15
   

A better understanding of Antisemitism

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 03:54 am
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:
You do just fine, RL. At least you write out your words.
I have a friend who fails to write out his words.
He writes about maybe the first half of them and then puts a period.
That looks bad and its annoying.

I 'd never do that,
but I 'm doing the best I can to lead changes in how words r spelled.
This shud have been done several centuries ago, but it was not.

VICTORY IS INEVITABLE for fonetic spelling!!!!!





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 04:01 am
@Green Witch,
Green Witch wrote:
I agree, and reading back on some of what I wrote I could be accused of poor grammar as well.
That's what happens when I cook and type at the same time.
I just hope u r not cooking vegetarian.
That makes women cranky, irritable, snappy, irascible, surly & testy.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 04:09 am
@reasoning logic,
Confusion in punctuation suggests
the liklihood of infusions of disorganization in reasoning, resulting in flawed logic.

One wonders: "how pervasive is the error ?"





David
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 04:51 am
@Green Witch,
The single most successful group of merchants in the middle east thousands of years ago were the Aramaeans. Their name derives from a region in what is now Syria known as Aram. That is why Aramaic was the lingua franca of the middle east two thousand years ago. In the so-called New Testament, there are many Aramaic survivals in the Koine Greek versions, both in common nouns and proper nouns, especially place names. The Aramaeans became confessional Jews--which is to say, they practiced the religion of the Jews. In fact, they spread confessional Judaism all over the middle east, and all along their trade routes, and as far east as China. (Many of them later became Nestorian Christians, and they spread their new religion along the same trade routes, once again, as far east as China.) At the time of Mohammed, the most common "non-pagan" confession in Arabia was Judaism, thanks to the Aramaean merchants. That explains to a large extent the heavy influence of Judaism on Islam--whether or not Muslims are willing to recognize it.

The Aramaeans were very successful merchants, and after their conversion, they were seen as Jews. The entire stereotype of Jews as greedy, miserly, and successful merchants because of their sharp practice derives from this Aramaic tradition in confessional Judaism. The stereotype is far older than the irrational hatred of Christians in the middle ages. GW is absolutely correct about the lending of money--other professions in which the Jews excelled were goldsmiths and silversmiths, and pharmacology. Muslims were forbidden to do representational art, and they had no tradition from Arabia for jewelers and pharmacists. Both Christians and Jews were highly valued in Muslim communities (highly valued by the powers that were) as goldsmiths, silversmiths and "druggists," and those professions spread to Europe from the middle east, even long before the crusades. When the city of Fez was founded by a Shi'ite dynasty in Morroco in the 8th century, a special distict was laid out for Jews and Christians so that the rulers could take advantage of their skills, and protect them from common bigotry.

The same thing happended in European cities--in Venice, the Jews were restricted to an island called Ghetto, which was originally a reasonably roomy and not unpleasant place to live. As Jews were persecuted elsewhere in Europe, one place they could flee to was the island of Ghetto, which evenually became overcrowded with an impoverished population, and so the name in that sense stuck. (It apparently derives from an Italian word meaning slag or waste, and that was what the island was originally used for, the storage of slag from metalworking.)

So, as Jews were restricted to very few professions, and many of those were associated with their money lending activities, and that was combined with the older stereotype of sharp practice as merchants which survived from the Aramaeans in the Hellenistic world--the stereotype of the greedy, miserly Jew became endemic in European cultures. Since Jews were most commonly the money-lenders in any give place (but not the only ones--see, for example the Fuggers in Germany or the Lombard--Italian--bankers), if local petty rulers were embarrassed by their debts, they could simply encourage riots against the Jews, and their creditors disappeared. It became such common practice that if a ruler owed money to the German or Italian bankers, he could just borrow money from the Jews, pay off the others, and foment a pogrom against the Jews. The Jews had no friends in high places.

