Best jewish history books according to redditors
We found 354 Reddit comments discussing the best jewish history books. We ranked the 163 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 354 Reddit comments discussing the best jewish history books. We ranked the 163 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
Jean-Paul Sartre:
> Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
It's from Anti-Semite and Jew: An Exploration of the Etiology of Hate.
In 1941 there was an Arab uprising against Britain by Arabs that considered themselves allies of the Nazis. They lasted about a month, but not before instigating the Farhud, the largest and deadliest pogrom in the middle east. Only a prelude to the civil rights taken away from Jews in Iraq after WW2 which would the Jewish community in Iraq. A community 1000 years older than Islam and had played host to the exilarch, or 'patriach in exile', the last known family in direct descent of King David. See The Farhud by Edwin Black, the same guy behind IBM and the Holocaust and The Transfer Agreement. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AGJZEOC/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
In the early Muslim Brotherhood itself the biggest ally of the Nazis was Sayyid Qutb, whose personal tome is translated from Arabic, 'My Struggle Against the Jews' - the reference is obvious. Qutb was far more willing to use than the founder Hassan Al-Banna and as such Al-Qaeda and Hamas are merely implementations of their spiritual grandfather.
The Ba'ath parties that dominated after overthrowing their appropriate kings in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria were all modeled after the Nazi party. As Hitler had espoused a pan-Germanic nationalism, so did Ba'ath promote a pan-Arabic nationalism. Briefly resulting in the United Arab Republic of Egypt-Syria, a terribly unstable and viciously racist affair.
In 1944 the Nazis made a last ditch effort to expand the Holocaust to British Palestine. In Operation Atlas three German Templars that lived in Palestine together with two Arabs parachuted in British Palestine with enough Arsenic to kill 250,000 people. They planned to poison the water supply of Tel Aviv. This was last ditch because of course the Nazis were pushed back by the Soviet Union instead of being able to expand the 'normal' processes of the Holocaust to the area. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Operation_Atlas_(Mandatory_Palestine)
Edit: The Arab League boycott of the Jewish community based in British Palestine, now Israel began in 1945. It was modeled after the Nazi boycott of the Jewish community. Note that 1945 is before the creation of Israel, before the Nakba, before the 1967 Six Day War, before the occupation. The boycott was about the Yishuv, or Jewish Community in Palestine, largely calling for having an independent state, not some protest about the treatment of Arabs in Palestine. A person who is joining the modern BDS movement, is in actuality joining the Arab Boycott as the PLO is part of the Arab League. And that boycott is modeled after the Nazis. There is nothing new under the sun. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Arab_League_boycott_of_Israel
TL;DR A number of Arabs, some of which were instrumental to the future of the Middle East considered themselves more allied to the Nazis than vice versa. Their admiration of the Nazis created many of both the authoritarian regimes that dominated the latter half of the 20th century and inspired some of the worst Islamist terrorist groups today.
https://www.amazon.com/Anti-Semite-Jew-Exploration-Etiology-Hate/dp/0805210474
​
Look no further:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering by Finkelstein.
And before you downvote me and call Finkelstein a self-hating Jew, read some of his work.
What are you talking about, clearly more quality output from the organization founded by the man who wrote Why the Jews?: The Reason for Antisemitism.
The discourse around Hitler, the Nazis, etc. is a product of American war propaganda; prior to 1967, it was the opposite, with few people in the United States, or, honestly, anywhere on our side of the Iron Curtain, addressing it properly. Raul Hilberg was one of the few. Indeed, many of the people who did speak out about their suffering during the Holocaust were labelled Communist sympathizers, as though the only motive behind their outrage over the incineration of millions of people could be opposition to the U.S. alliance with West Germany (which included many Nazis).
After 1967 it suddenly became a useful propaganda tool to justify America's one-sided support for the strongest military power in the Middle East. Because the Holocaust suddenly became the defining line between "us" and "them," these sorts of psychobabble witch-hunts for anyone remotely related to Hitler take place.
It is truly disgusting what Holocaust survivors have been dragged through. First their entire families were eliminated. Then they were forced to brood in private as others told them that if they mourned in public, they were somehow working for the Soviet Union. Then their suffering became cheap pabulum for Steven Spielberg movies and Israeli propaganda. Then their reparations were stolen.
I -- and Raul Hilberg, the founder of modern Holocaust studies -- both recommend this book, by the son of two Holocaust survivors to anyone interested in analyzing how truly ridiculous the way westerners discuss the Nazi genocide is. And NO, that does not mean that one should deny it, it means we should treat it with respect.
Well, during WW2, Zionist 'terrorists'/'freedom fighters' in Palestine fighting against British occupation teamed up with literally Hitler. Like, not 'LitTeRALly hItLEr', but literally literally Hitler.
The enemy of my enemy...
Edit: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1569804338
Israel EXPLOITS the Holocaust and uses it to justify its own aggression against the Palestinians. Normal Finklestein (whose parents were concentration camp survivors) has written about the Holocaust Industry
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348514230&sr=8-1&keywords=Holocaust+Industry
He also pointed out that a pro-Israeli book (by Joan Peters, entitled "From Time Immemorial", which argued that Palestinians were simply all recent arrivals and therefore could be justifiably ethnically cleansed by Israel, was actually a fraud.)
As a result of challenging the established pro-Israeli line, Finklestein was blackballed and his academic career at DePaul University was ended
http://www.chomsky.info/books/power01.htm
This should be required reading for r/conspiracy. It's scholarly, sourced and written by a "self-hating" Jewish professor whose family had experienced the holocaust.
... didn't know about ITT. I knew about IBM and the Nazis.
Holocaust denial is not about Jews, it's about Fascism. Fascist parties and movements have a major credibility problem. They can never be viewed as mainstream political movements because of their Nazi past. All any opponent or critic has to do to discredit them is to point to National Socialism and the Holocaust.
To redeem Fascism, to give it even a chance at respectability, they first have to cast doubt on the Holocaust. If the Holocaust didn't happen, or if it didn't happen in the way we have all been told, then the Nazis were just another political movement, and there is nothing inherently wrong with Fascism itself.
Deborah Lipstadt, in Denying the Holocaust, articulates this far better and more convincingly than I do.
>China and Russia are not natural allies, and Central Asia is a region where there is potential for conflict between Beijing and Moscow
They are natural allies as balancers against US interests, actually. Russia could've bandwagoned, but that goes against Russian interests and historical understanding. They're pretty natural allies with China for the time being.
>There is little doubt that China and India are likely to be adversaries in the future,
This is more minor, but in the future? They've fought border wars, buddy. They're adversaries now.
>Not tried to make Ukraine a Western bulwark on Russia's border. Specifically, the West should have refrained from trying to integrate Ukraine into the EU, and especially into NATO
I'm sorry, what? Ukraine itself wanted to join the EU, though NATO was not on the table until Russia invaded.
The idea that the West shouldn't have tried to engage Ukraine because Russia didn't want it to is tantamount to basic appeasement, particularly since he just assumes that Russia thought Ukraine would join NATO.
