Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Anti-semitism on the Left

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4465
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Mar 2010, 01:20
Ideology: None
Forum Commissar
Post 23 Nov 2014, 04:03
Okay thread's over. Dagoth called it.

Dagoth wrote:
There are hardly any anti-semitic people on the Left
That vast heterogenous group which shares only the vaguest ideological kinship has been thoroughly inspected and declared clean.

Good to know! I was in danger of treating the topic seriously for second there.

Dagoth wrote:
This all sounds like a bunch of jewish comrades who still have an attachment to Zionism seeing ghosts where there are none.
Quoted for posterity.

Dagoth wrote:
Also name one other country in the world tha treats any criticism of its policy as an existential threat to their people's existence. I can't think of a single one past the mid-20th.

So these Zionists keep bringing up anti-Semitism when we want to talk about Israel....

Later:

"Let's talk about anti-semitism on the Left"

"What about Israel? Huh! How dare you!"
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 23 Nov 2014, 05:01
So that wasn't a childish response.

Anyways I wrote a long reply but it got ate up by that scum bastard safari. Key points though:
1. If there was an actual antisemitic crisis on the left there would be actual antisemitic leftist groups. There aren't outside of tiny three-man "parties".
2. Of course there are antisemites on the left but they are incredibly marginalized. Outside of pro-Zionist circles there are zero places where antisemitism is cracked down as hard on as by communists.
3. Zionists like to act like paying attention to them at all is antisemitism, let alone critique.
4. Jewish communists apparently think it's totally cool to endorse oppression against muslims but never EVER to jews.
5. The reason people focus on Palestine is because it is an old issue and there is a lot of pre-built organizational frameworks already in place. Nobody ever cared about Tamils.
6. Dismissing the oppression of one people by referencing another is despicable. Imagine if you were told to stop focusing on the holocaust by a nazi because the Americans are still genociding native Americans.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4764
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 20 Jul 2007, 06:59
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Forum Commissar
Post 23 Nov 2014, 08:37
Shigalyov wrote:
The fact that a topic about Anti-Semitism on the Left is automatically assumed to be simply diversionary tactic to take pressure of Israel is a bit worrying.


I find it worrying that you assume that what I said was that a topic about antisemitism on the left is "simply" a diversionary tactic. Let's not make a caricature of what is being said.

We do have to tackle and condemn antisemitism, as any form of prejudice or discriminatory thinking. We know that this has primarily been the ideological fodder of the right, so there's a double reason for this.
(In my experience, in Chile and Mexico, there's little antisemitism among communists, though you do find it from time to time among workers or students, and its highly prevalent among nationalists and conspiracy theory quacks.)

Now what I actually said, or tried to convey (poorly, apparently) is that the fear of antisemitism sprouting among leftists by disguising itself as criticism of Israel should weigh less than the need to condemn imperialist, discrimnatory policies by a government. I didn't say that we shouldn't do it, and I certainly didn't say it was "simply" diversionary tactics to take pressure off israel.

Quote:
So these Zionists keep bringing up anti-Semitism when we want to talk about Israel....

Later:

"Let's talk about anti-semitism on the Left"

"What about Israel? Huh! How dare you!"


I don't think that's fair, because the original post is a video about people criticizing Israel, being presented as antisemitism.
Image

"You say you have no enemies? How is this so? Have you never spoken the truth, never loved justice?" - Santiago Ramón y Cajal
Forum Rules
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 23 Nov 2014, 11:35
I just think the idea that a group of people who look up to foreign jews as heroic icons would ever be fertile ground for antisemitism is pretty ridiculous. Sure there are antisemites on the left but these tend to be fairly confused people who roller coaster around the political spectrum. This week they're a vocal Palestine Liberation, death to Israel type, next week they're a fascist anti-islam radical who suddenly views Israel as a sword for Western civilization. It's not like they're going to make friends among leftists by hating Jews.

What evidence for this supposed antisemitic current exists outside of the fact that leftism has embraced the cause of the Palestinian Nation?
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 23 Nov 2014, 11:57
Dagoth points are perfect.

Judaism is a religion, not an ethnic group. People founded a country out of a religious identity (in plain 20th century !), yet, the muslins are the only crazy radical dudes around ?

Lets suppose that all of a sudden, science finds a perfect argument against religion. One that can convince anyone that this is all bullshit.

So there are no more jews, muslins, christians etc. What happens next ?

