Fri 18 Jan, 2013 01:12 pm
I read that Hitler was extremely anti-bolshevik and because most of the leading bolsheviks in Russia happened to be Jewish, he equated bolshevism with being Jewish. Therefore, it has been argued, that Hitler (in his twisted mind) was being anti-bolshevik through anti-semitism (Jews were not the primary enemy).? Also, is there any truth in the argument that Dr. Goebbels was the main driving force behind Hitler's Jewish policy (Hitler was more interested in gaining territory). May I thank the contributors, of this site, for creating the best free university in the world (and you don't require meaningless coursework).
You're merely repeating like a parrot the racially based stereotypical bigotry and fiction that was propagated by racist propaganda leader Goebbels of Nazi movement pre and during WW II.
"Jewish Bolshevism or Judeo-Bolshevism is the conspiracy theory that Jews have been the driving force behind Communist movements, or more specifically Soviet Bolshevism. The expression has been used as a catchword for the assertion that Communism is a Jewish conspiracy, and it has often coincided with overtly aggressive nationalistic tendencies in the 20th century and 21st century. In Poland, Judeo-Bolshevism was known as Żydokomuna and was used as an antisemitic stereotype.
The expression was the title of a pamphlet, The Jewish Bolshevism, and became current after the 1917 October Revolution in Russia, featuring prominently in the propaganda of the anti-communist "White" forces during the Russian Civil War.
The label "Judeo-Bolshevism" was used in Nazi Germany to equate Jews with communists, implying that the communist movement served Jewish interests and/or that all Jews were communists. According to Hannah Arendt, it was "the most efficient fiction of Nazi Propaganda". In Poland before World War II, Żydokomuna was used in the same way to allege that the Jews were conspiring with the USSR to capture Poland. According to André Gerrits, "The myth of Jewish Communism was one of the most popular and widespread political prejudices in the first half of the 20th century, in Eastern Europe in particular."
The allegation continues to be used in antisemitic publications and websites today.
That is some of the most blatant horseshit I have ever read anywhere.
most of the leading bolsheviks in Russia happened to be Jewish
Really? Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin were all Jewish? Beria, head of the Checka
(forerunner of the NKVD, MVD, OGPU and KGB), was Jewish?
Who makes up this anti-Semitic ****?
Hitler wanted to get rid of all the Jews. Identifying them all as "Communists" gave him an excuse he hoped most German people would accept. It's that simple.
The bigger picture of anti-Semitism is that Jews are portrayed as avaricious capitalists, and Bolsheviks at the same time. Also, internationalists, which was some other version of Communist, I think, and basically have been many people's "picture of Dorian Grey." Meaning, anything one was against, one projected onto Jews, since in Europe they were they minority that did not fit into the basic Christian world-view. Naturally, Europeans being the dominant group in the U.S., anti-Semitism was "imported" here too, as a way to assuage many feelings of feeling most comfortable in a homogeneous society.
By the way, if anti-Semitism was ever fully ended, Judaism would also end, in my opinion, like in China, and India, where a lack of anti-Semitism resulted in the country eventually absorbing their Jewish communities. If the truth be known, many a pretty Gentile girl finds Jewish men very interesting, since they often do not suffer from over-the-top macho beliefs, and are known to value an intelligent woman's opinion. Perhaps, that too keeps anti-Semitism alive, in the Gentile male demographic? Just my opinion.
In fact, Hitler tried to unite the German people behind anti-communism after the Reichstag fire. The fire was blamed on a mentally-ill Dutchman who was or was claimed to be a communist. In the subsequent Reichstag elections, far left-wing parties were banned. Before the fire, the NSDAP had polled 35% of the vote. After left-wing parties were banned, they polled fractionally over 44%--they still did not have a majority. Hitler hadn't picked the winner he hoped he had chosen. So he switched to the Jews. Read LA's post again--Stalin, Lenin and Beria were certainly not Jewish, nor was Felix Dzerzhinsky, a Polish Catholic who founded the Cheka, the ancestor of the NKVD and the KGB. Trotsky was a Jew, but it had nothing to do with his switch to the Bolsheviks in early 1917.
Hitler got more traction blaming the Jews for everything. I don't know where you read this, but you need to take more care with your sources of information.
Dear Ragman I have NO political motive. I just wanted opinions on a history text. I've never even voted, never listen to politicians/priests. Whether you like it, or not, ALL, politics/religion is based on propaganda that influences the individual. It is therefore wise, at least, to seek all opinions and evidence before formulating opinion. It is similar to Richard Dawkins being called an "atheist" when he is an agnostic (huge difference in scientific terms). It is similar propaganda when Christians claim moral superiority over atheists, when some studies (in the USA) show the reverse is the case by considerable margin (looking at crime figures, prostitution etc). There are people, highly intelligent, who regard Zionism as neo-Nazi, but I have no opinion (although I know of some Jews that agree with that statement). It could be argued that this world would be a better place if people thought dispassionately, in a scientific manner. Lastly, you claim that I repeat "racially based stereotypical bigotry" - I hope you can back up this claim BY PRODUCING THE PARROT (ANY PARROT THAT COULD FORMULATE MY QUESTION), otherwise some may say you are very foolish (BUT IT WOULD NOT BE FOR ME TO COMMENT ON THAT)
I just wanted opinions on a history text
Sure, you did! Where is the history text?
I attempted to provide you with some background info as did others. So what is your thought having read what was supplied?
Yup, I'm the fool here 'cause you nailed me with your irrefutable logic and ploy. Why not look up 'rope-a-dope' while you're poking around the 'net looking for inflammatory hot button race/religion/bias issues?
There are people, highly intelligent, who regard Zionism as neo-Nazi, but I have no opinion (although I know of some Jews that agree with that statement).
Famous saying---In a room with 10 Jews, you get 12 opinions.
And I know some Jews who hate other Jews. So what does that prove?
That is why I asked the question, because you know more than me. I cannot read every book - unfortunately. I'm just a young chap that wants to milk the knowledge and opinions of others. Physics and Chemistry are everything to me - everything else is of secondary interest. I am a SCIENCE BIGOT
If you were sincere about your quest for accurate knowledge, you could simply plug in question in Google and/or Wikipedia and you could gather a cross-section of info. Better still, you could go to library and read some books
After all, that's how a good student would study your beloved physics and chemistry, correct?
My thought is your intent is a bit less innocent than you claim. Of course, I could be wrong.
Thanks for your reply. Your answers help me counter bigots. However, the Brits tried to butcher every Aborigine in Tasmania, and allowed over 10,000 Boar women and children in POW camps, in South Africa. Nazism wasn't confined to Germany. To quote a very sincere methodist lady "mankind is evil, only idividuals are good".
Where's that parrot - we could make a fortune with that bird? Regarding theHitler/Dr quote, I think it was on the BBC world service, or maybe David Irving. I'll get back to you.
With best wishes
Boar women and children
But they were wild pigs. Sangliers in fact.
Your argument is specious and factually incorrect.
It could be argued that this world would be a better place if people thought dispassionately, in a scientific manner.
Well, since you are a complete DICK, you won't be playing any part in that process of global improvement.
...and you don't require meaningless coursework....
But you DO require training in weighing and contrasting different points of view and discarding pure conjecture. That's what your "self-education" signally lacks as shown by your ludicrous pro-science comment. What you have discarded as "meaningless" involves a level of interactive discourse irrespective of subject matter.
If you have to resort to insults, perhaps it is it shows your mother should have used contraception.
I suppose you regard a three thousand word essay on "WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF A RICH PATIENT OFFERS YOU MONEY FOR TREATING HIM/HER" is useful? Wouldn't 5 hours on the ward be better? It appears that you are religious. Do you think a mere priests can chage wine into blood? Read Richard Dawkins and educate yourself! Why do think ex-priest Bart Erhmann thinks religious belief a medical "condition" and his a Professor of Theology?English univesity lecturer (Theology) in Devon, also stated the Bible is fiction. Why are less than 5% of Nobel prize winners, non-believers?
Ask the afrikanners why they hate the Brits with such a passion. They have an ability to hate that has no equal. Why do you think an Afrikaaner forced his daughter to have a abortion because the father was English?
I think you fell out of your tree, Germanicus. Landed on your head, eh?
So if you were on trial in a court of law for, say, rape - you wouldn't want a dispassionate hearing? So you wouldn't mind jurers judging you with a feminist agender? They would have your testicals. Don't have children!! Come to think of it, rape is possibly the only way you could father children .
Are you saying Christians are intelligent? If an adult belived in Father Christmas, he would be deemed insane without prove. Bart Ehrmann has about 4 degrees. Richard Dawkins is one of the top brains in the world - are you saying he is wrong?
At least learn to read, Germanicus. I have no idea what you're on about or where you get the notion that I've said anything like what you're implying I've said. Learn to spell while you're at it, too.