When Germany invaded the Netherlands they found it extremely convenient that the Netherlands had a nice centralised paper filing system telling them exactly where all the Jews lived. The Holocaust proceeded more efficiently in the Netherlands than it had in Germany.
That papertrail mattered less than how you make it sound.
France also sent people to the Germans during the occupation, and there was very little info needed. The gov wasn't caring much about due process or lengthy and accurate investigations anyway.
Is it easier and more convenient to round up people when you have a literal list of people, along with the attributes that someone might want to round them up based on? Of course.
Is it still possible to do it without said list? Yes, of course. It is just harder.
And more likely some or many will be missed, if those attributes aren’t super obvious and impossible to change.
It is indeed a bizarre discussion: nazis round up people with or without these lists, anyone could point the finger at a neighbor and they'd be gone tomorrow.
The question becomes if it mattered whether the people sent in were actually Jewish or depraved or whatever motive was invoked. To me it doesn't matter, it is was horrible either way.
I can't think of any such event where the issue came down to having a list or not.
We can see a similar thing happening with ICE raids: do they have clean and tidy lists? No, they're supposed to know what they're doing, but in practice they're just going after anything they want, anyone that crosses their path, and they don't stop at any specific criteria. We had testimony of arrest quotas, and random people shoved in to clear the numbers.
There will always be a convenient target when the point is cruelty.
To my eyes the chimpanze's "loaded gun" is the actual guns and the impunity to use them, and they're pulling the trigger because they can. Having accurate lists would be more of a painted targets instead of randomly shooting in the pack. Basically the kind of people shor would be different, but someone would still be shot.
I'd argue that raiding the data center is theatrical more than anything, and they're not flailing by lack of data, hundreds of arrest have been made at each major raids.
On the surface there is this talk about immigration status..We try to draw a somewhat reasonable narrative that makes sense, and I get the sentiment.
The witness comments consistently tell another story though:
> “The book and the movie do not line up,” Joyce told reporters on Thursday. “We’re being told one story, which is totally different than what’s occurring.”
> “It is clear the overall operation is anything but targeted,” said Sue Roche, ILAP’s executive director. “People are being racially profiled on the streets and in their cars. As is their playbook, ICE is doing everything they can to inflict maximum cruelty and chaos.”
Here is a case study from Greece in the ‘20’s, but all you need to do is google ‘ethnic cleansing’ and dig in, and you’ll see government data sources (including census data) all played a part.
“The census was conducted in a period of successive wars and rapid territorial expansion. We focus on the handling of the census data for Macedonia, a newly annexed territory that would soon become the site of the first instance of large-scale ethnic cleansing in modern Europe.”
Of course. But the specific claim you made was about many countries currently using census data to "round up and murder" some "specific groups of people by religion, ethnicity, etc."
I'm not arguing that you don't a valid point - broadly speaking. You do.
But you made a very specific claim, and that was what was being questioned. That's all.
Reading is fundamental. I made no such claim. I said many were using it to target people (which they are), and some are even using it to murder people using that data. Which they are.
Or do you think that is actually not happening right now?
>Many countries use census data to target (or even round up and murder) specific groups of people by religion, ethnicity, etc.
You were asked to back up this claim but haven't cited an example of any country currently "using census data" to "round up and murder" people.
Is China currently using census data to do horrible things? Are other countries? Maybe. I have no idea. I wouldn't be all that surprised TBH. You may be correct for all I know.
But that's not the point... The point is that you made a very specific claim and you still haven't provided any specific examples or evidence.
really? bosnia 1990s, turkey early 1900s, pogroms all over europe in the 19th century, holodomor, china with tibet and uighurs, germany tabulating data on the jews with the help of ibm...
Can you give an example of an extermination program which was thwarted by a lack of accurate census data?
"The Nazis used a data source to implement an extermination program" is not a statement which proves that your problem was the existence of a data source.
‘Gov’t consistently threatens to do x which is bad, does x which is bad. collecting data which makes it easier to do x is… good?’
Do you even listen to yourself? How would collecting that data in this environment actually improve the country, instead of clearly being used to do bad things - which will make the situation worse?
Notably, this is the gun registry problem, and exactly why gun registries are also bad.
Many countries use census data to target (or even round up and murder) specific groups of people by religion, ethnicity, etc.