You get a country called Israel made up from people from all over the world who opresses another group of people (this time with a lot more national identity), and no one finds this strange or out of place !
Soviet cogitations: 1128
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Aug 2008, 18:12
Party Member
Post 23 Nov 2014, 16:16
Quote:
5. The reason people focus on Palestine is because it is an old issue and there is a lot of pre-built organizational frameworks already in place. Nobody ever cared about Tamils.


You're right, but my response is: why should I (or any worker in the world outside the Middle East) care about Israel/Palestine? Why has it become such a huge focus for the left in general? We all know that if Israel stopped oppressing the Palestinians, it wouldn't mean anything for the workers of the world. Workers in Europe, America etc. would still be oppressed. Israeli and Palestinian workers would all be oppressed.

Why is the Palestinian cause such a huge deal to the left?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4764
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 20 Jul 2007, 06:59
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Forum Commissar
Post 24 Nov 2014, 07:44
Well, just for the left?

Isn't a US president's stance towards Israel usually considered a big deal? Isn't that the case for many European nations too? How about in the Middle East?

Wouldn't we say that it's usually considered a big deal by much of the Western and non-Western world? I think so, maybe not on the scale some picture it, but it seems to be a pretty big deal.

As Marxist, do we just shrug our shoulders? Do we blame it on the media, say it's a fad or it responds to psychological projections? Or do we explain it in terms of economic, social interests? Do we adventure to say that the importance on the ideological level responds to stakes on a deeper level?

I don't pretend to have any answers to any of the above questions, but I think they're worth asking and exploring.
Image

"You say you have no enemies? How is this so? Have you never spoken the truth, never loved justice?" - Santiago Ramón y Cajal
Forum Rules
Soviet cogitations: 1128
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Aug 2008, 18:12
Party Member
Post 25 Nov 2014, 20:18
Yes, you are right.

The only thing I will say though is that the Israeli bourgeoisie clearly shares a lot of class interests with the bourgeoisie in the West. However, Islamist Palestinian fanatics don't have much in common with communists. I know people like to talk about anti-imperialism and resistance against capitalism but, once we remove this, we are just saying 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'.
Soviet cogitations: 108
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Feb 2014, 12:33
Pioneer
Post 26 Nov 2014, 01:19
Quote:
You're right, but my response is: why should I (or any worker in the world outside the Middle East) care about Israel/Palestine? Why has it become such a huge focus for the left in general? We all know that if Israel stopped oppressing the Palestinians, it wouldn't mean anything for the workers of the world. Workers in Europe, America etc. would still be oppressed. Israeli and Palestinian workers would all be oppressed.

I'm guessing its partially because Soviet-deemed progressive regimes of the Syrian Ba'ath Party, Iraqi Ba'ath Party and Gamal Abdel Nasser's Egypt were deeply involved (for certain periods) in fighting what they perceived as Israeli imperialism. Also, as some users have forgotten, the Palestine Liberation Organization was a Marxist-Leninist organization until, I don't know, the Soviet Union collapsed? The point being, Soviet-deemed "progressive" movements have in general always supported the rights of Palestinians... If you look at the 2006 election results, while of course Fatah and Hamas are the largest, several remnants from the Marxist era are still able to get votes. Examples are Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Palestinian Democratic Union, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Palestinian People's Party (the former Palestinian Communist Party) who are still able to win seats. In general, Palestine is one of the few places in which communists and radical socialists groups have dominated the political landscape for several decades within the framework of liberal democracy. The question isn't really why leftists in general are interested in Palestine issue, but rather how the PLO managed to get this issue on the international social democratic agenda throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. Its an accomplishment in itself considering that the PLO was deemed as a radical nationalist communist group throughout most of the Cold War by nearly all Western countries.
Soviet cogitations: 236
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Jul 2012, 03:04
Ideology: None
Pioneer
Post 28 Nov 2014, 17:50
praxicoide wrote:
Wouldn't we say that it's usually considered a big deal by much of the Western and non-Western world?

Just because liberals do it doesn't make it a reason for Marxists to do it too... For much of the 20th century we were indistinguishable with liberals, and we combated them on virtually all fronts. Apparently at some point we married Marxism with liberalism to the point that people on the right cannot tell us apart... Liberals are against Israeli expansion because of an effort to avoid antagonizing different sides, and instead employing institutions to satisfy both sides of the conflict. It seems like we Marxists are just bandwagoning along with whatever Liberals propose on this topic, and we are doing most of the yelling and screaming.

