Is this anti-semitism?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
I saw this headline and expected to read on and be saddened by the knock-on effects of recent anti-American and anti-Israeli feeling. But on examining it, I don't think I think much of the questions in the survey, or rather the interpretation being put on them.

Nearly 18% said Judaism was “intolerant” and 17% did not consider Jews compatriots.. Sure, that's anti-semitism pure and simple.

Asked if Jews in their countries had a “mentality and lifestyle” different than other citizens, 46% said yes.

Is this? Not all Jewish people, no. But if they choose to participate in Jewish culture, then yeah, why not? I'd say the same about any cultural group, including those that I belong to. Nothing wrong with difference, or acknowledging it. I thought that was what a multi-cultural society was about,

I'm not even sure the money question is a surefire way of exposing bigotry. So what if a culture is associated with professions like banking and so on? My Parsee ancestors held a similar position in India. Big deal.

Anti-Semitic Europe signalled by survey

Nearly half of those asked in a poll on anti-Semitism in Europe yesterday said Jews in their nations were different, and more than one-third said Jews should stop “playing the victim” for the Holocaust.
The poll by the Ipso research institute was conducted in nine countries, including Britain.
The poll, released on the eve of a Holocaust memorial day in many European countries, came after Jewish leaders claimed anti-Semitism was rising across the continent.
Asked if Jews in their countries had a “mentality and lifestyle” different than other citizens, 46% said yes.
About 40.5% said Jews in their country had “a particular relationship with money” and 35.7% said Jews “should stop playing the victim for the Holocaust and the persecutions of 50 years ago”.
Nearly 18% said Judaism was “intolerant” and 17% did not consider Jews compatriots.
“Obviously the virus of anti-Semitism is far more resilient and determined than we might have thought in the past,” said Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee.
“What’s more amazing than the percentage of people who hold those opinions is the percentage of people willing to express them,” he added.
France refuted Israeli charges of rising anti-Semitism, saying attacks on Jews and Jewish property had dropped by 36% last year rather than doubled, as Israel’s minister for diaspora affairs has asserted.
The Interior Ministry reacted a day after Natan Sharansky said 47% of all anti-Semitic attacks in Europe last year occurred in France.–AP

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:35 (seventeen years ago) link

It's very tricky. Nearly 18% said Judaism was “intolerant” -- even that isn't necessarily anti-semitic; I would saw that Islam, or any faith, really, is "intolerant" too. The Holocaust point is probably more worrying -- this was a cross-Europe poll, so held in countries considerably more culpable in this respect than the UK. Many quasi-Leftists fall on this position when attacking Israel, which is a vile position to hold, lacking in sympathy -- and I'm speaking as someone who is critical of Israel.

Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:39 (seventeen years ago) link

I've often thought the biggest problem with the often nebulous and knee-jerk accusations of anti-semitism is that there is an extri special word for it (ie it ain't called Anti-Judaism). Islamophobic is incleasingly being brought in to mean a similar kind of thing for Islam - though certainly not as loaded. But there is no real offical word for hating Christians.

Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:46 (seventeen years ago) link

It's not vile to be desperately upset with Israel's treatment of Palestinians is it, given the circumstances of the founding of Israel from a political standpoint? Admittedly, the founding of Israel on the ground kinda started to whole treatment of Palestinaians thing thing, but...

Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:48 (seventeen years ago) link

Hmm, the Holocaust one I'm not entirely convinced about, Enrique. Some Jewish people argue, not that it is time to forget, but time to get out of a victim-casting obsession with past persecution. Not because they are self-haters, but because they think it helps Jewish culture move on, and because in certain hands, the Holocaust issue is almost used as a trump card in all arguments, which is obviously irritating.

I accept that “Jews should stop playing the victim for the Holocaust and the persecutions of 50 years ago” is anastily-worded statement and I'm not saying I would agree with it. And yeah, maybe it's not for gentiles to say any of these things anyway.

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:50 (seventeen years ago) link

It's a bit vile to say that Israel only exists because the Jews 'used' the Holocaust as leverage, which is what a lot of revisionist leftists do in their attempt to undermine Israel's legitimacy as a nation. In its less nuanced uses, this is what the Finkelstein book does. Obviousy it shouldn't be used to justify current hostilities against the Palestinians, but I can understand why it was used back in the 1940s, when the area was a British mandate-colony.

Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 12:52 (seventeen years ago) link

What we learned from the Holocaust is that it is a very wrong idea to separate people out according to religion/sexuality (remember Catholics and homosexuals also suffered there), place them in internment camps and then kill them. What we learned from apartheid is that it is wrong to separate people out by skin colour and deny them access to cities and areas and basic civil rights as if on a whim. I would suggest to Israelis of a 'pioneer' bent to learn from the Holocaust and apartheid the lesson about onetime victims relishing their turn on bully duty, and to find a way to resist.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:00 (seventeen years ago) link

i thought it said 'jews should stop "playing the violin" for the holocaust'... i wish they had worded it that way because i don't think nearly as many people would be in favour of stopping violins!

jeremy jordan (cruisy), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:01 (seventeen years ago) link

Is it racist to say that a religion is intolerant? It would certianly be racist to say that Jews were intolerant.

It is not true that Judaism is intolerant, but saying it is might have all manner of motives, not necessarily racist ones. Although not excluding racist ones, either. For instance, someone might believe that Judaism is intolerant because its rituals can comes across as dogmatic and strict, such as not allowing you to use the car on a Friday. But this is not actually intolerance. To say that Judaism is intolerant implies that the religion or the culture has no sympathy for outsiders or other cultures. This is not true. Judaism, like Islam, is a religion of love and charity, which is not confined to the community but extends as far as loving the enemy.

Of course, I'm not talking about any particular state or government here, just the teachings of the religions.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:02 (seventeen years ago) link

Um, the Balfour Declaration dates back to long before the Holocaust.

Ricardo (RickyT), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:03 (seventeen years ago) link

How much of the fear and mistrust of Judaism comes from it being a non-evangelical religion (menkos Jews 4 Jebus notwithstanding).

Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:05 (seventeen years ago) link

Um, the Balfour Declaration dates back to long before the Holocaust.

Sure it does, but the Holocaust was a major part of the ideological constellation that led to Israel being set up. As you know, the Balfour declaration was no road-map, and of course had its Nazi counterparts (ie setting up of Jewish homeland far away from Europe).

Judaism, like Islam, is a religion of love and charity, which is not confined to the community but extends as far as loving the enemy. But neither are interpreted like that, or at least they aren't so often. The problem is the conflation of race and religion -- I think Ed made me think on this. I don't think it's racist to take issue with faith -- no-one will call me racist for having a problem with Christianity's views on homosexuality, for example.


Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:10 (seventeen years ago) link

You're right, Enrique, about no-one calling you racist for taking issue with Christianity's dogma on sexuality. But what about the statement that Judaism might be about love and charity in principle but is is not interpreted like that? Do you mean actual Jews don't act out of love and charity? Or do you mean gentiles don't regard Judaism as about love and charity?

If you think that Judaism is about love and charity but Jews don't act as if it is, then that's already sounding like an attack on the race not the religion to me...

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:14 (seventeen years ago) link

Pete, that's not at the heart of it at all. The Romans/Greeks didn't really 'get' monotheism, but it's the crapness of Christianity and its prostletysing that created a great deal of anti-Semitic sentiment, what with chasing the money-lenders out of the temple yada yada and people judging ALL Jews as usurers/cash-obsessed/cleverer than. I'm pretty bloody thankful I went to school with thousands of Jews, because they had in their favour a belief in the power of learning and education being a pathway to aspirations. Their parents were the best agitators for getting stuff done for everyone in my town that I've ever experienced.

Again: all bigotry is a manifestation of the bigot's insecurity, usually unsubstantiated.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:18 (seventeen years ago) link

So, has anybody got any idea why someone would say that Judaism is intolerant? (I'm not asking if any of you are racist, I'm just wondering if anyone has any examples or good guesses about purported Judaic intolerance... And I mean the religion, not the state or Isreal or somesuch)

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:21 (seventeen years ago) link

Hmm, interesting. I suppose I was thinking that the idea of not wanting to spread "the good news", being a closed community pretty much marks you out as The Other, but certainly the other factors you point out seem a fair bit more convincing.

How has Christianity dealt with the Jesus as king of Jews thing?

Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Dave, you've already said it's intolerant of several things (like allowing you to use the car on a Friday). You also explained why this doesn't mean the same as 'intolerant' to you. I understand that, but 'intolerant' means different things to different people.

Perhaps the main point of this thread was that I hate ambiguously worded questionnaires, esp. if they're deliberately so.

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:26 (seventeen years ago) link

because people conflate judaism with the state of isreal?

Stringent Stepper (Stringent), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Or with 'all Jewish people'.

