And it made me debate myself once again: Was the antisemitism in history justified? I simply can't get myself to believe that thousands of years of antisemitism all around the earth came out of nowhere and have absolutely no foundation other than "hey yea lets hate jews!". But at the same time I could imagine that they were just used as scapegoats with no real justification. There were very few proven cases of blood libel where jews killed infants as religious rituals. Were a couple of murders enough to ban them from most of Europe? I can't imagine that either.
I am really lost with this entire topic. I can't decide on whether its complete bullshit or the jewish conspiracy theory is based on real stuff.
Jews were a scapegoat used by rulers whenever times were bad. They also tend to, uhm, have a very strong in-group preference. Both of these things are true, but moreso the former.
I don't understand how me stating this is idpol? I don't support the persecution of any group except for fascists.
Did user say anything wrong?
Martin Luther turned against jews when they refused to convert
Jews were hated in christian Europe because they were the only religious minority, making them easy targets. Everything else was related to conquest and their resistance to it.
It's literally just some Holla Forums asshat who thinks he can get you to hate Jews if he calls not hating Jews idpol
a simple "no you colossal faggot" would suffice
OP Here: Well, I'd prefer to be able to provide people actual arguments if I will be confronted about it in the future. That's why I made this.
You really shouldn't talk about this, y'know. It tends to attract undesirable opinions.
for anti-semites facts don't matter. The second you try and argue with them based on evidence or reason they'll pull out their inforgraphics and run away declaring victory.
If one group declares itself the übermensch with all others being appointed as servants by god, those other people tend to not like that.
For some reason Holla Forums fully understands this except when it comes to jews.
How do I refute the argument that it has been proven that Jews killed babies as religious rituals?
The blood libel has never been proven. However, that user is right, anti-semites do not care about facts or speaking in good faith. Sartre's "Anti-Semite and Jew" is a really good analysis of how this thought originates and why it's pervasive.
God chose Jacob instead of Esau. Esau's descendants have been incredibly buttfrastred about it ever since.
The whole Jews are a chosen people thing is not about some inherent superiority, but about the idea that the biblical Israelites and their descendants (whom very few Ashkenazi Jews are descended from) are in a covenant, that is to say agreement, with God.
Christians hate Jews because they secretly hate Christianity and resent the Jews for helping create it. It's the classic hating someone else because you hate yourself routine. You can easily see this in other questions: if the Jews are so bad what does it say that Europeans are "dominated" by them, a much smaller contingent? Pathetic, no? Why does the biggest European religion have to do with the deification and worship of a Jew?
There are no good antisemitic answers to these questions because the Europeans did it to themselves. Europeans adopted Christianity willingly and forced it on the Roman Empire because they liked the story of the suffering God. Meanwhile the Jews themselves kept their heads because they're still waiting for the Messiah and don't have to rationalize why they world is terrible even after the Messiah came.
Jews have done well because they arbitrarily decided they were a group and have been working with each other. All the attempts at Euro nationalism since then, in reaction, ironically represent the Judaification of European peoples. You hate kikes so… you want to be exactly like them? Sure…
You can't base what you should do off of what you think le Jews want you to do, because they'll just convince you they think the opposite of what they want you to do. Being so stupid makes you easy to manipulate. It should be obvious that the source of the power of the Jews is property, and its only by negating property that you can free yourself from the Jews. Because whatever Jews you hate are already working with your own elite. Its past the time when you can throw them out of the country because governments rely on markets now. It's an MAD situation.
So we can see the biggest psyop of the rulers and the rich Jews is convincing everyone communism has been tried and is a dead end, when if you compare history to the theory of communism its obvious that it has not yet run its course. Abolishing private property and collectivizing things might seem like the Judaification of the entire world, but that's not true. The Jewish mentality relies on being a bubble of civilization in the barbarized wilderness, whereas world communism pierces all bubbles and opens the challenge of universal civil society and therefore true accountability.
If you are chosen by God, everything is permitted, hence the celebration of genocide among Jews. Even if no text explicitly states superiority, you can't expect people to be raised to believe that their God flattened cities for them and not have this lead to a racist othering. Not even the nazi's went as far as to say that the creator of matter and time itself chose the Germans as his people and murdered other races for their benefit.
