I’m a firm believer in Hanlon’s razor. It states,
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
There are times however, when someone’s behaviour is so ridiculous that I can’t imagine simple stupidity being the cause. Such is the case with clothing retailer, Zara. They sold a shirt for children that they claimed was “inspired by classical Western films.”
Once you see it however, you’ll note that it looks a lot like the striped uniforms Jews were forced to wear in concentration camps, right down to the yellow badge. The only difference I can see is the stripes on the uniforms were vertical rather than horizontal.
The point at which Zara’s behaviour exceeded the bounds of stupidity, in my opinion, was their apology. It is fairly lengthy, and says pretty much what you’d expect, up until the very last sentence:
as soon as the issue became clear, it was decided the product will be removed from shelves across the world and exterminated.
See what I mean?
From +972 via a @missmayim retweet
Julie
Wow…the poor word in their apology really takes the cake! WTH were they thinking?
Jessica
Yowza! Could it be possible that Zara was trying to be clever and make light of the issue? Not that that would be appropriate either, but it’s a possible explanation. Reminds me of the Eton window display in Toronto that caused a furor: http://urbanalliance.ca/2014/08/09/racially-insensitive-advertising/. It would have been fine if not for the double nooses! Eton’s apology was much better than Zara’s, though.