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:33 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't mean that it doesn't mean intolerant to me, I mean it is not what intolerant means. Intolerance is an unwillingness to endure differing opinions. Religious Law is not intolerant of those who break religious law. Laws are not opinions, so flouting the law is not a differing opinion either.

If you are a Jew, you do not drive etc on the Sabbath. This is a ritual by which you live a religious life. It is the code by which you get closer to god. That is not intolerant. Judaism would be intolerant if it forbid non-Jews to drive etc on the Sabbath.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:34 (seventeen years ago) link

good point, what about forcible removal of non-jews and 'pioneer' settling though?

Stringent Stepper (Stringent), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:35 (seventeen years ago) link

That's Isreal, not Judaism

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:37 (seventeen years ago) link

Is a state intolerant for forbidding someone to open his business, or restricting his hours of busines by law on the Sabbath no matter what his religion?

Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:37 (seventeen years ago) link

in·tol·er·ant    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (n-tlr-nt)
adj.

Not tolerant, especially:
a. Unwilling to tolerate differences in opinions, practices, or beliefs, especially religious beliefs.
b. Opposed to the inclusion or participation of those different from oneself, especially those of a different racial, ethnic, or social background.
c. Unable or unwilling to endure or support: intolerant of interruptions; a community intolerant of crime.


I'd say a) is pretty different to b)

N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:38 (seventeen years ago) link

That's Isreal, not Judaism
-- run it off (davebeec...), January 27th, 2004 1:37 PM.


because people conflate judaism with the state of isreal?
-- Stringent Stepper (stringen...), January 27th, 2004 1:30 PM.

there you go mate

Stringent Stepper (Stringent), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:39 (seventeen years ago) link

the State may well be intolerant if it restricted business hours for citizens who don't share the law of the Sabbath, but the religion isn't intolerant because the state does this.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:40 (seventeen years ago) link

So, if the problem is the conflation of the state and the religion, does that mean it is racist to say that Judaism is intolerant instead of saying that Isreal is intolerant?

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:41 (seventeen years ago) link

not racist, I mean anti-semitic...

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:41 (seventeen years ago) link

Huzzah, The UK is intolerant (no shock there....)

Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Well, a lot of places in London settled by Jews had Sunday trading by dint of being closed on Saturday for Sabbath: see Brick Lane/Whitechapel, Golders Green/Hampstead.

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:44 (seventeen years ago) link

the religion isn't intolerant because the state does this

I don't know enough about the tenets of Judaism to go into it, but by analogy -- it *is* intolerant if it sanctions the law, surely?

Judaism != Jews, maybe, run it off? It's clumsy, but race and religion are not the same. So it isn't racist to criticize a faith? I doin't know.

Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:46 (seventeen years ago) link

Religious Law is not intolerant of those who break religious law.

Surely religious las IS intolerant of people who break it. I'm guessing there must be punishments for transgression, even if it's just an evil look during church - and that kind of emotional punishment can be extremely effective/painful, especially in close-knit communities and ones where the people have a God's good will yo lose.



Laws are not opinions, so flouting the law is not a differing opinion either.
If you are a Jew, you do not drive etc on the Sabbath. This is a ritual by which you live a religious life. It is the code by which you get closer to god. That is not intolerant. Judaism would be intolerant if it forbid non-Jews to drive etc on the Sabbath.

-- run it off (davebeec...), January 27th, 2004.

Laws are opinions, they're (usually(should be!)) the opinion of the majority as to how individuals should behave.

Also, not being allowed to drive on a Sunday (or Saturday) IS intolerant: intolerant toward Jews. I think most religions are least tolerant of their own.

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Laws are opinions, they're (usually(should be!)) the opinion of the majority as to how individuals should behave.

That's a bit of a shallow view of jurisprudence.

Ricardo (RickyT), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 13:55 (seventeen years ago) link

jurisprudence = ideological screen for repressive state apparatus

Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 14:00 (seventeen years ago) link

how could a religion as old as the hills sanction a state as young as Isreal? Still less the acts of the leaders of such a state.

The ideological screen idea is itself an ideological screen.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 14:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Ideologies don't screen. They are productive not obstructive. Eagleton at one point uses the example of the phrase "the Prince of Wales is a nice chap". This is ideological because it produces a certain effect (support for the Royals as people) not because it hides the real social relations (Royals are social leeches, or etc). The fact that it makes no mention of politics, economics, and so on does not mean that it is a screen any more than a black and white photo can be said to be a screen against colour.

