Germans Accuse Borat of Slandering Gypsies - - But Not the Jews?

It's possible that the prevailing philosophy is that being a Jew himself, the case can't be made that Cohen is making an earnest attempt to defame jews, whereas he has no actual relationship to gypsies whatsoever.

Reply

Umm Borat isn't real...

Is every Eurasian government going to have something against this character and movie? LOL

Didn't Germany have some issue just recently when someone wrote a fiction book and one of the characters was anti-semetic and they tried to bring the author up on charges?

Reply

The group is about Antiziganism, ie, they're a group concerned with the treatment and portrayal of gypsies, much as the Anti Defamation League is concerned with the treatment and portrayal of Jews.

Reply

Devin is right about the antiziganism group.

And I'd recommend that you change this headline as it is very misleading, faulty and insulting to Germans! Sure, the rest of the article is too, but I suggest you fix that problem with a small update.

You are in fact insinuating that the germans as a people are still antisemitic, which is totally baseless and false. I expect more from one of the key members of Cinematical.

Reply

Wow. Did anyone even read the post before commenting? The writer wasn't saying that the same group should be protesting against the Jewish remarks. She was merely commenting that it's a bit odd that no group has commented on them.

I'm also not sure how the article portrays Germans as anti-semites?

It's a rhetorical question people. Why is one group outraged and another not outraged? Doesn't seem to make much sense. I do think, however, that poster #1 is probably on point with his theory.

Reply

Since when are anti-semitic "kasachian traditions" in an american/english mocumentary done by an english Comedian in the U S and A a matter for the german state prosecutors office? Is it Team Germany: World Police now? Or would it not look slightly canting n dubious when the "germans" (whoever exactly that means) would go around accusin others (a jew of all ppl) of antisemitism?

Reply

Marc, it seems to be obvious that no group in Germany is talking about the anti-semitic stuff because the relevant groups "got" the movie.

Reply

"fellow blogger" --

I could have included the entire name of the group that filed the complaint in the headline, but we try to keep headlines shorter than the actual story. The title says "Germans", not "ALL Germans," and the group that filed the complaint with the German prosecutors office is German.

As for this post alleging that all Germans (or even ANY Germans) are antisemitic, please go back and reread it. I never said or implied that at all; I merely questioned why no similar human rights group had complained on behalf of the Jewish people, who -- if you're going to overlook the fact that this entire film is a brilliant political satire -- are "slandered" as much or worse than gypsies in the film.

Reply

For goodness sake when on the earth the Americans are going to realise that Borat is a subtle sattire exposing the prejudices in American society but not against Jews or Kajkhstan.

Reply

So if the (american)Jewish Defamation league took offense to this well known satire which also included controversial parts about african-americans - do you think that would make it fair to write "AMERICANS ACCUSE [WELL KNOWN SATIRIC MOVIE] OF SLANDERING JEWS--BUT NOT BLACK PEOPLE??" and then in the article have the whole spin revolve around american history with the slaves and racism, and how it's very peculiar of "the americans" that they have not stepped up and protested against the treatment of the blacks.

In american mainstream media, most of which is accessible from Europe, most news or mentions of european countries like France and Germany are built around these lingering and false images forged over 50 years ago, when the whole world was very different. So your story has to be put in this nationalistic and propagandistic context - a context which you are naturally not responsible for, but which you are playing into, which you rely on in order to give your story some flavor and gain interest.

The implication of the your whole story was that it was very strange that "Germans" with their history would protest against defaming of the gypsies and not the jews..

And I realize that you don't actually write "the germans" or even "germans" anywhere in the story, but you certainly lump all the germans together in sentences like "Why the German hooplah over the gypsy slander, but not a peep about the Jewish sequence.."

And about the headline, you're right, you couldn't fit the name of the human rights group in the headline, but come on, of course you have all the choices in the world when coming up with a headline. You could have for example have written "German human rights group accuse borat of slandering gypsies" or even "Borat accused of slandering gypsies in Germany" but that would not have played into your spin now, would it?

However, I am over my initial anger over the article and I apologize if maybe some of this anger should have been directed at the roots of this context I mentioned above.

