And, as we are all happy to hear, there are Jews once again in Germany.
Foofie wrote:dagmaraka wrote:Foofie, I believe there is a lot of education ahead of you. If you wish to defend the Jewish and their history, you need to know it in the first place. Theodor Herzl is one of the key figures in modern Jewish history. And the concept of the chosen land is one of the foundations of judaism.
The following is my own opinion, and it would sound very offensive to many Jews, but again, in my own opinion, the land mass today called Israel, which is the small size of the U.S. state of New Jersey, is just a booby prize for the Jewish People.
Sort of a peace offering after the Holocaust. Yes, I know the whole concept of Israel, as the Home for the Jewish People, goes back farther, and religious Jews lived in Israel since the times of King David, and there was a Zionist movement that predates WWII.
Regardless, the fact that it is in the middle of a desert, surrounded by 300 million hostile Arabs, makes me think it is not exactly Manhattan real estate that was given to these initial survivors of the Holocaust.
And, if anti-Semites still would like to see Jews wiped off the face of the Earth, can anyone think of a less fortified country? No Pyrenees mountains, Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean. Not exactly a natural fortress!
So, if Jews are going to survive as a religion for the future, they need to be spread out. Jews in the U.S., Jews in France, Jews in the U.K., Jews in the Commonwealth countries, Jews in Hungary, Jews in Scandanavia, Jews in South America. And, as we are all happy to hear, there are Jews once again in Germany.
Do you notice I put Jews in countries with large Caucasian populations? My answer to that: Didn't they have enough problems???
YOUR OPINION IS FACTUALLY WRONG. Did you read at least those excerpts about the history of Israel that I copied and pasted up there for you? You couldn't have. Israel, the state, was not "given to Holocaust survivors" - what nonsense! Israel was in making for decades before... Read up before you voice your opinion.
My contention is that if a modern, western country would have offered these survivors something akin to Miami Beach or Westchester county in NY, they never would have gone to Palestine.
The nice thing (said sarcastically), I believe, people feel about Israel is that the world can gain the usefulness of what Jews develop, in the way of science, medicine, etc., but the Jews don't have to be living amongst others, and also don't therefore get to vote in one's country. Hey, that's another idea, from the perspective of western Gentile civilization: Israel is a nice (warm) refrigerator where Jews can be kept, until one needs them, and gains the benefit of their intelligence, without the social/political inconvenience of their presence.
Foofie wrote:My contention is that if a modern, western country would have offered these survivors something akin to Miami Beach or Westchester county in NY, they never would have gone to Palestine.
Are you serious? You think that, in the late 40s, most Jews would have preferred Westchester county over a country in their holy lands?
Foofie wrote:The nice thing (said sarcastically), I believe, people feel about Israel is that the world can gain the usefulness of what Jews develop, in the way of science, medicine, etc., but the Jews don't have to be living amongst others, and also don't therefore get to vote in one's country. Hey, that's another idea, from the perspective of western Gentile civilization: Israel is a nice (warm) refrigerator where Jews can be kept, until one needs them, and gains the benefit of their intelligence, without the social/political inconvenience of their presence.
And how does this theory hold up with regard to the fact that only 41% of the world's Jews live in Israel[/url]? And a majority of the world's Jews thus do live amongst those others you refer to?
nimh wrote:Always fun when someone so demonstrably ignorant tries to lecture other people..
It's not that I lecture; I don't converse. It's a trait of Asperger's.
The child with Asperger's syndrome is often immature in the art of negotiation and compromise and may not know when to back down and apologize. He or she will not accept a particular school rule if it appears to be illogical, and will pursue a point or argument as a matter of principle. [..]
We know that the child with Asperger's syndrome has difficulty with social integration with his or her peers. [..] Those children who have exceptionally high IQs may compensate by becoming arrogant and egocentric, and have considerable difficulty acknowledging that they have made a mistake. Such children can be hypersensitive to any suggestion of criticism, yet overly critical of others, including teachers, parents or authority figures. [..]
The child can develop a form of over-compensation [..] by developing a sense of arrogance such that the 'fault' or problem is in other people and that the child is 'above the rules' that he or she finds so difficult to understand. The child or adult goes into what I describe as 'God mode', an omnipotent person who never makes a mistake, cannot be wrong and whose intelligence must be worshipped. [..]
A lack of ability in social play with peers and in interactions with adults can result in the development of behaviours to achieve dominance and control in a social context; these include the use of intimidation, and an arrogant and inflexible attitude. Other children and parents are likely to capitulate to avoid yet another confrontation. The child can become 'intoxicated' by such power and dominance, which may lead to conduct problems.