As such, juridprudence is not an ideological screen; it is ideological. That doesn't mean it is no different from other ideas or opinions. Opinions that are ratified and authorised are not opinions in the same way as opinions that are not.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 14:41 (seventeen years ago) link

Sorry -- it was just my little joke. Nonetheless, I think it's interestingly provocative to call laws 'opinions'.

Enrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 14:46 (seventeen years ago) link

yes, I agree.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:02 (seventeen years ago) link

Hey, we Jews are barely tolerant of each other, let alone the rest of you.

Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:12 (seventeen years ago) link

Enough with the kvetching!

suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:41 (seventeen years ago) link

kvetching - one of my favourites. A friend calls her young baby a kvetch box

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:47 (seventeen years ago) link

Every time you moan you have to put a coin in the kvetch box.

Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:55 (seventeen years ago) link

[all babies are young, aren't they... doh!]

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 15:59 (seventeen years ago) link

Laws are opinions, they're (usually(should be!)) the opinion of the majority as to how individuals should behave.
That's a bit of a shallow view of jurisprudence.

-- Ricardo (boyofbadger...), January 27th, 2004.

Jurisprudence is the philosophy of law isn't it? Isn't what I've said what that all boils down too?

Where _is_ the depth?
It's simple isn't it?

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Can you explain how it all boils down to opinion?

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:01 (seventeen years ago) link

Hey, we Jews are barely tolerant of each other, let alone the rest of you.
-- Chuck Tatum (sappy_papp...), January 27th, 2004.

See! Told you!

And more kvetchup please!

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:01 (seventeen years ago) link

Laws (attempt to) make people behave in the ways other people _think_ they should behave.

How humans should behave is a matter of opinion. Different religions, for example, havie differing opinions.

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:02 (seventeen years ago) link

Sorry -- it was just my little joke. Nonetheless, I think it's interestingly provocative to call laws 'opinions'.
-- Enrique (miltonpinsk...), January 27th, 2004.

To clarify, laws themselves aren't exactly opinions, but what they attempt to enshrine as 'right' and 'wrong' ARE opinions.

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:05 (seventeen years ago) link

I might break the law even though I agree with it generally, but I may also break the law because I have a different opinion as to what is 'rihgt' and what is 'wrong'.

mei (mei), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:06 (seventeen years ago) link

who are these other people? Don't the laws apply to the people who write them? (Seriously)

If laws are backed by the state (and, after all, that's what makes them laws, rather than guidelines or codes or something else) then they are not just opinions, they are sanctified, ordered, institutionalied, backed up by the criminal justice system etc. I'm not saying power and hierarchy and stuff aren't involved -- of course they are -- but laws don't get to be laws without going through a socially sanctioned process.

The case of breaking the law because you have a different opinion (civil disobedience etc) does not mean that the law is treated as opinion it means that laws are seen as arbitrary and changeble, so that collective action can bring about social changes that force laws to change.

run it off (run it off), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:07 (seventeen years ago) link

The context:

Joanna, it was Sarah Phillimore who weaponised the Holocaust.

Here she is comparing trans rights to the Holocaust and harassing a trans person whose relatives died.

Do you support this kind of language? Why do you support this person, both online and financially? pic.twitter.com/tWVdJZzGv6

— David Paisley (@DavidPaisley) January 26, 2021

scampish inquisition (gyac), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:05 (three months ago) link

xp

No :)

She's a barrister who's frequently outspoken on trans issues and has made an arse of herself with holocaust comparisons.

anti-Semitism and transphobia does not seem to have put Joanna Cherry off of supporting her.

new variant (onimo), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:05 (three months ago) link

Yes, I see it's really about Joanna Cherry.

Waterloo Subset (Tom D.), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:06 (three months ago) link

... who does have an existence outside of Twitter.