That's not why Russia acted. Russia acted because it saw opportunity, not because of fear. It saw a chance to seize some territory it desperately wanted, of strategic value, and to destabilize a country that was going to drift away from them regardless. They knew it, so they acted to take what they could, not out of reaction to some kind of Western initiative but because everyone knew precisely what Ukraine wanted.
>I think that the influence of the lobby has hardly changed since Obama first took office. It remains a remarkably powerful interest group. What has changed is that now lots of people understand that there is an Israel lobby and that it wields great influence on US foreign policy.
First of all, I just want to point out that his claims of the "Israel Lobby" were ridiculously underresearched. He cited, for example, historian Benny Morris, who summarily took apart their claims on history, saying:
>Like many pro-Arab propagandists at work today, Mearsheimer and Walt often cite my own books, sometimes quoting directly from them, in apparent corroboration of their arguments. Yet their work is a travesty of the history that I have studied and written for the past two decades. Their work is riddled with shoddiness and defiled by mendacity.
And not only that, but they literally wrote hundreds of words, if not thousands, about groups they never interviewed a single current or former member of, including the US government. They just said they had "enough information" and spoke to no one about whom they wrote.
There was a literal book length response by the ADL's Director to their book, debunking its claims, which former US SecState George Shultz wrote the foreword to, saying their book was entirely wrong.
Ignoring that they were literally rebuked by the people they did cite, and failed to even do proper research, let's just assume for a moment that they're correct. Mearsheimer actually makes the claim that the "Israel Lobby" is hardly changed. But wait...what happened to the prominence of left-wing groups like J Street and Jewish Voice for Peace, one of which even advocates the destruction of Israel? What happened to the loss on the Iran deal? What happened to the loss on the aid package MOU the US signed, which the "Lobby" supposedly wanted to be much more generous? What happened when the ACLU came out against the Anti-Israel Boycott Law?
This idea that there is such a powerful lobby is belied by the fact that even if there was such a "lobby" acting in some kind of concerted way he claims (this is separate from there being pro-Israel groups, as there are anti-Israel ones, not some kind of "lobby" coordinating) and with the power he claims, then it wouldn't be losing so often.
>Regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, it seems clear to me that the two-state solution is dead and that there is going to be a Greater Israel for the foreseeable future. I agree with former Israeli prime ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, who have said that in the absence of a two-state solution, Greater Israel would be an apartheid state.
This is a weird comment. For one thing, he claims the two state solution is dead. But it clearly is not, when you bother to look at the numbers. It is still eminently possible, including with the deal that Prime Minister Olmert proposed. And Israelis are for such a deal, in polls. But the question isn't whether or not it is possible or dead, it's whether it is likely to happen. In the foreseeable future? Probably not. But does that make it dead? No.
Also, pretty weird of him to reference Barak and Olmert, but not mention their full claims. Barak was talking about what would happen if Israel just decided to never withdraw no matter what, but didn't annex the territory. But literally no one in Israel's government advocates that. Even the most radical group, which has very few seats in the government, advocates annexation without full voting rights for Palestinians, but says in the long term those rights would be granted; there would be a provisional period in between is the extent of it.
Olmert's comment is the same.
>Iran is not a threat to the Gulf monarchies, contrary to what most people in those countries think.
Uh, it absolutely is. Has he not paid an ounce of attention to Bahrain, which Iran literally still thinks belongs to it? The demarcation agreement signed with the shah really isn't something Iran's current government cares about, and Iran would love to overthrow the Bahraini monarchy and install a Shia one, or annex Bahrain, since it is majority-Shia.
>First, Iran, which has never invaded a country in its history,
No, it just sends money and weapons to proxies, who then do it. Hezbollah from 2006 and the Houthis infiltrating Saudi Arabia have called, they want their political hackery back.
> shows no inclination to want to invade Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf monarchies.
Invade directly? No. They want to topple it though, and send it into chaos. Which is a threat to the monarchy. Mearsheimer does this thing where he sets up each question as a situation of either military invasion or nothing. It doesn't work that way. Threats are not solely invasions.
>Second, and more importantly, the United States would intervene immediately if Iran invaded one of the Gulf monarchies and the Iranians know that. American leaders have made it manifestly clear that they will not tolerate Iran becoming a regional hegemony in the Persian Gulf.
See above.
>The best strategy is to leave and let those stakeholders you mention deal with Afghanistan. There is nothing the US can do to fix the problem. This is simply the least bad strategy. Obama did not pull all of the US forces out of Afghanistan by January 2009 and Trump recently decided to hang on in Afghanistan, because neither one of them wants to be accused of "losing" Afghanistan. Both surely recognize that there is no clever strategy for rescuing the situation in Afghanistan.
This sounds like a great way to allow a terrorist government to run Afghanistan. Not like we've seen that harm us before cough cough Al Qaeda planning 9/11 cough cough.
I have no clue how this happened, I just found it profoundly shocking that this book is now classified right beside David Icke's theories of lizard people. The authors of this book go out of their way to say that there is not a conspiracy.
If you look here:
http://www.amazon.com/Deadliest-Lies-Israel-Jewish-Control/dp/1403984921/
You'll see that Abraham Foxman of the ADL does believe that discussion of the "Israel lobby" is akin to a conspiracy theory. Some of the selected professional reviews specifically mention the term "conspiracy theory." Thus this reclassification of the book is in line with what the ADL has been very vocally pushing for. I'll quote the specific review on Foxman's book here:
> "Conspiracy theories are a measure of a society's mental health; when on the rise, trouble lies ahead. In The Deadliest Lies, Abraham Foxman diagnoses the 'Israel Lobby' conspiracy theory and reveals how sick it is. In doing so, he does a service to all Americans." --Charles Hill, Distinguished Fellow in International Security Studies, Yale University
Don't do it. You will feel invisible at best.
It's easy to like the idea of Orthodoxy, but life is difficult enough for transgender people who were born Jewish, even when their communities are supportive. As far as Jewish law is concerned, you hardly exist. Unless you're going stealth, I don't know how far you'll get with "an extra sense of community" as you convert. And then where is tradition getting you? Maybe you actually love the gender binary, but do you really want to join a religion that can't affirm your journey?
I'm sorry that I'm writing such a discouraging comment, but it's in solidarity. You'll know when you arrive at your homecoming.
Check these out:
The Limits of Orthodox Theology by Marc Shapiro
He goes into this and discusses using source material which person/people disagreed, one ikkar at a time.
> -Hebrew tends to be more direct, vivid, and concrete than Western languages
What is meant by this? It is my understanding that most Hebrew words have multiple possible meanings (English often has 2 or more meanings for a word as well) - great example: adam could mean "a human being" or "humanity" (just like "man" in English could mean either).
Not only this, but the original Hebrew had no vowels, so there was the possibility that what was written could have been multiple words. So "adam" could have been "edom", which means "red" or could mean a red sauce of some kind.