When such children are confused as to the intentions of others or what to do in a social situation, or have made a conspicuous error, the resulting 'negative' emotion can lead to the misperception that the other person's actions were deliberately malicious. The response is to inflict equal discomfort [..]: 'He hurt my feelings so I will hurt him.' [..]
The compensatory mechanism of arrogance can also affect other aspects of social interaction. The child may have difficulty admitting being wrong and be notorious for arguing. Hans Asperger advised that:
There is a great danger of getting involved in endless arguments with these children, be it in order to prove that they are wrong or to bring them towards some insight. This is especially true for parents, who frequently find themselves trapped in endless discussion. [..]
There can be a remarkably accurate recall of what was said or done to prove a point, and no concession, or acceptance of a compromise or a different perspective. Parents may consider that this characteristic could lead to a successful career as a defence lawyer in an adversarial court. Certainly the child has had a great deal of practice arguing his or her point.
Foofie wrote:My contention is that if a modern, western country would have offered these survivors something akin to Miami Beach or Westchester county in NY, they never would have gone to Palestine.
Are you serious? You think that, in the late 40s, most Jews would have preferred Westchester county over a country in their holy lands?
Foofie wrote:The nice thing (said sarcastically), I believe, people feel about Israel is that the world can gain the usefulness of what Jews develop, in the way of science, medicine, etc., but the Jews don't have to be living amongst others, and also don't therefore get to vote in one's country. Hey, that's another idea, from the perspective of western Gentile civilization: Israel is a nice (warm) refrigerator where Jews can be kept, until one needs them, and gains the benefit of their intelligence, without the social/political inconvenience of their presence.
And how does this theory hold up with regard to the fact that only 41% of the world's Jews live in Israel[/url]? And a majority of the world's Jews thus do live amongst those others you refer to?
nimh wrote:Foofie wrote:My contention is that if a modern, western country would have offered these survivors something akin to Miami Beach or Westchester county in NY, they never would have gone to Palestine.
Are you serious? You think that, in the late 40s, most Jews would have preferred Westchester county over a country in their holy lands?
Foofie wrote:The nice thing (said sarcastically), I believe, people feel about Israel is that the world can gain the usefulness of what Jews develop, in the way of science, medicine, etc., but the Jews don't have to be living amongst others, and also don't therefore get to vote in one's country. Hey, that's another idea, from the perspective of western Gentile civilization: Israel is a nice (warm) refrigerator where Jews can be kept, until one needs them, and gains the benefit of their intelligence, without the social/political inconvenience of their presence.
And how does this theory hold up with regard to the fact that only 41% of the world's Jews live in Israel[/url]? And a majority of the world's Jews thus do live amongst those others you refer to?
Foofie does not seem interested in factual accuracy: "Don't give me homework assignments. I don't give you homework assignments. My opinion is my opinion."
You are free to cling to your opinions, Foofie, but your opinions seem to be based on ignorance.
Foofie wrote:nimh wrote:Always fun when someone so demonstrably ignorant tries to lecture other people..
It's not that I lecture; I don't converse. It's a trait of Asperger's.
I'm sorry to hear that you have Asperger's. I must admit I knew nothing about it - only had heard of the name, nothing else.
You spurred me on to looking something up about it. Like this page. And some of the descriptions on this page may seem a propos, here.
Mind you, descriptions like the ones below, from that second link, made me think about forums like these in general. I can't help thinking that there's many forum posters on the Politics and Religion boards that share some or many traits with people with Asperger's! :wink: :
Quote:The child with Asperger's syndrome is often immature in the art of negotiation and compromise and may not know when to back down and apologize. He or she will not accept a particular school rule if it appears to be illogical, and will pursue a point or argument as a matter of principle. [..]
We know that the child with Asperger's syndrome has difficulty with social integration with his or her peers. [..] Those children who have exceptionally high IQs may compensate by becoming arrogant and egocentric, and have considerable difficulty acknowledging that they have made a mistake. Such children can be hypersensitive to any suggestion of criticism, yet overly critical of others, including teachers, parents or authority figures. [..]
The child can develop a form of over-compensation [..] by developing a sense of arrogance such that the 'fault' or problem is in other people and that the child is 'above the rules' that he or she finds so difficult to understand. The child or adult goes into what I describe as 'God mode', an omnipotent person who never makes a mistake, cannot be wrong and whose intelligence must be worshipped. [..]
A lack of ability in social play with peers and in interactions with adults can result in the development of behaviours to achieve dominance and control in a social context; these include the use of intimidation, and an arrogant and inflexible attitude. Other children and parents are likely to capitulate to avoid yet another confrontation. The child can become 'intoxicated' by such power and dominance, which may lead to conduct problems.