Waterloo Subset (Tom D.), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:07 (three months ago) link

The account above seems to indicate financially too, but don’t know enough about it.

scampish inquisition (gyac), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:08 (three months ago) link

It's a trans issue that morphed into an AS issue. Worrying that Cherry seems to be one of many who profess progressiveness but are happy to turn a blind eye (or worse) to this shit.

new variant (onimo), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:13 (three months ago) link

There’s an... interesting correlation where a lot of the higher profile transphobes are also antisemites, like full-on Soros conspiracists, and as per that now banned account not above likening terfs to Jews in 40s Germany. Magdal3n B3rns (in hell) was one of these people, think on that the next time you see someone rather more mainstream praise her.

scampish inquisition (gyac), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:14 (three months ago) link

joanna cherry is a full-on transphobe, has been forever, doesn't even pretend not to be, and is one of the uk politicians most committed to destroying trans rights. not surprising that she'd turn a blind eye to blatant anti-semitism like that when there's anti-semitic conspiracy shit is pretty common from transphobes these days as gyac mentioned

ufo, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:25 (three months ago) link

my guess is the financial support is that cherry donated to phillimore's crowd funder for her legal antics (attempting to sue the police because someone reported her tweets as hate speech to them)

ufo, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:27 (three months ago) link

these people believe in "degeneracy" and many have specifically denied that nazis targeted trans and queer people

Left, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:29 (three months ago) link

Fear of a 'rootless' gender.

pomenitul, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:33 (three months ago) link

Relevant:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Geschlecht#German

pomenitul, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 13:34 (three months ago) link

I'm not sure about the almost exclusive focus on the value-form although there is clearly something to the postonean analysis of antisemitism even if it's not the whole picture (but I need to read the referenced essay "the logic of gender")

Left, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:09 (three months ago) link

Since this is the "is this anti-semitism" thread, I would say that the S Phillimore tweets quoted above are (to my Jewish eye) clearly driven by anti-trans fervor, not anti-Semitism. "Can't it be both?" -- sure, that exists, to me that would look like "Soros and the globalists are funding trans activism to undermine British womanhood. This just feels like the usual "my own personal thing I'm mad about is best thought of as the contemporary version of the Holocaust," which fucking EVERYBODY does, including plenty of Jews, I'm not saying this stuff doesn't grate on me but anti-Semitism is too strong a word for it.

Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:47 (three months ago) link

In particular it's absurdly tendentious to characterize that tweet, whatever the heck it was about, as "comparing Jewish people to dogs"

Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:48 (three months ago) link

xp what about the ones where she’s telling a descendant of Holocaust survivors that it’s really sad they lived to contribute to a similar regime?

scampish inquisition (gyac), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:50 (three months ago) link

It's still the anti-trans fervor driving the bus

Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:54 (three months ago) link

For the moment.

Waterloo Subset (Tom D.), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 14:56 (three months ago) link

It's kind of a lose-lose, either that person isn't anti-Semitic but was nonetheless keenly aware they were doling out anti-Semitic stuff for the sake of ad hominem shock, or that person *is* anti-Semitic, which would explain why they went straight to that kind of rhetorical Godwin's law dead-end extremity when any number of less incendiary insults might have done. I mean, that tweet may not compare Jews to dogs, but afaict it's comparing their *dog* to *Jews* and joking that for that reason it should therefore be left behind, which seems ... worse.

So yeah, unless better knowing who that person is provides some important context, the tweets kind of fails (passes?) the "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck" test.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 15:07 (three months ago) link

particularly pointless bit of hairsplitting here

Left, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 16:08 (three months ago) link

that kind of "hairsplitting" is literally the explicit named purpose of this thread

Guayaquil (eephus!), Tuesday, 26 January 2021 16:43 (three months ago) link

any person or group that thinks or tries to raise itself above others is racist!

xzanfar, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 16:55 (three months ago) link

wtf

Left, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 17:03 (three months ago) link

Another day, another xzanfar pvmic.

pomenitul, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 17:05 (three months ago) link

xps the considerable overlap between antisemitism and transphobia/homophobia/(trans/)misogyny which was under discussion makes this participar hairsplitting pointless at best

thought experiment: what if these particular bigots were Palestinian but otherwise saying the exact same things

Left, Tuesday, 26 January 2021 17:11 (three months ago) link

yes

The narrative being pushed is dangerously accurate in many details, as the Frankfurt School really did want to end Western Civilization and is almost wholly comprised of Jews. This allows anti-Semites to recruit new anti-Semites *who wouldn't have otherwise been recruited*.

— James Lindsay, won't fit in your box (@ConceptualJames) February 4, 2021

Left, Friday, 5 February 2021 20:23 (three months ago) link

Who is this person and what the heck is he talking about

Canon in Deez (silby), Friday, 5 February 2021 20:27 (three months ago) link

I have no idea but it sounds like some kind of galaxy brain 'the Jews were the real anti-semites all along!' take and it makes me very glad I don't have a Twitter account, yet again.

pomenitul, Friday, 5 February 2021 20:29 (three months ago) link

intellectual dark web culture warrior, popular among the anti-woke/anti-trans crowd, spreading literal nazi judeobolshevik conspiracy theories

Left, Friday, 5 February 2021 20:36 (three months ago) link

To stop the anti-Semitism you must first become the anti-Semitism.

