It’s funny that Walz is preaching nuance and critical thinking, and yet the people who purport to agree with him in this thread apparently can’t synthesize your point. The Holocaust is a stark reminder that genocide will not only continue, but will be improved and augmented by new technologies and ideologies. Like you said, though, that doesn’t make it worse than others. I think the issue you’re running into is that the point here is Walz is being subjected to ad hominem to distract from a broader discussion on the nature of genocide because such discussions are bad for Israel and their conservative benefactors in the US. Folks ITT probably have it in their heads that you agree that Tim Walz is an antisemite, but as it turns out, two things can be true. The Holocaust is unique in a particular sense, but that is not what Walz is talking about; in the context he is speaking, the Holocaust is not unique. Essentially, the Holocaust, as a vivid and well-documented case study, can and should be a window into the broader history of genocide and human rights abuse.

I agree with Walz here, the Holocaust was not unique in the sense that genocide is an ongoing feature of human history and events. I also agree with the dude elsewhere in this thread that the Holocaust was unique among genocides, because it was the first industrial genocide. That doesn’t make it worse; we don’t need to play victim olympics. In the grand scheme of things, Walz certainly should not be called antisemitic for saying that we shouldn’t hyperfocus on the Holocaust at the expense of understanding the prevalence of genocide in general, and we should realize the reason he’s being called antisemitic is because, right now, it benefits Israel to derail any broader discussion on the nature of genocide.

In the future, all sexes, genders and orientations will attend a single club to watch leotard-clad dad bods dance like 40 year old dudes at a Keith Urban concert.