Consider the following by Rabbi David Cooper in "God Is A Verb":
>The Hebrew language is constructed in a way that vowel substitutions can dramatically change the meaning of a word. It is like seeing the letters PN as a word, which could be pin, pan, pane, pain, pen, peon, pine, or pun. Usually we can derive the meaning of a word in the Written Torah through the context in which it is used, but some sentences could leave us wondering. For example, imagine reading a sentence that says, "If you know how to properly work with a PN, you will qualify for a million-dollar reward."
Also, the book 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis By Lenni Brenner.
Zionists are more like Nazis than they are proclaimed Jews.
> Right now, it looks like I'm heading the Rambamist route. I'm trying to find a siddur biladi or siddur rambam to see review to see if I'd like to pick that up.
Some links for the budding Maimonidean/Talmid HaRambam (no particular order):
did the zionists collaborate with the nazi party?
https://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
https://us.blastingnews.com/news/2017/05/nazi-coin-sparks-theories-of-alleged-nazi-jewish-zionist-collaboration-001722689.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Other_Side:_The_Secret_Relationship_Between_Nazism_and_Zionism
the never ending rabbit hole that is life. can't even discern truth from fiction everything is so obfuscated. personally I just want to find out the truth no matter how uncomfortable it is.
> He claimed there was "real collaboration" between Zionists and the Nazis
There was collaboration and it was definitely real.
https://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
You might be reading too much into the word "real". That's a biased semantic interpretation which you likely cannot defend.
As to your claim that he defended the joke itself. That is false. He declared the joke utterly rude and obscene but said that he had spent time with Shah and didn't believe she was an anti-semite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY5-OianGnc
From Jean-Paul Sartre's The Anti-Semite and The Jew. Buy it from amazon.
>the "facts" presented by Mearsheimer and Walt suggest a fundamental ignorance of the history with which they deal, and that the "evidence" they deploy is so tendentious as to be evidence only of an acute bias
Morris continued to say:
>Mearsheimer and Walt often cite my own books, sometimes quoting directly from them, in apparent corroboration of their arguments. Yet their work is a travesty of the history that I have studied and written for the past two decades. Their work is riddled with shoddiness and defiled by mendacity
Officials he spoke about pointed out he never once interviewed or spoke with them. His knowledge of Israeli history is virtually nonexistent, and his book is rife with errors. Entire book-length responses have debunked his work on Israel.
>that Israel with its fanatical pursuit in the attempt to destroy the 2SS predicted this potential future and thinks it might be the one to win out in the end?
This is an incredibly unusual claim. Israel's "fanatical pursuit" to destroy the 2SS that he predicted in 2007...despite Israel offering a two-state solution repeatedly in 2007 and 2008? Despite Israel's offer to endorse a framework deal enshrining a two-state solution in 2014? This is an unusual tack.
It is the Palestinians, as explained here, who benefit from waiting:
>Instead, the Palestinians have an attractive (in their view) “Plan B,” which is to get the Israeli concessions in international decisions, without having to make their own concessions—all while denouncing Israel and delegitimizing it in international forums. Since 2008, there are strong indications that the international route was actually the Palestinian “Plan A”—hence their intransigence in entering the talks and in the negotiations themselves.
...
>The continuation of the status quo—which appears so problematic to many Israelis and Americans—represents for the Palestinians a favorable strategic avenue that would lead, eventually, to an Arab-majority, one-state outcome. When Americans, Europeans, and even elements of the Israeli public repeatedly warn that Israel will be “lost” if it allows the status quo to persist, it does not encourage Palestinian moderation or willingness to compromise. Instead, it strengthens the underlying Palestinian assumption that a failure of negotiations is a reasonable option from their perspective. For the Palestinian leadership, all paths lead to the same destination: either Israel accepts their conditions (which, through flooding Israel with refugees, will lead to the demise of Israel as a Jewish state) or the status quo persists and Israel is supposedly lost.
The Palestinian decision to wait and park comfortably has been literally stated outright by Palestinian leaders. For example, Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority (the recognized Palestinian government) said back in 2009:
>Abbas rejects the notion that he should make any comparable concession -- such as recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, which would imply renunciation of any large-scale resettlement of refugees.
>Instead, he says, he will remain passive. "I will wait for Hamas to accept international commitments. I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements," he said. "Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life."
The reality is not what you paint. It's quite different.
A couple of books on the more scholarly side; Sufism and Taoism and Mystical Dimensions of Islam are good, if somewhat deep and dense, and useful, orienting. The works of Henry Corbin, such as Spiritual Body and Celestial Earth and Alone With the Alone: Creative Imagination in the Sufism of Ibn Arabi, are illuminating. Look into the Sufi mystics themselves as much as commentary, there should be a list somewhere online but Ibn Arabi, Suhrawardi, Jabir Ibn Hayan ('Geber'),Avicenna and Hallaj as well as the more well known Rumi come to mind. Your best bet if you really want to learn about Sufism is to take up instruction under a Shaykh in an order. Depending on where you are there is possibly a local order you could attend meditations and classes with?
Well, not too Orthodox, but ones I have on my ereader which I liked...
Yes, being able to articulate your political views, more precisely via the nomenclature of established political philosophy, is the same thing as saying that we need more trans drone operators.
>A World Without Jews by Karl Marx speaks about religious prejudice specifically against Jews. It begs to question can the world survive without this prejudice and how Jews beg for political emancipation?
Did you eat lead paint as a child, or are you naturally this dumb?
If the OP is interested in more about Irving and what it means to be a holocaust denier, I would recommend Lying About Hitler by Richard Evans and the book that lead to the trial it covers, Denying the Holocaust by Deborah Lipstadt
>historically, Jews have at least six defined genders (three on the male end of the spectrum, three on the female end)
Source for this? Not doubting you, but I'd love to learn more. It bothers me that I don't know more about my own culture's historical attitudes/practices around this stuff.
ETA: A friend who's Jewish and studied theology in grad school loaned me the book Balancing on the Mechitza by Noach Dzmura. It's a great place to start for folks looking to learn more about this.
> you use inhabitants for Palestinians, while using Zionists as an aggressor, I would assume that you have a bias towards this situation.
Yes, I have a bias towards factual accuracy. Note that the Palestinians didn't arrive from Ukraine or Brooklyn, the Zionists did, and the Zionists didn't end up murdered, raped or forced into refugee camps there, the Palestinians did.
>Holocaust
which had nothing to do with Palestinians, so...