Joe Biden Stan Account (milo z), Friday, 5 February 2021 20:47 (three months ago) link

apart from anything else the frankfurt school was way too reverent towards "western civilization" but this isn't actually about them is it

jacob rees-mogg and priti patel among others have also endorsed this nazi narrative with minimal outcry

Left, Friday, 5 February 2021 20:55 (three months ago) link

intellectual dark web culture warrior, popular among the anti-woke/anti-trans crowd, spreading literal nazi judeobolshevik conspiracy theories

― Left, Friday, February 5, 2021 3:36 PM (thirty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

This. I feel like you have to be a way too online person to get it, but if you go down the rabbit hole you'll find plenty of outright, overt antisemitism rather than dog whistles -- people who read The Culture of Critique and all that kind of stuff.

longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Friday, 5 February 2021 21:10 (three months ago) link

That stuff goes through multiple levels of filtration and bubbles into the "mainstream" trumpist right in disguised form. I don't know how many people are or aren't aware of the roots of it -- there's that famous quote about the southern strategy admitting it's about racism but noting that at some point with enough coded language maybe even the target audience isn't overtly aware of it. There are Jews among that crowd so clearly it's lost on some people.

longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Friday, 5 February 2021 21:12 (three months ago) link

you don't have to go paticularly deep

you might have to be too online to totally "get it" which is how some very mainstream conservatives and even liberals have been getting away with this. I assume the accusations of nazism sound paranoid if you're lucky enough not to recognise this bullshit

I don't think it's as lost on people as it often appears to be though, the antisemitism still works

Left, Friday, 5 February 2021 21:25 (three months ago) link

one month passes...

I have zero understanding of what actually happened in this story

Guayaquil (eephus!), Thursday, 25 March 2021 04:17 (one month ago) link

That makes two of us

mom tossed in kimchee (quincie), Thursday, 25 March 2021 05:01 (one month ago) link

It's so vague as to be nonsensical.

it's like edging for your mind (the table is the table), Thursday, 25 March 2021 14:25 (one month ago) link

..that the words "rabbi" and "dreidel" were also used...

Ah, the evergreen passive tense: 'mistakes were made'. Who said them, and why? I expect so much more from ESPN reporting.

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 25 March 2021 16:48 (one month ago) link

Oh wait, it says that in the espn article too. Never mind.

peace, man, Friday, 26 March 2021 11:21 (one month ago) link

four weeks pass...

Meanwhile in England, people are donning yellow stars with “no covid certificates” on them. Photos from @chloe_adlestone. pic.twitter.com/OCTtFdMFQy

— David M. Perry (@Lollardfish) April 24, 2021

stupid fucking English people

calzino, Sunday, 25 April 2021 07:44 (two weeks ago) link

Behind the Bastards Podcast did a massive 2 part history of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion last week which was quite edutaining like. Looked back at hundreds of years of antisemitism which started off as simple oppression of the other but then took on the conspiracy theory thing of they're trying to control things.
Looked at the rise every time there was a period of turmoil. I don't remember mention of the Americas as a potential resettling ground for Jews being kicked out of post-moorish Spain which I've heard elsewhere.
But does look at awareness of the text being plagiarised from a satirical source and the given explanation as to why that didn't matter.
Very good show with guest Langston from My Momma Told Me which is a really good podcast too. About black conspiracy theories and reasons for white ones. Quite amusing.

Stevolende, Sunday, 25 April 2021 07:56 (two weeks ago) link

performing brisses is pretty deep cover

Wayne Grotski (symsymsym), Monday, 3 May 2021 20:37 (one week ago) link

stupid fucking English people

there's that footage of a German anti-vaxxer doing a speech comparing herself to Sophie Scholl so I'm afraid the brainworms are Europe-wide on this one

Daniel_Rf, Tuesday, 4 May 2021 09:16 (one week ago) link

stupid fucking Scottish people (... I assume)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57025065

Authoritarian Steaks (Tom D.), Friday, 7 May 2021 23:44 (five days ago) link

Why is he wearing a star of David?

Bidh boladh a' mhairbh de 'n láimh fhalaimh (dowd), Monday, 10 May 2021 13:30 (two days ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.