So I agree with gRed Britain. Why should the workers make this such a priority? 200,000 people have died in Syria, and topics relating to Syria are barely on our radar. Israel, which is encouraging people to do some colonizing that we should be critical of on some scale, is hardly worthy of intense bickering.
I mean you could just sense the intense emotions by some users like AldoBrasil, MissStrangelove, and others when talking about this subject. Holy crap, it is as if they are actual people suffering from Israeli occupation.

Quote:
Or do we explain it in terms of economic, social interests?

If you want an economic explanation for Jewish settlements in the West Bank, it is because housing prices in Israel are outrageously high and opportunities are relatively low. It is the same reason why Americans on the East Coast went to the Wild West and built settlements.

The Left during this period never talked about American settlement building, and some even took part in building Utopian settlements like Robert Owen.

Anyway, the cause of Israeli settlements is capitalism, and not some inherent greed in Jews, Zionism, or whatever other premises being used by Leftists. Stop blaming Jews for this and start blaming capitalism.

AldoBrasil wrote:
Judaism is a religion, not an ethnic group.

This is a misconception. There were twelve Israelite tribes, and the Jews were one of these twelve (also the last surviving tribe). This is the reason why modern biblical researchers refer to the religion of the Israelite tribes as "YHWHism" and not "Judaism." Judaism was a later adaption during the Roman empire where the Jews were the last living Israelite tribe, and the term referred to the religion of the Jews. Since the Jews began as a tribal-state and now make up a nation-state, they are just as much a people as Russians or Germans.

The Greeks don't even call Jews "Jews." They refer to them as "Evri," which refers to the Hebrew word for the Hebrew language "Evrit."

There are also Messianic Jews, who are Jews that accept Jesus as their Messiah but who follow the Jewish tradition and claim to be part of the Jewish tribe.


Quote:
You get a country called Israel made up from people from all over the world who opresses another group of people (this time with a lot more national identity), and no one finds this strange or out of place !

The Palestinians have a stronger national identity than Jews? Name one difference between their cultural customs or language from Jordanians or Iraqis. There are none save a few words or terms, and the cultures are pretty equivalent. The Palestinians found their national identity in the 20th century along with every other Arab nation-state created in the 20th century. The Palestinian national identity actually came a little later during the Arab revolt of 1936-39, while Syrians, Iraqis, and others developed it in the 1920's. Now that Syria and Iraq are in civil wars (Syria, which was an actual region in the Ottoman empire, and therefore has the greatest claim to statehood among Arab nation-states, especially), it is a hard case to say that the 20th century project of creating nation-states has any legitimacy anymore.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 29 Nov 2014, 14:44
I think prax has got it about right. I don't think there is one universally applicable answer to the question of why Palestinian solidarity plays such a role in the communist movement, or in the left in general. But if there is one, surely not antisemitism. People who say this always talk about it through insinuation, connecting the dots, guilt by association, isolated incidents, "undercurrents", "mentalities", and so on. This is psychologisation of the political problem: antisemitism is a mental disease, and you don't know you've got it until pro-Israel leftists diagnose you with it, and the prescribed cure is always to stop talking about Israel, stop fostering solidarity with Palestine. How convenient is that?

In reality, there are plenty of political reasons. Israel's role in the Middle East is simply a very visible expression of western imperialist aggression. Its recognition as such has nothing to do with communists or leftists: it's our political leaders who make the position of Israel a matter of principle in their foreign policy. The US and Germany are leading the charge in this for various historical reasons that I'm sure are known to all, while other European and North American countries follow behind, occasionally making some noises about Israeli violence and two-state solutions.

For communists, solidarity with Palestine can never simply be empty sloganeering or supporting a "team" from the sidelines. We don't just oppose imperialism in the abstract, but also its concrete manifestations. It matters to us because we're an international movement, including an Israeli party of Jews and Arabs that supports a Palestinian state and rejects Zionism. Solidarity and cooperation on this matter is a logical move. Capitalism in its imperialist phase affects the entire world. The national oppression against the Palestinians is just one very visible expression of this. It would be monumentally stupid for us to avoid any problems beyond our own borders.