But in fact the Zionist had themselves struck a bargain with Nazis to promote emigration to Israel https://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
>those kicked out from middle eastern countries
You mean the Mizrahi jews whom Israel didn't even recognize as refugees until it became convenient to do so in order to counter the rights of palestinians https://972mag.com/spineless-bookkeeping-the-use-of-mizrahi-jews-as-pawns-against-palestinian-refugees/56472/
Palestinians who were, again, were not responsible for what happens in Morocco or Iraq... except in the fevered minds of Zionists for whom they're all just a bunch of Arabs and subject to collective punishment. And FYI lets not forget that the Zionist themselves probably bombed Jews in Baghdad to convince them to move to Israel
https://www.amazon.com/Ben-Gurions-Scandals-Haganah-Mossad-Eliminated/dp/1893302407
In fact according to CIA officer Wilbur Crane Eveland:
>>"In an attempt to portray the Iraqis as anti-American and to terrorize the Jews, the Zionists planted bombs in the U.S. Information Service library and in the synagogues. Soon leaflets began to appear urging Jews to flee to Israel... most of the world believed reports that Arab terrorism had motivated the flight of the Iraqi Jews whom the Zionists had 'rescued' really just in order to increase Israel’s Jewish population."https://www.amazon.com/Ropes-Sand-Americas-Failure-Middle/dp/0393013367/
And ...
>the Palestinians rejected it and then countered with a war which they lost
Actually the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians started before the 1948 war in places like Jaffa and Haifa, where the local population was gathered up into the village square, bombarded with mortar fire, and literally forced into the sea where British naval vessels picked up the survivors and took them eventually to refugee camps.
And the idea that innocent Palestinian villagers and women and children are somehow collectively responsible for the actions of the Jordanian or Egyptian military is yet another example of the Zionist racist tribalistic mind set of "heck they're all just Arabs"
PS the last time someone claimed that people who lost wars could be ethnically cleansed, he had a funny little moustache.
http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Jews-Karl-Marx/dp/0806529539
Plenty of Jews object to Israels cooption of the Holocaust to promote its own political legitimacy and agenda
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
This is an awesome book about Jews that are trans. Beyond The Mechitza
I'm Reconstructionist and the movement is very accepting of queer and trans Jews.
I've also felt accepted by Reform Jews and Conservative Jews. I don't know any Orthodox Jews personally, so I couldn't say.
Excerpted from The Slifkin Challenge:
"What is mankind's primary purpose of existence?"
The Rambam states there is a singular purpose for mankind: to attain true knowledge.
Then he goes on to state that the proper attainment of this ultimate purpose requires other prerequisites.
Don't be misled by the fact that the Rambam says the ideal human being is one who is both learned and possesses proper character. He is quite clear earlier that having proper character is only necessary to allow one's intellect to properly understand the truth.
Having proper character alone is not the ultimate human achievement.
And having a correct understanding of the truth is simply not possible without proper character development.
This means that according to the Rambam, the highest form of human endeavor is really attainment of the ultimate truth. The refinement of character is simply a prerequisite. An indispensable one at that, but it is not the end goal.
***
The Ultimate Importance of KNOWING Maimonides First Five Principles.
Maimonides' Radical Universalism
Maimonides' Confrontation with Mysticism
Jewish American Literature, huh?
You should read this.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
Some black groups in America supported the slogans "Africans back to Africa", these people are ones who are willing to sacrifice people from their community to meet their political objectives. Same was the case with the zions who had collaborated with Hitler.
Poor Muslim labourers cannot afford this because they are the ones losing first if secularism goes while Muslim businessmen would vote for right or liberal or right wing agenda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)
https://www.amazon.com/Sufism-Taoism-Comparative-Philosophical-Concepts/dp/0520052641
http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520052642
https://www.scribd.com/document/263605121/sufism-and-taoism-a-comparat
http://www.seekeraftertruth.com/toshihiko-izutsu-sufism-taoism/
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
Really? Check out the history of Zionism and the Nazis...
http://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
http://www.amazon.com/The-Transfer-Agreement-25th-Anniversary-Edition/dp/0914153137/ref=pd_sim_14_2?ie=UTF8&dpID=51pBrljOWRL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR106%2C160_&refRID=0GN1CVGSZNESC2C73HZZ
Hell, Google the history of the Lehi. Or, check out this link and the sources provided... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_political_violence
Or downvote facts? Rebel against knowledge. "Ignorance is strength. War is peace. Freedom is slavery."
It seems all literature about Arabs sympathizing with Nazis revolve around Al-Husseini, a marginal man in exile who lost his status several years before he knew Hitler. The connections that one man and few others - who they had their own motives - had with the Germans is not enough to call every Arab literally a Nazi.
By your logic, a lot of other nationalities and races took more active role in the Axis. [Jews] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FzmvniIUmc) and Zionists, Christian Chruch. But don't see much hate directed to them.
>Ever wonder why so many people hate Jews?
This book is a good, simple explanation Why the Jews?: The Reason for Antisemitism, by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin.
This is not a rebuttal of anything I said, as the relevant excerpt was from his Senate platform, and not the opinion of anyone at Snopes. But I see that in your opinion, actual argument is for other people, just like empathy. Or:
>They even like to play with discourse, for by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert.
Source
You should check out the book Why the Jews. It's pretty comprehensive on the origins and reasons for anti-semitism.
Before you speak of "Post-Shoah" Zionism. Take a read at this
https://www.amazon.com/Conversations-Crow-Gregory-Douglas-ebook/dp/B00GHMAQ5E
https://www.amazon.in/Conversations-Crow-Gregory-Douglas-ebook/dp/B00GHMAQ5E/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1462721376&sr=1-1&keywords=Conversations+with+the+Crow
I haven't read The Holocaust Industry in a while, but if I am not mistaken, it rejects what you're saying and offers a completely different perspective. Please read the book in its entirety before criticizing it or me.
Karl Marx's actual title for that book was "On the Jewish Question," which was merely about whether or not Jews could be granted equal rights without being forced to abandon their Judaic faith and tradition (long story short: Marx's conclusion was "yes").
The title "A World Without Jews" was an alternate translation concocted by Dagobert D. Runes, apparently for the sole purpose of deliberately smearing Marx's public image.
I’m glad you were able to get an apology from her. Maybe she will indeed learn something. Which is amazing. Also you are amazing for wanting to educate your class.
Although you probably saw it in your research, this entry from the US Holocaust Museum is quite good:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/antisemitism
If you can find it, the book Why The Jews? by Joseph Telushkin and Dennis Prager might be an interesting resource.
It's more complicated than most people realize.
In a way it makes sense: Zionists are ethno-nationalists. For example the Christchurch killer was an avid Zionist and stated in his lame manifesto that Israel had the right idea.
But I understand your deeper argument. It's sort of like when a person is abused as a child and grows up to become a child abuser. People are incredulous: YOU WERE ABUSED, WHY ARE YOU DOING THE SAME THING? I don't really understand it either; my parents are saints. But apparently it's pretty common.
In the case of Israel I think there's a very strong tribalistic aspect. Jews are taught from infancy that they are destined to be both persecuted and great. That's some heady stuff.