Reply

Well, its hard to get mad at someone who is jewish and is making fun of jews.. borat is played by sasha baren cohen... come on... the name is as jewish as it gets... and when he's not speaking english in the movie, he is in fact speaking in hebrew!! who cares about a bunch of gypsies, and a jew making fun of jews... what about khazicstan?.. they're the real target of the jokes.. i can see how people from khazicstan want to kill him for how he portrayed their people, but still... i thought this movie was fucking hillarious

Reply

fellow blogger,

First, I'd have to disagree with you that Borat portrays African-Americans in a bad light. Have you actually seen the film? The Americans who are portrayed badly (or, to be more correct, who make themselves look bad) are white, middle-Americans whose racism and misogynism are brought to light by their interactions with this man they think is a foreigner. The one person who comes off NOT looking like an idiot is the black prostitute.

To answer your question though: Let's say, hypothetically, that the film had included a scene in which, somewhere in the Deep South, they had a "running of the Blacks" with a people running around with giant, papier-mache heads with exaggerated African-American features being chased by people dressed as Klansmen. Satire or not, I can't imagine that someone in the NAACP wouldn't take umbrage with that.

And in that hypothetical situation, had the ADL here filed a complaint (which likely wouldn't happen because here in the States we have the First Amendment), and at the same time no one spoke up about the Black scene -- yeah, I would have written this piece up, with that angle.

Or to put a different perspective on it: Just imagine if that scene with the Jews had instead depicted Muslims chasing after a caricature of Christians -- or a guy with a papier-mache head of Jesus Christ. Do you think no Christian group in America would have spoken out? Please. Middle American would have had its panties in a bunch in a hurry, and they either wouldn't have grasped the satirical element, or they wouldn't have cared that it was satire.

Then again, ten years ago when the original South Park episode (and I mean the very first one, before they got a show on Comedy Central) came out, my Jewish friends thought it was hysterical, while my Christian friends were aghast.

My original point in this article, though, was that the human rights group filing a complaint about the portrayal of gypsies did so under the auspices of a law that was specifically set up to protect groups (like Jews, for instance) who were persecuted by the Nazis. Hence, the irony that a human rights group would speak out against the portrayal of the gypsies, but not the Jews.

Reply

Kim, after reading the article, and once again after reading your last comment, I wonder wether you know that gypsies were also among the people persecuted by the nazis.

Reply

The answer is obvious:
Germany has no more "Jew problem" as Borat would put it. Their WWII purge was succesful. I guess Borat went to the wrong country to find solutions to Khazakstan's woes.

Reply

Patrik,

Yes, I do know that gypsies were among those persecuted by the Nazis. So were a lot of other people who just fought back and got caught in the crossfire. My grandparents are concentration camp survivors, and gypsies were among those in the camps with them.

This story wasn't about the gypsies; it was about how one human rights group was complaining about how gypsies are depicted in the film, while no human rights group had done the same on behalf of Jews, who are also among those groups protected by Germany's anti-discrimination laws.

Reply

I think you are intimating that "Germans", through inaction, are anti-Semites. Is there a story here? Yes. The story is that an Antiziganistic research group objects to the film. There are many interesting and important implications of their accusations but you chose to make your piece about why "Germans" failed to condemn defamation of Jews.

The whole tone of your article is designed to play on "German" stereotypes. "Of course the Germans haven't done anything. Look at their history; they are all still Nazis at heart". If you had said something like "Why have no Jewish human rights organizations condemned the film?" I might believe you had a legitimate interest in the answer.

Cohen is a Jew. The ADL released a statement back in September saying his film's anti-Semitism was not to be taken seriously. However, you feel it is the job of the German Government to condemn a film by a British Jew satirizing American culture as anti-Semitic. You should ask yourself why. Cohen's talent is making his patsies reveal their own prejudices. Chalk another one up for Borat.

Reply

"First, I'd have to disagree with you that Borat portrays African-Americans in a bad light"

Well, I was actually trying to state a hypothetical myself and did not think enough of the context of the comment or of how the tone of this spoken english I had in my head would translate to text..

So no, I don't think that it portrays african-americans in bad light either (even though I have yet to see the movie I know almost too much about it at this point).