Judaism is not the only religion that does this, for fucks sake Christianity says that eveyone but its followers can expect eternal torment (or annihilation depending on your interpretation) in the lake of fire after the final judgement, the descriptions of conquests and genocide are really just a product if their time, that's just how militarybaction worked at the time those stories are set.
"user SAID NOTHING WRONG!"
Antisemitism is simply a natural response to Jews jewing.
So was the holocaust, but I don't think you'd take celebrating that product as well as you do with Jewish celebrations of genocide. The intrinsic difference between Jewish and Christian othering is that for Christians, the other is a soul to be saved, there being no difference between the substance of soul between Christian and heathen, for the Jews however, the difference between Jew and gentile is of that between man and cattle.
Yeah, but Christianity and Islam ain't ethno-religions. They actually try to get as many followers as possible no matter who they are or once were, but Judaism's only for a select few based on matrilineal bloodlines. If your mum ain't a Jew, you ain't a Jew.
Judaism allows for converts. As I pointed out earlier, nearly all ashkenazi jews are descended from white converts, not biblibal israrlites.
Most jews do not believe this, perhaps the extremely orthodox who often don't even speak English even whilst living in America. More to the point though, what material impact does this part of their theology have? I really don't give a shit if increasingly fringe synagogues have this as part of their scripture. In the same way I don't give a shit about the 5% nation, it's irrelevant.
Good luck tryna get them to admit that…
Luther was a fucking asshole. Read The Peasant War in Germany.
Then how can they have the rule that the child of a Jewess is a Jew? If conversion is allowed, this makes no sense.
That's not what they themselves believe. Creationists also descend from apes, this doesn't mean that they aren't creationists.
If you can provide me with information on which part of Jewish teachings they have discarded and with what reasoning I'll appreciate it.
Racism towards gentiles.
Most Jewish outreach programs make very clear that Jews are not in fact superior to gentiles. Such as chabad or jewfaq. Their reasoning is insanely warped and complicated and I won't make any attempt to delve into talmudic debate. It's a common punchline in Jewish humor how factional it can all get but suffice it to say, the reasoning is present.
Also, are you trying to deny the existence of converts? A very quick google search could eliminate this mystery for you. Judaism is an old religion, like Hinduism or Zoroastrianism, it still has traditions and practices from when religions generally weren't universal and ethnic groups remained within their religions. The matrilineal rule was probably founded as a way to keep cohesion during times of occupation and conquest, of which there were quite a few.
I can't help but feel this is dramatic since historically it has been Jews that have had to worry about prejudice far more than the other way around. But as I've said, the overwhelming majority of Jews are reform or secular, this idea of Jewish supremacy isn't popular even among the devout and certainly not among the regular people you're likely to interact with. If there's any haughtiness or nepotism present then it's the exact same amount you'd find in any cultural or ethnic group.
I know that the Talmud has so many rules for every detail of life that when fully applied, would make 1984(which isn't that far of from the lives of hasidic Jews) look like a rave festival. If we take the need to work around law as a shield from criticism of those who confess to said law however, then any and all ideology and religion would be immune from criticism, since none of them are a perfected actuality of their doctrine.
I find it highly unlikely that their dominance of banking and media has any other explanation, certainly with the hypocrisy Jews convey about this. If whites being over-represented two times is indicative of a white supremacy, then why isn't Jews being over-represented 30 times indicative of Jewish supremacy?
Let's take the example of Jewish fraternities -open to atheistic Jews too, so the excuse that they're merely religious clubs can't be used- there is no controversy over them, but if there were to be a white fraternity, that excluded Jews, then the Jews would cry anti-semitism, and have the media, politics and courts descend upon them. How would you explain this then, the common excuse of Jews being a minority who need a helping hand can't be used either, since they are already in a better position than whites.
It doesn't matter if they don't believe that, the genetic record is clear, askenazi jews are of white ethnicities, which means conversion happened at some point and was allowed to happen without any major trouble.