Archives for the links in comments:
----
I am Mnemosyne 2.1, Watch out for moon rocks! ^^^^/r/botsrights ^^^^Contribute ^^^^message ^^^^me ^^^^suggestions ^^^^at ^^^^any ^^^^time ^^^^Opt ^^^^out ^^^^of ^^^^tracking ^^^^by ^^^^messaging ^^^^me ^^^^"Opt ^^^^Out" ^^^^at ^^^^any ^^^^time
As to if its reasonable to question the factuality of the Holocaust, I cant determine what is reasonable for other people. From my perspective, the evidence supporting the Holocaust is absolutely undeniable. Photographic evidence (NSFL), the physical existence of the camps, primary accounts of the camps which range from camp gaurds to camp liberators to imprisoned Jews suggest that the genocide happened, and futher supports the idea that it existed on a massive scale. Further, the Nuremberg trials were heavily based on primary evidence, and concluded that the Holocaust existed. And these examples are but a drop in the bucket of a massive collection of stories, confessions, and testimonies concerning the extermination of the Jewish people.
For me, it is simply impossible to deny the Holocaust.
There are a lot of reasons why a person might deny the holocaust: ignorance, contrarianism, or a general conspiratorial attitude. However, the most infamous Holocaust deniers generally do so from a politically biased perspective. The Holocaust had tremendous political and social implications for many Jews, including the creation of a Jewish homeland in the Levant. Anti-semites, Arab nationalists, and Anti-westerners have rejected the Holocaust that the might sabotage the legitimacy of Israel, as well as justify their own extreme rhetoric.
This isnt to say that there isnt interesting and important questions which need to be asked of the Holocaust. Many historians have, and continue to, explore the question of "What did x person know, and when?" or "How did the Holocaust evolve as national policy?" Holocaust historians continue to explore these questions, and ask hard questions to try and explain why such a sad and traumatic event happened.
As a final note, Ive really focused on the Jewish Holocaust. The Russian genocide, which goes hand-in-hand with the Jewish Holocaust, is really very similar. In fact, many Nazi's were more willing to admit to what happened in Russia, given the climate of Post-War politics concerning the Eastern Bloc. But at the same time, AFAIK there are no serious deniers of the Russian Holocaust, especially because the Russians rally around it as a nationalistic point.
Good examinations of Holocaust denial are Richard Evan's Lying about Hitler and Deborah Lipstadt's Denying the Holocaust.
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Jews-The-Reason-Antisemitism/dp/0743246209/ref=cm_lmf_img_4
Not exactly, see below. The short answer is the ten commandments.
If you want a REALLY good primer on Jewish values, beliefs, and thoughts, take a look at the following:
Jewish Wisdom
Jewish Literacy
Jewish Values
A Code of Jewish Ethics
Chaim Halevi Donin's books
Between R. Telushkin and R. Donin you will get a very comprehensive intro to Judaism. I have personally read at least 6 of the 9 or so books posted here, and have found both to be exceptionally well written and informative. R. Telushkin is a personal favorite of mine, and I think he nails it every time, not only in terms of accuracy and quality of writing, but in making it actually enjoyable to read. Aka, when I sit down with one of his books, I will clear easily 600 to 800 pages a day.
Hope that helps!
Try this:
http://www.islambuddhism.com/docs/CommonGround.pdf esp p.79
Also regarding Islam and Taoism
https://www.amazon.com/Sufism-Taoism-Comparative-Philosophical-Concepts/dp/0520052641
Tales Of The Chassdim is on Kindle.
I want to respond to you directly but this is also in reference to what /u/Casual_Observer0 said as a response to your piece. There have been several discussions across halachic Jewish literature and even here on on /r/Judaism about whether or not Judaism requires a positive statement of belief or merely as long as one doesn't explicitly mention a negative statement contradicting the beliefs one is assumed to be a member in good standing.
Nearly everyone is familiar with the Rambam's 13 principles of belief. Fewer are familiar with Chasdai Crescas 6 principles or R' Yosef Albo's 3 principles. While you may not personally believe them, there are many poskim who say that we can assume any Jew is kosher as long as they don't explicitly disclaim them.
Finally I have also seen at least one scholar, R' Marc Shapiro who has questioned why these dogmatic statements exist at all. I wouldn't recommend the book to everyone but I think you might be interested in reading one of his works, The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides' Thirteen Principles Reappraised. In a similar vein, Menachem Kellner also addresses the question about dogma and the Rambam in Must a Jew Believe Anything?. It's been a while since I read them but if I remember correctly, both say that there have been among our earliest scholars (rishonim) who disagreed or contradicted with each of the Rambam's principles and therefore those principles cannot be a bright line for who is in and out of the religious Jewish world.
It's the subject of many books (like this one ) and countless doctoral theses.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1906764158
required reading for anyone making a connection between the rambam and the Andalusian school of thought and kabbalah.
You're not the first person to ask that question.
Here's a book exploring the answer
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/world/middleeast/netanyahu-saying-palestinian-mufti-inspired-holocaust-draws-broad-criticism.html
And actually it was the Zionists who collaborated with Hitler
https://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
Yes, I agree with you the survivors and their relatives deserve better.
I back this up with the in-depth writings of Norman Finkelstein . I think his book has been mentioned, but I'll repeat it: http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
Antisemitism shouldn't be allowed to be used like kryptonite to silence reality.
Perhaps you're familiar with Moshe Feiglin? He is advocating for the "temporary" installment of "concentration camps" and the diaspora of the Palestinians.
I might be a dyed in the wool mina and apikorsa, but man, even I have arguments about that with a good friend of mine who is an orthodox rabbi.
The reason
Dr. Marc Shapiro's 'The Limits of Orthodox Theology"
https://www.amazon.com/Limits-Orthodox-Theology-Reappraised-Civilization/dp/1906764239
It is pretty much impossible to prove someone is a heretic, which are positions you are posting about.
It is so difficult to do anything about heresy, that if it weren't for the fact that I am already female, the reason I can't be a witness for contractual matters like a wedding isn't my heresey: it's because I publicly break the sabbath. That one is provable after the fact, whereas hersey is basically impossible to get a straight definition of in orthodox theological thought.
So even though there is a mitzvah to remember the exodus in your daily prayers which is fulfilled by reciting all the paragraphs of the shma, there is no comittee forcing you to believe those paragraphs.
As Dr. Yeshayahu Leibovitz accurately pointed out Judaism is a Doing -> Believing religion, unlike Christianity which is Beleiving -> Doing religion.
So plenty of rigorous orthodox scholars think the Kuzari is pablum, and don't care very much about lack of or presence of archeological evidence. Everyday orthodox society doesn't even focus on this as an issue. It doesn't matter.
I admit this is weird, but that's how it works
This is a decent one.
There are many books on the subject, and there was a unit on it in the holocaust class I took at Cal.
http://www.amazon.com/Nazis-Islamists-Making-Modern-Middle-ebook/dp/B00I50EXP0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406651825&sr=8-1&keywords=nazi+germany+and+arabs
http://www.amazon.com/Farhud-Roots-Arab-Nazi-Alliance-Holocaust-ebook/dp/B00AGJZEOC/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1406651825&sr=8-3&keywords=nazi+germany+and+arabs
http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Germany-World-Francis-Nicosia/dp/110706712X/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1406651825&sr=8-4&keywords=nazi+germany+and+arabs
and a good critical view that looks at both sides:
http://www.amazon.com/Arab-Responses-Fascism-Nazism-Attraction-ebook/dp/B00LEYR2C0/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1406651825&sr=8-7&keywords=nazi+germany+and+arabs
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Jews-Antisemitism-Dennis-Prager/dp/0743246209
>It depends if you count the transition from El to Yahweh as two separate gods.
