he didn't mean the rich 1% are being rounded up and gassed, I'm not that literal. This is not an emotional reaction. What I'm asking is in which context does the comparison make sense? Forget about the holocaust... in what sense is persecution of a powerless class comparable to being angry at the rich and powerful? In what sense is criticism of the marginalized comparable to criticism of the entitled?
If the only ground for comparison is "well, they were both about people being angry at other people" I'd say the comparison is so weak as to be stupid. People were right to find it offensive.
Tom Perkins didn't literally mean that rich people are being rounded up and killed.
How on earth do you know what he meant, or didn't mean?
For the sake of discussion: How could an apparently intelligent man pull such an insanely stupid and offensive analogy?
Being Jewish I thought his remark was extremely offensive and an insult to the millions of people killed by the nazis. It is totally and uttely inexcusable.
My rage has nothing, whatsoever, to do with the "pc crowd", which seems to be employed whenever some rich or important person talks shit and then tries to justify it in his or her non-apology (I'm sorry that you're offended about my statement kind of apology).
What is "the PC movement"? "PC" usually has some connotation of sensitivity to racial/gender/ethnic/cultural issues, but I have trouble seeing how that applies to the criticism of Perkins' remarks. Indeed, I would have thought that the kind of people who use the term "political correctness" in earnest would identify spurious claims of oppression as an example of the concept.
Yep, I agree - people have a tendency to focus on what you said rather than what you were trying to get at (the context).
And I don't blame people, its human nature, but I am thankful I've reached a point where I can take a deep breath and think about what someone has said before issuing a gut reaction. :)
That said, as someone who has inadvertently made over-the-top comparisons myself when something bothers me greatly, I don't think he deserved the backlash he received. The problem with the PC movement is that context is completely lost. If you interpret everything you see and hear literally, as the PC crowd does, you will find yourself outraged several times per day over nothing.
He was trying to say that there is a mob mentality when it comes to the richest people in the US. The public seems hate them but have no real justification for it. In that sense, hatred of the rich is no different than the hatred displayed by racists, anti-Semites, and other such closed-minded groups. The results of that hatred aren't as extreme - at least not yet - but the hatred itself is based in the same ignorance and flawed thinking.