This was particularly true in England; although today people wouldn't think it because of the image of Jewish pogroms in Poland and Russia, the worst excesses in the middle ages were in England. You likely won't know this if you were educated in England. In 1290, Edward the First expelled the Jews from England. Edward had never liked relying on the feudal levy (which had always failed his father, Henry III), and he commonly hired his troops, and when his wars did not return as much money as he spent, he went to the Jews. In the rebellion against his father in the mid-13th century lead by de Montfort, the Earl of Leister and King Henry's brother-in-law, Monfort has convened a Parliament, the first in English history, which was essentially just a "House of Lords" to attempt to gain support for his campaign against the King. Henry died in 1272, and after the expulsion of the Jews, and with his planned campaign against Scotland languishing, Edward convened the first regular Parliament in the 1290s (1295, i believe). But Edward was canny--he also had a House of Commons, which allowed the commonalty--mostly prosperous merchants or knights from the counties--to hobnob with the high and mighty, and to exercise the "privilege" of voting taxes or loans for the King. Edward could also isolate the "overmigthy" lords in a house of their own, were they were happy to approve of taxation on the commonalty, passed by the House of Commons. Edward did not need the Jews.

Jews slipped into England from time to time, and their money was welcome, but it was a dangerous proposition, because it could be all their lives were worth. More than 350 years later, Oliver Cromwell officially allowed the Jews back into England because he wanted to attract capital investment to rebuild England after three ruinous civil wars in a dozen years (1640-1651). After Cromwell died, Charles Stuart was restored as King Charles II in 1660. Not long after, the Jews came to him complaining of extortion and threats by thugs in the east end of London. Charles knew it wouldn't be a good idea to bring that up formally with the Parliament, so he sent some of the boys around to "talk" to those thugs, and the Jews were finally safe (more or less) again in England.

There is a very strong tradition of anti-semitism in Europe and especially in the English-speaking world. Every stereotype, however, can be traced to causes which make a mockery of the ignorance of the Jew haters. More than anything else, it became a pervasive habit in the upper levels of European society to blame the Jews for any of the woes of their communities, and to turn the fury of the ignorant and superstitious on the Jews, and away from themselves.

EDIT: The Jews and the slave trade is purest bullshit--it has been promulgated and spread largely by antisemites among the black community in the United States. Muslims set up the west African slave trade which was later exploited by the Portuguese many centuries after it began, and then very successfully exploited by their commercial rivals, the Dutch. Later, Americans from New England took over--their descendants would still later use the leisure provided by the wealth derived from the slave trade to become abolitionists. Irony is a killer.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 08:36 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
You likely won't know this if you were educated in England. In 1290, Edward the First expelled the Jews from England.


And you know this how? I was educated in England, and it's something I was aware of from an early age.
Setanta
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 08:40 am
@izzythepush,
Selective editing is a cheap trick . . .

I wrote:
This was particularly true in England; although today people wouldn't think it because of the image of Jewish pogroms in Poland and Russia, the worst excesses in the middle ages were in England. You likely won't know this if you were educated in England.


That was not a reference to the knowing of the expulsion of the Jews. Go pick a fight with somebody else, clown.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 08:49 am
@Setanta,
I was also aware of the persection of the Jews in the UK in the middle ages. You're suggesting that we just like the nice bits of our history, when we have a warts and all approach. I wasn't taking issue with anything else you'd written, but there was no need for your aside which was just your opinion as opposed to anything factual. You undoubtedly know a lot about History, but you know precious little about the teaching of History in the UK.
Setanta
 
  2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:10 am
@izzythepush,
Here let me play your kind of idiot game--there was no "United Kingdom" in the middle ages.
JLNobody
 
  2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:30 am
@Setanta,
Admirable control of history, Set, but I have something interesting that happened recently. There was a demonstration downtown calling for "English Only". One lady carried a sign saying "If it was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me." Later, a guy carried a sign calling for "Aramaic Only: if it was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me."
izzythepush
 
  2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:33 am
@izzythepush,
Shakespeare is often criticised for his portrayal of Shylock in The Merchant Of Venice. However, the opposite was true, Shakespeare gave Shylock human characteristics, unlike Marlowe's Barabas in The Jew Of Malta, who is an out an out villain.

As Setanta has already pointed out the Jews had been expelled from England over 200 years before. Jews were by and large portrayed as villains in almost the same way wolves are portrayed in fairy tales, and every bit as true to life as that portrayal.