The intersection of religion and ethtnicity in the ruminations of "who is a jew" is something still hotly debated by jewish scholars.
Hating Jews as a race is irrational and never justified. Hating the Jewish religion however, is a very different story.
There has been actual on the books racism here in the United States to the benefit of white people. The presence of successful whites is not an argument for most whites having white supremacist beliefs. But instead that such inequality is the legacy of historical white supremacism. Jews in America enjoy a level of success due to a variety of factors, many of them cultural, such as in a strong study-ethic and status oriented family life, but probably more than a little nepotism as well. No doubt much of this nepotism was spurred from The discrimination they faced from broader society. You speak of Hollywood for example but Jews were forced to flee to Hollywood as the more dug in institutions were not welcoming. Who exactly can you blame for their dominance there then. The difference is in the narrative offered. Anti-semites usually claim that these are traits unique to Judaism and that response with force is justified. I don't think it is a good thing for Jewish people to be clannish and insular, as I don't think it is for any group, but these are not uniquely Jewish traits. American hindus and Chinese have all the same stereotypes, but usually without the accusation of being inherently scheming or evil, as is the case in anti semitism.
There are many unsavory elements of the Jewish religion and culture but to consider them especially egregious to the extent that the entire Jewish people can be scapegoated is the irrational complex we call anti-Semitism. And from a Marxist pov singling out the Jews for special consideration is mostly worthless. A prole is a prole, a bourgeois is a bourgeois, the Jewishness is immaterial and irrelevant. It is one of many factors that has historically been used to distract from class struggle.
He's right, faggot. Jews are a problem in so far as they are insular. This goes for any group, and this is exactly what Marx says in his book on the jewish question: jews are only free when freed from judaism. Rightists are fucking morons though and their answer to jews being insular is 1) for their preferred group to become just as insular 2) treat jews as inferior The real solution is to rid them of their insularism (is that a word) and treat them as equals
It didn't come out of no where. It came out of the theological narrative of the Jews being collectively responsible for deicide coupled with the general theme throughout every nation ever of using minorities as a scapegoat. The reason the Jews managed to be so enduring is because of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, the way Jews are particularly insular and unlikely to integrate into host populations and the fact that every nation in Europe is Christian, the only way to escape would be to leave Europe.
It's not just Jews this happened to, for quite a few centuries in England they were much more liable to blame random problems on Catholics, oppress Catholics and get all ornery about prominent figures possibly being secret Catholics or in league with the Catholics. I imagine it was similar elsewhere in the world.
It still is. In Indonesia, the Chineses plays the role of the Jews.
LOL Christianity and Islam are both derived from Judaisim. They're basically Judaism that's supposed to be for everyone. But of course they never can be and just recreate the Jewish dynamic on a larger scale.
What I would like you to do is respond to what I said about the enigma of ethnic Jewish fraternities, which shouldn't be accepted based on your reasoning due to them being fundamentally racist.
These are categories that don't actually exist in the way of things, no more than a division of classes between those who use wrenches and those who don't exists. They're artificial constructs that have nothing to do with the true nature of social rank and file, not even after 70 years of it being rammed into their heads did the soviet people truly internalize it, it forever remains an alien doctrine.
I thought you would be able to infer what I think of those fraternities. Obviously I don't approve. But again, context, wouldn't surprise me if many of them were formed in the times where Jewish people banded together out of necessity more than choice.
Rest of your post is drivel. Relations to capital are very real and very material.
It's really all Jews all the way down. That's why I'm zoroastrian now
I am able to do that just fine. You don't approve, because you're not a racist, and obviously most Jews won't approve either because they're not racist segregationists, but this disapproval is only held nominally when questioned to keep coherency. It doesn't activate the superego like a no-niggers fraternity for white men does.
I didn't say they weren't real, I said the categories are an alien doctrine and not truly representative of what constitutes class. Marxists can't differentiate between the two, not consciously that is.
I read his book. He was nice to try to convert them at first But when he kept failing he became a bitter dick Christians wanted to remove Jews because they knew the ugly truth