As for the assertion that the focus on Palestine is one-sided and disproportionate, I don't necessarily agree, especially not if we're going to compare it to the Syrian conflict. The Syrian situation has in fact been one of the most important issues for the communist movement, as well as for anti-war and anti-fascist movements, ever since the rebellion against Assad began. Same with other conflicts like Ukraine. In the more distant past, the struggle against Apartheid in South Africa was of tremendous importance in western countries like the UK and the Netherlands. If people can't see that, then I simply don't know what the problem is. And today, international organisations like WFDY also routinely organise solidarity with the Western Sahara, Burma, etc. It's just that these issues are so under-represented in the media that the work that other organisations are doing in this regard is invisible as well.

In any case, it would be wrong to simply reduce international affairs to a kind of "oppression Olympics" where the scale of the conflict or the number of casualties is used to determine what is the most important. It's true that the Syrian conflict has killed more people in a shorter time, yet the occupation of Palestine is a crime that has been going on for half a century. The two are linked together in any case. At the moment, it's hard to discuss the one without referring to the other.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 29 Nov 2014, 16:04
Dude ...

Quote:
There were twelve Israelite tribes, and the Jews were one of these twelve (also the last surviving tribe).


Do you trully want me to believe that all jews in the world today are somehow blood line related to the jews of the times of the "twelve tribes" (a invented term created to meet the mysticism of the early jews) ?

Judaism is a religion. Period. And the binding element of israely society IS judaism. Remove judaism and you have people from all over the world.

You say that palestinians are not much different from iraquis and etc. I dont disagree. But, their "national" identity is linked to their islamic ancestry. Their sepparation for their fellow arabians is the result of european imperialism and not of their own volution. So your argument that palestinians, syrians and iraquis are similar is just a testament that this people were submitted to a double injustice, by first being colonized by european powers (french and english) and later having their lands stolen by the jews. At least the palestinians were in the land for centuries, they do have a identity as palestinians (not as part of a separate state of palestine, but as a nation/people who lived in the part of the world for a long time).

So basically you have a nation (not a state) living in what is today called israel. Jews migrated (both before ww2 and after) to this land, they were accepted by the palestinians. Just to later get their land stolen by a israely coup and become opressed. And all in the name of a religious identity. Jew is not a nation nor a people. They are a religious group. This is not (i repeat) different than grouping a bunch of christians from all over the world into palestine to create a "christian promised land".

As usual, religion here is used as ideology to justify imperialism. This is the exact momment where religion is used as a way to create an artificial separation among the proletariat. There is the jew proletariat and the muslim proletariat. Those are artificial divisions that weaken the proletariat cause. I do believe there are nations (not nation-states, but groups of people that, due to isolation, create their own version of human civilization - and is pretty nice that this happens that way because that creates variety and adaptability) but nation-states are artificial entities and are not in the best interests of the proletariat.

In a non imperialist world, one that does not harbour unequal policies, all those cultural differences would be usefull to provide a more colorfull world. But today they are used to foment wars and to justify imperialism, while keeping the world proletariat split into factions.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1329
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Party Member
Post 29 Nov 2014, 16:42
Aldo wrote:
In a non imperialist world, one that does not harbour unequal policies, all those cultural differences would be usefull to provide a more colorfull world. But today they are used to foment wars and to justify imperialism, while keeping the world proletariat split into factions.


I couldn't agree more. Culture is an inherent human quality as opposed to strictly being a national quality and will never fade away even if the very concept of nation-states (especially based on ethnicities) becomes a thing of the past. It's a sad thing that people mixup the two and even worse when they use cultural differences to divide and conquer.

The negative, backwards, and counterproductive elements of specific cultures here and there are of course not included in my line of thought.
Image


The great art of life is sensation; to feel that you exist, even in pain.
Soviet cogitations: 236
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Jul 2012, 03:04
Ideology: None
Pioneer
Post 29 Nov 2014, 16:58
I wrote a long reply to AldoBrasil that didn't process. Screw this forum...

Here are highlights

-Jews have been found to share very similar DNA, so your claim that Jews do not have a common identity is invalid..

"Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews have roughly 30 percent European ancestry, with most of the rest from the Middle East, the two surveys find. The two communities seem very similar to each other genetically, which is unexpected because they have been separated for so long."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?_r=0

As I said, you hold misconceptions...

-Palestinians and Syrians didn't call themselves Arabs during the Ottoman empire. They called themselves "Osmanilik." Arabs only referred to Bedouin. There were no borders between places, so there were large population exchanges in the entire region. In 1878, Sultan Hamid II also had a resettlement policy for Circassians and Algerians, and many settled in the Levant. It is hard to say that Palestinians have been solely connected to just one piece of land for so long.