This makes no sense. These names are interchanged throughout the Torah to represent different attributes of God and his functions. Why did you leave out Elokim and Shakkai as well?
As well, these accusations of polytheism have been thoroughly debunked within the last century by Umberto Cassuto.
>Israel was just one of the tribes of the Canaanites and eventually chose one of their own Canaanite polytheistic gods to be their primary tribal god. Ancient anthropology helps put a lot of the OT into context.
Again, this is very skewed and wrong. This book does not support anything you're saying in what I'm quoting above and this is one of the readers we were instructed to use at my very liberal, anti religious University.
None of your attempt at this anthropological history ever came up because it's just nonsense. People attempt, from multiple angles, to undermine Jewish history with a number of theories, but most of them get dismissed and don't hold up to scrutiny. The attempt to say that HaShem is really these other Gods reworded, or in some pantheon of Gods is just silly.
I would also recommend this book on the thirteen principles: http://www.amazon.com/The-Limits-Orthodox-Theology-Civilization/dp/1906764239
But perhaps this argument is better suited to /r/judaism :-)
Consider books about Germany after WWII -https://www.amazon.com/After-Reich-Brutal-History-Occupation-ebook/dp/B00PM8I1G0/
Nazi Germany was the only modern country to face an actual apocalypse. They deserved it. Don't get me wrong. But stories about how people faced it might be relevant.
For example, the best way to preserve large amounts of wealth is with precious gems. Not only are they valuable, they're mobile. How many gold bars can you shove up your ass?
I don't think they are "denying" the holocaust, but again, after reading Dr. Norman Finkelstein's (Who's parents both perished during WW2) book, Holocaust Industry, I have my reservations on the term, "Holocaust".
I don't think Iran is denying the fact that Jews were persecuted just like lots of other races/religions during WW2, but certainly they are debating and discussing this so called, "holocaust".
P.S. Read the book, Holocaust Industry by Dr. Finkelstein.
>Oh, your point is 100% correct. Israel is the Jewish state.
No. It's a racist ethnostate, much like that envisioned of Adolph himself. And before you retort with some more puerile name calling, take a quick peek at Lenni Brenner's 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis.
>Oh, what a tangled web we weave when our hate for Israel and Jews supersedes all logic and morality. A person that helps someone commit a crime is more guilty than the person who actually commits the crime? You got a legal precedent for that?
First of all, I don't "hate" teh joos. In fact, in some respects, I have the utmost respect for a people who have pulled off some of the shit they've managed to pull off. Your request for legal precedent indicates that you must agree that the law makes no distinction between principle and aider and abettor. We'll just leave it at that since you like the law so much. Israel may plead guilty now - to murder. Again.
>I directly addressed the merits of your point, it appears you simply aren't intelligent enough to understand me.
So, you fancy yourself a logician, eh? Then you must recognize that your attempt to draw a general rule from the atypical case of the Reform Jews is the quintessence of the Hasty Generalization Fallacy. And some of your other points are textbook examples of argumentum ad logicam, and argumentum ad ignorantiam. And of course you've proven yourself the master of argumentum ad hominem.
Just because you cannot countenance the horrific deeds of your race-nation does not mean you have to disparage me by attempting to affiliate me with a white supremacist group. Interestingly, when Identity Christian groups mirror the exact claims of jews by claiming that they too are G-d's chosen people albeit from the Lost Tribes of Israel, they are considered a racist organization. What does that say about judaism? So you see, judaism is much more aligned with Stormfront than am I, which again explains Lenni Brenner's 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis.
You might want to look elsewhere. This sub, and site, aren't very accepting of Holocaust skepticism.
I'd suggest reading actual books on the subject. Here's some places to start:
https://www.amazon.com/Denying-Holocaust-Growing-Assault-Memory/dp/0452272742
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0520216121/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_of_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=5DEFX2BVQA1NXDGX1XPE
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0465021530/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_of_8?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=PK9GJG86KSCWJVVXB91M
Or visit /r/Holocaust for some community based skepticism
The Tao Te Ching is also a religious text. And the Quran is also a deeply philosophical text.
If you're interested in learning how they are related, you should read Sufism and Taoism: A Comparative Study of Key Philosophical Concepts. It is by Toshihiko Izutsu, a renowned Japanese scholar of theology.
Its not christian at all. There's no ambiguity in christianity. Angels choose to either be good or evil, and if they choose evil its not for some ambiguously questionable failing, but a deliberate choice to be evil. Demons falling because of some ambiguous attempt to serve G-d even better than what he wants sound more islamic or something. It would have no coherent place in christianity.
https://www.amazon.com/God-Verb-Kabbalah-Practice-Mystical/dp/1573226947/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1505439938&sr=8-1&keywords=god+is+a+verb
It was in this book, from an alleged rabbi. It even mentions that some angels are envious of humans because humans have free will, but then goes on to describe a lot of specific stories in the zohar that sound like there is very much a possibility of rebellion. From my last thread here, I was told that the talmud more or less openly accepts that there are demons, and the idea of there not being any in judaism is semi modern, despite being presented as a long standing truth.
http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation-Suffering/dp/185984488X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261517612&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation-Suffering/dp/185984488X
> I'm sorry but I stopped half way through your post.
That's the problem. You guys try to ignore the strong anti-Jewish resentments in the Muslim world. If you don't want to use the information provided by MEMRI look at Palestinian Media Watch:
> Our enmity with the Jews is a matter of [or 'based on'] faith; our enmity with the Jews is a matter of faith, more than an enmity owing to [or 'arising from'] occupation and the land. (...)
-Preacher paid by the PA on the official television of the PA
Or recent findings of the Pew Global Attitudes Project:
> In the predominantly Muslim nations surveyed, views of Jews are largely unfavorable. Nearly all in Jordan (97%), the Palestinian territories (97%) and Egypt (95%) hold an unfavorable view. Similarly, 98% of Lebanese express an unfavorable opinion of Jews, including 98% among both Sunni and Shia Muslims, as well as 97% of Lebanese Christians.
Or look at the rich literature about Jew-hatred. Someone who doesn't see Muslim anti-Semitism doesn't want to. That's a dangerous and immoral behavior.
The relationship between Jews and Muslims in Muslim dominated countries can be and was peaceful - but mostly poisoned by anti-Jewish resentments. In those countries the general attitude of the Muslims toward the Jews is that of a master towards slaves, whom he treats with a certain lordly tolerance so long as they keep their place. Any sign of pretension to equality is promptly repressed. That includes an own Jewish state.