In fact the only Jews in England at the time were 'converts,' a key example being Roderigo Lopez, Elizabeth 1 chief physician. He fell foul of the machinations of the Earl of Essex and ended up being tried for high treason. Due to the paranoia at the time, England being one of the few Protestant countries at the time, all non-Protestants were treated with suspicion, and in Lopez' trial his Jewishness was held against him, despite the fact he was a convert. The prosecutor summed things up as follows.

"Lopez, a perjured murdering traitor, and Jewish doctor, worse than Judas himself, undertook to poison her, which was a plot more wicked, dangerous, and detestable than all the former...."

From Stephen Greenblatt's Will In The World.

Quote:
Lopez was, by all accounts, a practicing Christian -- an observant Protestant thoroughly assimilated into high society -- and the English generally contented themselves with outward religious conformity. But the particular profile of his wickedness -- the greed, perfidy, secret malice, ingratitude and murderousness -- seemed to call for a special explanation, one that would also reinforce the sense that the queen had been miraculously saved by divine intervention. Traditional hatred of Jews and the continuing topicality of Marlowe's ''Jew of Malta'' (whose antihero, one might recall, began his career as a doctor who poisoned his patients) gave Lopez's Jewish origins an important place in the narrative of his conspiracy.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/magazine/12SHAKESPEARE.html?pagewanted=4




0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:34 am
@JLNobody,
That's pretty damned hilarious, Boss. Where was this downtown in which people were calling for English only? You'd think they'd want ever'body to speak 'Merican.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:36 am
@Setanta,
You claimed that the English would most likely be unaware of their ignoble part in antisemitism. England is now part of the UK, and I naturally assumed you were talking about the English today. Therefore my comment about you knowing precious little about how History is taught in the UK is relevant.
Setanta
 
  -1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:38 am
@izzythepush,
Here's a quarter kid . . . see that pay phone over there? Go call somebody who gives a **** . . .
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:39 am
@Setanta,
I don't know where you think I am, but our phones don't take quarters.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:42 am
the sister of one of my parents worked in a munitions factory, we called her auntie semtex
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  -1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:44 am
I don't give a **** where you are, nor whether you live or die. All i know so far this morning is that you seem desparate to pick a fight, and will cast about for anything which might remotely justify it. At the request of the Witch, i wrote a long post to show where racist stereotypes against Jews have derived, and how antisemitism because pervasive in Europe and in English-speaking countries. You completely ignored my remarks about how Cromwell lifted the ban on them, and how Charles II moved quickly to nip in the bud extortion against Jews. You looked at that entire post and picked out something you thought you could make into a bitch fight, and even then, you had to edit it capriciously to make it work for you.

You've got a serious problem . . . but it ain't my problem . . .
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:47 am
@Setanta,
I'm not trying to pick a fight, I mentioned before that I didn't have a problem with the bulk of what you had written, just the waspish aside that we would be unaware of our own history.

You get upset when Contrex makes similar remarks about Americans.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 09:52 am
Waspish? As i said, you've got a problem, and it ain't my problem. You're a funny guy, ishy.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 10:15 am
@Setanta,
You also have a problem with responding, without fully digesting what you have read. I don't have a problem with the vast bulk of your informative, and by and large well balanced post. In fact the only thing I take issue with is this sentence.

Quote:
You likely won't know this if you were educated in England.


You seem to be under the delusion that I object to you mentioning the persecution of the Jews in England in the Middle Ages, or their expulsion under Edward I. Otherwise why would you then castigate me for not mentioning your treatment of Cromwell or Charles II.

I can handle the truth, I don't object to you telling the truth, I do object to you assuming that we have a rose tinted view of our own history.

Btw, you are waspish.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Mon 6 Feb, 2012 11:33 am
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:
Admirable control of history, Set, but I have something interesting that happened recently. There was a demonstration downtown calling for "English Only". One lady carried a sign saying "If it was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me." Later, a guy carried a sign calling for "Aramaic Only: if it was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me."
Jesus told people to buy swords,
if thay did not already have one. Luke 22:36

I hope that thay got good ones,
or that thay extrapolated to good defensive firepower.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/05/2024 at 08:47:40