-Jews weren't accepted by Muslims when they arrived. Bourgeois Zionists from Europe came to modern Israel and bought farmland from the corrupt Ottoman aristocracy at inflated prices. The Ottoman empire still had a lot of vestiges of Feudal modes of production, so such transactions were accepted by Ottoman officials at the time. Zionists then kicked off peasants living on the land (as the peasants belonged to the owner of the land), and they built collective farms called Kibbutz in their stead. The Kibbutz were very attractive to many European Jews who had nothing and had socialist leanings, so they came to Israel and joined Kibbutz. This is the origin of "Zionist migration."

However, Jews have had a large population in cities like Jerusalem since the 16th century.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 29 Nov 2014, 17:04
As a side note, i want to stress a certain point.

While i have nothing to do to talk about a certain religious identity, i do have something to say about israel.

Israel is the parameter country to talk about religious opression. No, its not about preventing someone to worship a different god inside israeli lands (as some wahabi islamists do), but, when a certain religious group - under the banner of religious freedom - imposes their view on the life and peace of other people, this is the absolute oposite of religious freedom.

I might recognize that jews have a "religious dream" about a promised land. And i am ok with this. But as soon as other people, who believe in other faith, suffer the consequences of this "religious dream", then, they are being forced to surmount the practical consequences of a religion that is not theirs. This is not religious freedom. This is opression plain and simple. If we are going to support Israel in the name of jew religious freedom from prosecution, this becomes hypocritical when we do so while supporting the opression of another faith.

And thats the whole point. The only element that binds jew faith to that exact spot in the world is a religious identity. Remove judaism and they could very well have settled in the middle of antarctica (provided we did have the technology to do so).

Thats not much to say besides that. I fail to see how a militant israelist would argue above this point. Usually their rethorics revolve around religious concepts, as if we were forced to believe in what they do believe, and take this seriously.

Apart from that, i am usually a christian (not a good one at that) so from my point of view, i fail to see how Jesus would support the invasion of another country on such basis. Being practical is i believe he was, he might very well migrate to EUA due to the sheer cost of suffering that Israel produces to keep its existence as a country. He would say "Israel is wherever my brothers are, wherever my father ordains it to be, or wherever someone follows the will of my father, Israel is whatever people who love my father" or something to that effect. (If you want to know my standpoint as a person with a christian background)
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 29 Nov 2014, 17:10
Quote:
-Jews have been found to share very similar DNA, so your claim that Jews do not have a common identity is invalid..


Brazilians have been found to not share a very similar DNA. Lets split Brazil into thousands of countries right now ! Americans have been found to not share a very similar DNA, lets restart the american secession war !!

You should agree with me that this genetic centered concept of country is even more artificial than the illuminist concept of nation. Its something that could very well bind Nazis and Zionists in the same camp (They too believed in such genetics based nationalism). Besides that, i dont believe Jews share a very similar DNA (pls point me a really big genetic study that prove that and that can prove that we can split the world in historical-ethnical lines by simply using genetic material as the basis). Secondly, even if true, Jews are not much different from other semites. If a group of peoples in this world is related to the historical jews from before the diaspora, those are the arabians and afro-semites.

Actually, historically, the people who later would become the biblical hebrews (and later jews) are related to mesopotamic and arabian ancestry. There is even a tradition to attribute the sons of Noah to each of the countries of biblical traditions (Syrians, Nestorians, Ethiopians etc). So the genetic argument would point that Jews and Muslims are more related than Muslims and say, brazilians.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 29 Nov 2014, 17:24
I believe jews - while talking among jews - justify Israel existence on religious ground. Something like "We are here because we are the people of God and God wants us to have this land". I find it hard to believe Jews use the prosecution or other kinds of more rational arguments to justify Israel existence while not talking to people who could be more criticial of their true thought. Genetics, history, persecution bla bla bla are good excuses to be used while in public or while being listened to by people who could think otherwise, while inside their minds they hould the same exceptionalist thinking that claims they are the only people who God loves. The people who are allowed even to commit crimes - if they are done against the "samaritans" - in the name of their exclusivity towards God. I do trully believe they believe God is theirs exclusively, because they are the people of the "promise", while us are devoid of the "true god" because we are the people of the "flesh".