---
So it is not important what Israel does; it will always be wrong. Even painful Israeli concessions stimulate not reciprocal Palestinian goodwill but rather irredentism, ambition, fury, and violence. Diplomatic negotiations through the 1990s led to a parade of Israeli retreats that had the perverse effect of turning the middling-bad situation of 1993 into the awful one of 2000.
---
Therefore I see only one solution: the Arab-Israeli conflict will be resolved only when one side gives up.
Until now, through round after round of war, both sides have retained their goals. Israel fights to win acceptance by its enemies, while those enemies fight to eliminate Israel. Those goals are raw, unchanging, and mutually contradictory. Israel's acceptance or elimination are the only states of peace. Each observer must opt for one solution or the other. A civilized person will want Israel to win, for its goal is defensive, to protect an existing and flourishing country. Its enemies' goal of destruction amounts to pure barbarism. Israel must win. Then there will be peace - the best thing that can happen to the Palestinian Arabs.
Thoughts on this book?
http://www.amazon.com/Code-Jewish-Ethics-Volume-Shall/dp/1400048354
If you want a good 10,000-foot view of it all the way to modern Judaism I would recommend one of these if you are interested in learning more:
by Michael Satlow
Satlow also has a good podcast called "From Israelite to Jew" you can listen to for a decent, and brief overview, his book is really the follow-up to that.
Here's one citation.
Also, some background.
There is a great book about trans Jewish people. “Balancing the Mechitza: Transgender in Jewish Community” It’s an anthology of people’s stories.
One of them has inspired me to have my Hebrew name changed. It’s currently Esther but I want to change it to David, after my father who passed away April 4, 2014.
This tid-bit I learned from Eustace Mullens. Is it true? I don't really know. He was on the FBI watch list for most of his life though, so we can imagine he was on to something.
What is thouroughly documented though, is the fact that there was close collaboration between the 2.
By the way, you forgot to label me as anti-semite for speaking out against Zionism.
IBM also provided punch-card sorting equipment, the punch cards themselves, and engineering services that supported German industrial planning, rail scheduling and the management of concentration camps.
Source
God, I hate explaining simple things.
All of the holocaust-themed books, movies, television productions, and history lessons have, as an undercurrent, the idea that the holocaust wasn't a condition of certain circumstances (ie, a particular regime during a losing war) but that it was a natural result of man's inherent evil. All of the above materials aim to make the viewer [1] feel guilty. I don't want to get into it too deeply, but let's say that the Jews have had considerable leniency regarding foreign policy activity as a result of the understanding that 1) they are all victims, and 2) everyone else is a criminal.
http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation-Suffering/dp/185984488X/
The performance being covered by the bbc is rather shamelessly doing the same thing.
[1] NOT JUST ME, but everyone including me, hence my original comment.
I don't particularly agree with everything Norm Finkelstein has to say, but this book nailed it.
Essentially, what he argues is that some Jews have turned the Holocaust into a business and monopolized it. They use it to blackmail governments and stifle any criticism of Israel (or Judaism for that matter - not that you hear any of that...it's always either Christianity or Islam).
These people have cheapened the holocaust...they've reduced it to an excuse for them to influence world opinion, and it seems that more and more people aren't willing to be pushed around any more as they feel the zionists have depleted their moral capital.
Anyways, talking about the holocaust is never a pleasant topic. It degenerates into a petty political mudsling very quickly and insults all those who died during its course, Jews and non-Jews alike.
Norman Finkelstein has also written eloquently about this in his books "The Holocaust Industry" and "Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History".
http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation-Suffering/dp/185984488X
http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Chutzpah-Misuse-Anti-Semitism-History/dp/0520249895
It really comes down to "marketing". It might sound crazy, but if you want to learn more about this topic you should read this Norman Finkelstein's book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
>This is an appeal to consequences.
Yes. Your actions have consequences. Welcome to adulthood.
> I do not argue in favor of discrimination against any individual
That's all very fine and well, but when you use your platform (how many subscribers do you have? Hundreds of thousands?) to argue that blacks have inferior intelligence it doesn't really matter whether you qualify your statements or not. You're just pouring fuel on the fire of racial conflict.
One of the sticking points here is that you have gone out of your way to promote a white supremacist while offering nothing in the way of criticism except to cover your own ass by (unconvincingly) claiming you don't share his views. You know what would have been more productive? You could have invited on a leftist concerned with workplace safety issues and discussed whether right-libertarianism and the destruction of unions are conducive to reducing deaths in the workplace. Apparently you would prefer to hob nob with Neo-Nazis and gutter trash like Roosh V.
>IQ may indeed be a factor in prison populations in general
Certainly not among the upper classes, considering that very bright fellows like Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs have yet to be imprisoned (or hanged, as occurred with currency speculators in the middle ages). Or did you mean to say that high IQ folks are better at evading justice? Turns out dumb rich folks don't have much to worry about either, otherwise George W. Bush would have been executed at the Hague.
>(ambition, perseverance, industriousness, rule-consciousness, risk aversion, openness, etc)
Hilarious that you didn't mention the single most important factor -- inheritance. Also hilarious that you think "rule consciousness" is associated with wealth. Haven't you ever heard the expression "nice guys finish last"?
>IQ is correlated with success, but it's not the only factor.
Not by a long shot. Jordan Peterson's claim that IQ = success is pure hogwash.
"In fact, when Zagorsky charted IQ against people’s likelihood to have financial struggles like paying bills late, declaring bankruptcy and maxing out their credit cards, people with the highest IQs were more likely to have financial instability than those with just slightly above-average scores.
"In a paper last year, Wai wrote that many of the world’s wealthiest benefit from familial largesse. “Highest average net worth appeared to be linked to inheritance, showing the wealthiest people also tended to not have been the ones to have earned their own way, even in part,” he said.
http://time.com/money/4600143/are-millionaires-smarter-than-the-rest-of-us/
As for billionaires -- don't even get me started. The richest people (who aren't even listed on the Forbes 500 -- see Michael Parenti "the Super-rich are out of site") inherit their wealth. The greatest artists in history mostly died poor. We don't live in a meritocracy. We live in a plutocracy.
>blacks are superior in some ways to whites
What, in terms of athletics? That's debatable.
>I don't recall him arguing that they are less than human.
And here you are again defending this piece of trash.
>I have argued that in terms of psychology, a black man has more in common with a white man than a black woman, and vice versa.
Indeed.
>As for your assertions about how this is all a plot by billionaires and the CIA or whatever, what the FUCK does that matter?
It would seem to matter quite a lot, considering that people of your ilk seem to be under the mistaken impression that "the left" is responsible for feminism and identity politics. As it turns out it was the far right that bankrolled the whole affair -- the same class of people you support.
>It's not billionaires rioting in the streets destroying the property of people who don't even have anything to do with this.
Again I encourage you to read up on the history of this sort of stuff. I'd be happy to provide you with a list of resources, including by former CIA officers like Philip Agee (though I should warn you that some of them are in book form). The CIA, incidentally, was founded by a bunch of Wall Street bankers and lawyers. You're effectively blaming the hitman while ignoring the Mafia Don.