"My original point in this article, though, was that the human rights group filing a complaint about the portrayal of gypsies did so under the auspices of a law that was specifically set up to protect groups (like Jews, for instance) who were persecuted by the Nazis. Hence, the irony that a human rights group would speak out against the portrayal of the gypsies, but not the Jews."

Oh, yeah, what irony! Let's see here;
1. The ADL, surely influential in these types of matters in the worldwide jewish community (especially taken into account how many americans of jewish faith and roots are employed in Hollywood, where the distributor of the film is based) had already stated it's position on the film.
2. Well, apparently the nazis' mistreatment and massacre of other ethnic groups also played a part in forming those anti-discrimination laws. Who knew? Gypsies - oh, those guys, yeah, what does their suffering have on the suffering of the jews.. Theyre just still shunned all over europe, still poor, still without their own country..
3. The anti-ziganism group took offense TO A SERIES OF ADS. You even mention it in your short summary of the actual news.
4. I don't think I need to say this now, but that human rights group you mentioned just now, the one which was only speaking out about the portrayal of the gypsies and not about the jews - we are still talking about the same human rights group only monitoring discrimination towards gypsies.. so.. so much for the irony.

Everyone can make mistakes, and you are surely a good writer/blogger, but had you not immediately jumped to conclusions based on foul stereotypes, I think you would at least discovered or thought some of these flaws in your logic.

And yet, even if your logic should have checked out, there really is no excuse for your tone and stereotyping of germans ("Miffed" said it best..).

Reply

It isn't a GERMAN human rights group, but a SINTI and ROMA organisation.
Get your facts straight...

Reply

Well Kim, You comment on a profile movie and the bully-pit has something to say. Interesting to see them analyzing your sentences in the context of a warm and cozy movie environment. Considering the hoopla, I thought the Borat movie was a little light on issues of sexism, racism etc. If one wanted to assemble a catalogue of 'isms in the movie, it would be numerous. One welcome appeal is the sense of realism in the filming. I find it interesting the fraternirty boys of South Carolina are sueing the movie for defamation of character. They seem to have missed the point. They were used as actors in a satire movie and have not being compensated for their contribution. Maybe their attorney thinks they will get more coin for pain and suffering etc.
Borat is not a movie about America. Borat is a poetic vision and expression of one Sasha Cohen. It is a catalogue not of America, but a catalogue of the writer's mind and imagination. Much of it is very gentle and charming. I think the innocence of the character is real and is an innocence within the childlike portion of Cohen's mind. When he pats the chicken on the head and releases it, when he cries out on the sidewalk (twice), it is real, I found this to be the considerable merit of the film. When he presents Pamela with the embroidered cloth, dual-purpose kidnapping sack, commemorating their marriage, it is a genuine and pure vision, in stark contrast to the glare of the store lights, the vacant boys standing in line to meet their object. Take care.

Reply

Well Kim, You comment on a profile movie and the bully-pit has something to say. Interesting to see them analyzing your sentences in the context of a warm and cozy movie environment. Considering the hoopla, I thought the Borat movie was a little light on issues of sexism, racism etc. If one wanted to assemble a catalogue of 'isms in the movie, it would be numerous. One welcome appeal is the sense of realism in the filming. I find it interesting the fraternirty boys of South Carolina are sueing the movie for defamation of character. They seem to have missed the point. They were used as actors in a satire movie and have not being compensated for their contribution. Maybe their attorney thinks they will get more coin for pain and suffering etc.
Borat is not a movie about America. Borat is a poetic vision and expression of one Sasha Cohen. It is a catalogue not of America, but a catalogue of the writer's mind and imagination. Much of it is very gentle and charming. I think the innocence of the character is real and is an innocence within the childlike portion of Cohen's mind. When he pats the chicken on the head and releases it, when he cries out on the sidewalk (twice), it is real, I found this to be the considerable merit of the film. When he presents Pamela with the embroidered cloth, dual-purpose kidnapping sack, commemorating their marriage, it is a genuine and pure vision, in stark contrast to the glare of the store lights, the vacant boys standing in line to meet their object. Take care.

Reply