Honestly, i find that concept of exclusiveness towards God the dangerest thing among Jews.

On another side note. I find your argument about Jews being 30% genetically different amusing !

If two persons are 30% genetically different, we might very well have not two separate ethnicities, but two whole different SPECIES. 30% is enough to turn a sardine into a dinossaur...

On genetics reasearch the element most used to track peoples are the mithocondrial DNA. And the differences among two groups are not in the order of 30% of the genetic material. Usually they are on the order of one or two genes... Because 30% is so much in genetics, this would yield another species, even another reign in nature. But, one or two genes doesnot give the kind of certainty you think they do. You could very well have a brazilian indian sharing the same gene with a aboriginal australian.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 238
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jun 2011, 15:14
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 01 Dec 2014, 06:48
Havee3333333 wrote:
.
I am not like these fox news bastards who are denouncing the left and socialism for this tendency. I think we just need to have a compromise and treat Israel like we treat Germany, France, Russia, or other modern nation-states. None of these nation-states are actively criticized for merely existing, and a compromise has to be made that Israel will exist in the same fashion that the listed nation-states do in the modern world. Once such a compromise is made, we can distinguish who among us is really an anti-imperialist against Israeli expansion and a blatant antisemite. Because I was banned on RevLeft two years ago for defending a guy who said Israel had a right to exist, and I am not very fond of people who say Jews will be pushed into the ocean as Hamas and the PLO have said. I am also not supportive of an attempt to rebuild a single Palestinian state (something the Brits created in 1920 with the intention that Palestinians would refer to Zionist Jews) where all Jewish political parties will be banned and the same people who have traditionally called for mass Jewish deportation and/or genocide coming to power.
If Germany were to exist as a Volksgemeinschaft then you might have a point. However Germany is now a multi-ethnic society. And I can not think of any nation, or even state, besides Israel, where citizenship is granted based upon ethno-religious criteria. Adolf Hitler, in "Mein Kampf" gave a similar criteria for immigration to the German fatherland http://www.mondopolitico.com/library/meinkampf/v2c3.htm, but of course he failed in his attempt to establish such an Aryan empire. By the same logic, or lack there of, by you rabbi, it would be anti-Germanic to criticize the Third Reich Germany as a folk state. As for Revleft, I myself have been restricted on there for among one other thing, expressing support for the Third Camp. Apparently, if anyone on there is opposed at all to such militant groups as Hamas, or Hezbollah, they'll be liable to get confined to "Opposing Ideologies". And what's worse is that they do not even give a list of unacceptable opinions, in respects to a party line. So you can end up being deemed politically incorrect, without even trying to be contrary. So yes, since you mentioned it, I am glad that there is Soviet-Empire.com, where those such as you, a relative of Holocaust victims I suppose, can discuss matters with the likes of me, a likely relative of Adolf Hitler. Seriously, though I sincerely regard myself as being a Communist, and am not by any valid definition anti-Jewish, I appear to be a cousin so many times removed from Hitler. My surname is Stumpner, and if you look at this family tree of Adolf Hitler, you'll find that his great-great grandmother was a Stumpner http://www.wargs.com/other/hitler.html. Also, Hitler mentioned in Mein Kampf that his family originated in Bavaria, as did mine. So perhaps there is some historic link between Communists and anti-Semitism after all.
Seriously though, there have been some socialists whom made anti-Semitic statements that would have rivaled that of the National Socialists. So this is not something new. Case in point, Pierre Proudhon, whom made this statement https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/1847/jews.htm. And even though he was a Jew himself, some consider "On THe Jewish Question", by Karl Marx to have been anti-Semitic as well, to a lesser degree at least. But as oft been stated, " "Anti-Semitism is the socialism of fools". And as Dagoth Ur pointed out, it would be ludicrous for Marxist-Leninists, whom emulate so many figures whom were Jewish, to be espousing anti-Semitism. Why even Lenin himself was a Mischling http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/24/vladimir-lenin-jewish-roots-moscow-museum_n_866098.html.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1329
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Sep 2011, 13:51
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Party Member
Post 01 Dec 2014, 17:18
Thanks for some interesting links there Jason.