>Calling a Jew a Jewish supremacist and human excrement... how very nazi-esque of you.
Zionists got along just fine with the Nazis. They were both supremacists.
Tell me, do you agree with Shapiro that the Palestinians should be be expelled from Gaza, even after most of their land has already been stolen and their people ethnically cleansed? And keeping in mind that this would be violation of the Geneva Conventions?
I repeat that Shapiro is human excrement. And talk about neoteny! ;)
Edit: few words
Do you like Karl Marx? He did not care for Jews. Che Guevara? He did not care for blacks. Margaret Sanger? She was a eugenicist that identified blacks as an inferior breed and advocated for a plan to exterminate them. If you do not find their views repulsive then I wonder if you are a decent person.
These 2 soucres both claim half a million deaths die to ethnic cleansing by the Allies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/03/the-forgotten-story-of-when-the-germans-were-the-refugees/
https://www.amazon.com.au/After-Reich-Brutal-History-Occupation-ebook/dp/B00PM8I1G0
Careful, you might uncover some very uncomfortable truths. ;) That's edited by a Jewish academic, incidentally.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holocaust-Industry-Reflections-Exploitation/dp/185984488X
Jewish intellectual lays out how the Holocaust has been turned into an "extortion racket."
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/irene-zisblatt-diamond-girl-fact-or.html
Bloggers who have spent years debating Holocaust deniers admit that a modern Holocaust celebrity (featured prominently in a recent Spielberg Holocaust documentary) is a complete liar.
Most people are pointing out the obvious like this, they arent denying it happened.
They're a self governing territory same as the west bank. But you're still correct it's the military regime is Hamas who sinks aid money into digging tunnels they can use to attack Israel from and rockets. Let's not pretend they're some innocent party here, they store weapons in schools and mosques for fucks sake. Also the claim that the land was stolen from them is just flat out a lie. Prior to WWI it was a part of the Ottoman empire. Afterwards the parts not governed by Britain were controlled by Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and the French.
From a thread in a different sub by
/u/mightymetricbatman
To explain the history of why Israel does not take any shit from its Arab neighbors particularly groups like Hamas who exist to kill them all. And don't take my word for it it's in their founding charter.
"Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."
They don't want to peace they want to destroy Israel and slaughter the Jews. How would you deal with a group like that?
The reasons for this go back prior to Israel being founded.
I'll repost something from another thread in a different sub. Credit goes to /u/mightymetricbatman
In 1941 there was an Arab uprising against Britain by Arabs that considered themselves allies of the Nazis. They lasted about a month, but not before instigating the Farhud, the largest and deadliest pogrom in the middle east. Only a prelude to the civil rights taken away from Jews in Iraq after WW2 which would the Jewish community in Iraq. A community 1000 years older than Islam and had played host to the exilarch, or 'patriach in exile', the last known family in direct descent of King David. See The Farhud by Edwin Black, the same guy behind IBM and the Holocaust and The Transfer Agreement. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AGJZEOC/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
In the early Muslim Brotherhood itself the biggest ally of the Nazis was Sayyid Qutb, whose personal tome is translated from Arabic, 'My Struggle Against the Jews' - the reference is obvious. Qutb was far more willing to use than the founder Hassan Al-Banna and as such Al-Qaeda and Hamas are merely implementations of their spiritual grandfather.
The Ba'ath parties that dominated after overthrowing their appropriate kings in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria were all modeled after the Nazi party. As Hitler had espoused a pan-Germanic nationalism, so did Ba'ath promote a pan-Arabic nationalism. Briefly resulting in the United Arab Republic of Egypt-Syria, a terribly unstable and viciously racist affair.
In 1944 the Nazis made a last ditch effort to expand the Holocaust to British Palestine. In Operation Atlas three German Templars that lived in Palestine together with two Arabs parachuted in British Palestine with enough Arsenic to kill 250,000 people. They planned to poison the water supply of Tel Aviv. This was last ditch because of course the Nazis were pushed back by the Soviet Union instead of being able to expand the 'normal' processes of the Holocaust to the area. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Operation_Atlas_(Mandatory_Palestine)
Edit: The Arab League boycott of the Jewish community based in British Palestine, now Israel began in 1945. It was modeled after the Nazi boycott of the Jewish community. Note that 1945 is before the creation of Israel, before the Nakba, before the 1967 Six Day War, before the occupation. The boycott was about the Yishuv, or Jewish Community in Palestine, largely calling for having an independent state, not some protest about the treatment of Arabs in Palestine. A person who is joining the modern BDS movement, is in actuality joining the Arab Boycott as the PLO is part of the Arab League. And that boycott is modeled after the Nazis. There is nothing new under the sun. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Arab_League_boycott_of_Israel
TL;DR A number of Arabs, some of which were instrumental to the future of the Middle East considered themselves more allied to the Nazis than vice versa. Their admiration of the Nazis created many of both the authoritarian regimes that dominated the latter half of the 20th century and inspired some of the worst Islamist terrorist groups today.
You mean how each year there are more holocaust survivors for whom lawyers discover new claims to be compensated for while they collect the profits?
No, I don't think satisfied is the correct description for the German feelings towards that shakedown.
>The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering
(EDIT: I'd like to remind you folks of reddiquette. this is factual sourced information not some conspiracy theory.)
Al-Husayni wasn't even in Palestine when he was in contact with the Nazis, and he wasn't part of a significant movement.
And you should also be aware of Nazi - Zionist ties.
http://www.amazon.com/51-Documents-Zionist-Collaboration-Nazis/dp/1569804338
Some summary quotes
The Zionists also had a trade plan with the Berlin government by which German Jews could redeem their property in Nazi goods exported to then British-occupied Palestine. And to top it all off, the infamous SS-Hptscharf. Adolf Eichmann, had visited Palestine, in October, 1937, as the guest of the Zionists. He also met, in Egypt, with Feivel Polkes, a Zionist operative, whom Eichmann described as a “leading Haganah functionary.” The chain-smoking Polkes was also on the Nazis’ payroll “as an informer.”
As early as June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation was sending a secret memorandum to the Nazis, which said, in part:
“It is our opinion that an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state [German Reich] can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims as a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry- -indeed, that such a national renewal must first create the decisive social and spiritual premises for all solutions...”
Incredibly, Avraham Stern, the leader of the notorious “Stern Gang,” late in 1940, made a written proposal to Hitler, by which the Jewish militias in Palestine, would fight on “Germany’s side,” in the war against England, in exchange for the Nazis help in resolving the “Jewish Question” in Europe, and their assistance in creating an “historic Jewish state.” By this date, German troops had already marched into Prague, invaded Poland, and had built the first concentration camp at Auschwitz. The deranged Stern had further bragged about how the Zionist organizations were “closely related to the totalitarian movements of Europe in [their] ideology and structure.” Stern’s obscene proposal was found in the German embassy, in Turkey, after WWII.