When such children are confused as to the intentions of others or what to do in a social situation, or have made a conspicuous error, the resulting 'negative' emotion can lead to the misperception that the other person's actions were deliberately malicious. The response is to inflict equal discomfort [..]: 'He hurt my feelings so I will hurt him.' [..]
The compensatory mechanism of arrogance can also affect other aspects of social interaction. The child may have difficulty admitting being wrong and be notorious for arguing. Hans Asperger advised that:
There is a great danger of getting involved in endless arguments with these children, be it in order to prove that they are wrong or to bring them towards some insight. This is especially true for parents, who frequently find themselves trapped in endless discussion. [..]
There can be a remarkably accurate recall of what was said or done to prove a point, and no concession, or acceptance of a compromise or a different perspective. Parents may consider that this characteristic could lead to a successful career as a defence lawyer in an adversarial court. Certainly the child has had a great deal of practice arguing his or her point.
Facts can be erroneous, Foofie. Many have pointed out factual errors in your posts.
I apologize if anything I have written seems ad hominem.
Much of the adult world didn't get that benefit, since Dr. Asperger in Germany didn't have the German articles translated to English until a few decades later.
nimh wrote:And how does this theory hold up with regard to the fact that only 41% of the world's Jews live in Israel[/url]? And a majority of the world's Jews thus do live amongst those others you refer to?
I am talking about the time Israel was birthed by the U.N.; most countries did not want any, or more Jews. Few believed, at that time, a Jewish community was an asset. In the 1940's anti-Semitism was still rampant in the U.S.; many colleges did not want Jews, or had a quota. There were still "restricted" hotels, country clubs. Corporate America hired few Jews, if any at all, in more than a few industries.
Perhaps, it has become fashionable, of late, to have a Jewish community in one's country? Who knows?
Foofie wrote:Much of the adult world didn't get that benefit, since Dr. Asperger in Germany didn't have the German articles translated to English until a few decades later.
Hans Asperger was an Austrian, not a German.
Much of the adult world didn't get that benefit, since Dr. Asperger in Germany didn't have the German articles translated to English until a few decades later.
It was necessary to point this out?
Foofie wrote:nimh wrote:And how does this theory hold up with regard to the fact that only 41% of the world's Jews live in Israel[/url]? And a majority of the world's Jews thus do live amongst those others you refer to?
I am talking about the time Israel was birthed by the U.N.; most countries did not want any, or more Jews. Few believed, at that time, a Jewish community was an asset. In the 1940's anti-Semitism was still rampant in the U.S.; many colleges did not want Jews, or had a quota. There were still "restricted" hotels, country clubs. Corporate America hired few Jews, if any at all, in more than a few industries.
Perhaps, it has become fashionable, of late, to have a Jewish community in one's country? Who knows?
Hm. No doubt about the shameful institutionalised anti-semitism that was still widespread in America and Europe back then. But otherwise, eh.
I mean, if even now the majority of Jews lives outside Israel, surely that was even more true back when Israel was still just being settled by pioneers facing the desert. So the point about how the majority of Jews do in fact live among other nations in other countries holds up even more for back then.
I do agree with a lot you said in this post. About how the Europeans of 1945/46 were hardly eager to welcome surviving Jews back - plenty of horror stories from those times. About how anti-semitism is alive and well especially in more rural/conservative areas, and about how it is often part of the rejection of any kind of outsiders there.
I'd also echo the irony of the Muslim world having now taken over the brand and products of anti-semitism that were fostered for centuries in Christian Europe. Almost like a relay race yeah, except that I dont believe in any big plot behind it.
What I dont like is how you've played fast and loose with facts in this thread, making all kinds of assertions, some of 'em true, others demonstrably false. It's like you take these scatter shots, and invariably hit some good targets as well as some wrong targets. Makes me wish you'd spend some more time on checking and backing up your assertions, and then come back to make a more selective/informed argument.
What I also dont like is how you make these kind of generalisations and prejudices about whole peoples and nations that, IMO, WW2 should have made suspect forever, even as you demonstrate ignorance about those countries and peoples. Just my 2 cents.
Foofie wrote:
It was necessary to point this out?
Well, I doubt that many would like if I name instead of the USA any other English-speaking country.
And someone working in Dublin wouldn't like if I said he worked in the UK.
Walter Hinteler wrote:Foofie wrote:
It was necessary to point this out?
Well, I doubt that many would like if I name instead of the USA any other English-speaking country.
And someone working in Dublin wouldn't like if I said he worked in the UK.
O.K., O.K., you're correct.
...honestly, I care little of other's opinons of me.
As far as factual errors in my posts? Like in Alice in Wonderland, up is down, and down is up.
.