Although I of course knew that Lenin had some Jewish roots, I still found the link especially interesting to me personally because it says that he was of some Ukrainian Jewish origins specifically from the city of Zhytomyr which is where my mother is from. I've also wondered whether I myself am of some Jewish origins considering that my mother's family are of Polish descent who resided in the city of Zhytomyr which was famous for its significant Jewish population. The fact that my uncle married a Jew and bore two sons with her just makes me wonder even more. I've asked my grandmother if her grandparents were of Jewish origin who converted to Christianity before they emigrated from Poland to Ukraine (Russian Empire) but to her knowledge she's always said no.

Still it's a trip when you think that so many prominent communists who were part of the revolution were of Ukrainian/Jewish origins including people like Trotsky (who spoke fluent Ukrainian), Zinoviev, and now according to the article Lenin.

Then there were other leaders of the USSR like Brezhnev who was ethnically Ukrainian while Khrushchev (who made his fondness for the Ukraine well-known) practically spent his entire youth in the Donbass and later in other parts of the Ukraine under the patronage/tutelage of "Iron" Lazar Kaganovich who again was himself a Ukrainian Jew who served as First Secretary of the Communist Party of Ukraine.


Jason24 wrote:
Apparently, if anyone on there is opposed at all to such militant groups as Hamas, or Hezbollah, they'll be liable to get confined to "Opposing Ideologies".


I'd like to stress that besides the cause for Palestinian Liberation Hamas and Hezbollah have absolutely nothing in common; neither in their ideologies nor in their politics.

Hamas impose Sharia law in Gaza while Hezbollah on the other hand do not in areas under their control.

All of Hamas's offices inside Lebanon have been ordered closed by Hezbollah officials for more than two years now mainly because of Hamas's anti-Bashar sectarian stance; with political ties between the two organisations officially over.

Palestinian refugees were treated in Syria better than in any other country. Syria was the only Arab country that permitted Palestinians residing within the same rights as Syrians themselves while Palestinians in Lebanon for example hardly have any rights. In Syria they were given the right to work, own property/businesses, healthcare, education etc. In Lebanon they can't work outside of their refugee camps and are not allowed to purchase land.

A significant portion (but not all) of the Palestinian political sphere including Hamas within and outside Syria immediately took sides with the FSA and later on with other Jihadi/Wahhabi organisations against the Syrian Arab Army from the onset of the Syrian civil war. This was a grand betrayal of the long standing Syrian support for the Palestinian cause as well as a spit in the face of Syria's hospitality to Palestinian refugees. Since then Hezbollah have not been on good terms with Hamas and no longer permit Hamas to operate within Lebanon.

So whenever Nasrallah makes a speech in support of Palestine, always bear in mind that he's supporting the civilian population of Palestine and not Hamas itself.
Image


The great art of life is sensation; to feel that you exist, even in pain.
Soviet cogitations: 236
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Jul 2012, 03:04
Ideology: None
Pioneer
Post 03 Dec 2014, 00:25
AldoBrasil, enough... I am not going to get into a long emotional discussion about this.

Here was your original claim, "Judaism is a religion, not an ethnic group," and your supplementary claim "Remove judaism and you have people from all over the world."

You have been proven wrong through historical data (Jews originated from a tribe) and DNA (which proves that the genetic similarities between Jews keeps the original tribal link intact regardless of the diaspora).

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?_r=1&

The purpose of the historical data was to prove the first claim wrong, while the purpose of the data about DNA was to prove the supplementary claim wrong. The data about the DNA was only to address your belief that Jews are just a bunch of European converts with no relation to the original historical Jewish tribe - I made no reference to building a national theory based on genetics, rather my goal has been to stress the Judean tribal origins of the Jewish people, and a claim that Israel is the legitimate nation-state of the Jewish people (who have their origin from the Judean tribe). I am not promoting nationalism here, rather I am calling for equal treatment of Israel compared to all other respective nation-states in the world.

You don't have anything left to say, so I am moving on to the next person...

Jason24 wrote:
And I can not think of any nation, or even state, besides Israel, where citizenship is granted based upon ethno-religious criteria.

Umm... How about the German law of return for Volga Germans after the dissolution of the Soviet Union? I will only address this sentence because all the other stuff was comparing Israel to Nazi Germany - a comparison I hope you can understand isn't very accurate by the link below showing other countries with respective right of return regimes.

Israel citizenship can also be granted through naturalization by living in the country legally for 5 year.

As for Aliyah (Jewish right of return), here is a list of countries granting similar practices: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return

If you are going to continue this conversation, please explain why Israel's right of return should be given particular attention compared to other country's right of return regimes.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron