The Gypsies? [Archive]

Holden Caulfield

11th August 2009, 12:47

Who hates the Gypsies? Did I miss something?
At my school if somebody even mentions a goddamned stereotype as a harmless joke there's always a bunch of buggers yelling, "Get lost, racist Nazi!":rolleyes:
Have we reached a point where people discriminate against those who are racist?:confused:

Alot of people 'hate' gypsies, its one of the most prevelant acceptabe prejudices. In Carlisle there is a travellers camp on the borders of the city and people are very hostile towards tho who live there in their opinions, due to the animosity them living 'outside' society brings (by that I mean remaining in a rather close knit group), due to issues over tax and public services and due to many other reasons. Many young traveller lads often get into fights as well and generally only hang out together, or this is at least how it is perceived.

I don't think its prejudiced on our behalf to acknowledge such things. For example when I say traveller lads get into fights I am not stating they are violent, but that a siege mentality and community bonds leads to things. i.e. One traveller kid gets abused, other people from his community will stand up for him.

Travellers are not a problem, society is, they are used as scapegoats alot, and fear is spread in the national bourgeois press concerning them leading to problems.

There are also issues of poorly educated children being left behind in schools which could be sorted out.

What do people think about what i've said, its a subject I've not fully considered before and that I have myself in the past been prejudiced about.

Pogue

11th August 2009, 13:06

Theres alot of predjudice towards them here. I think its because they are an easy target, and there are stereotypes of them that are widely beleived which people seem to think means they are above racism. People call them 'pikeys' as a term of abuse here.

brigadista

11th August 2009, 13:14

there is a European Roma Rights centre
http://www.errc.org/

you can look on this site by country -

Roma are some of the most discriminated against people in the world....

http://www.romaniworld.com/

apparently there is a Roma community in Australia but i cant find any links...

and
http://www.geocities.com/romanestan/

JohannGE

11th August 2009, 14:19

Far from all people labled as gypsies are Roma. In the uk I would think they are a minority of the many people stereotyped by the term gypsy.

Not that it justifies the predjudice though.

communard resolution

11th August 2009, 15:13

I would like to know more about the history of Roma, Sinti, and other gypsy ethnicities. I barely know anything about them other than that they are extremely vulnerable and are often attacked, particularly in Eastern Europe.

Holden correctly pointed out how anti-gypsy sentiments are 'acceptable racism'. As someone living in the UK, I've noticed that a lot of people feel it's not acceptable to make racist remarks about black people anymore, but have no problem sterotyping gypsies, Germans, or Eastern Europeans. It doesn't seem to occur to some that racism against any ethnic group is wrong, not just racism against one particular group.

brigadista

11th August 2009, 15:21

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/gypsies.html

communard resolution

11th August 2009, 15:26

Killfacer

11th August 2009, 15:52

It is strange how anti-gypsy sentiment seems to be the acceptable face of racism.

Pogue

11th August 2009, 15:54

Also alot of Irish travellers, people most often referred to racistly in the UK was pikeys, find the word gypsies offensive too.

khad

11th August 2009, 15:54

It is strange how anti-gypsy sentiment seems to be the acceptable face of racism.
Yes, the film Borat was the perfect example. That Roma village tried suing that zionist fuck for abuse and exploitation but had the case thrown out in court.

Those of you who laughed at that film are unwittingly complicit in yet another dehumanizing humiliation inflicted upon the Roma people.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415871/Borat-film-tricked-poor-village-actors.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415871/Borat-film-tricked-poor-village-actors.html)

When Sacha Baron Cohen (http://explore.dailymail.co.uk/people/cohen_sacha_baron) wanted a village to represent the impoverished Kazakh home of his character Borat, he found the perfect place in Glod: a remote mountain outpost with no sewerage or running water and where locals eke out meagre livings peddling scrap iron or working patches of land.

...

So when a Hollywood film crew descended on a nearby run-down motel last September, with their flashy cars and expensive equipment, locals thought their lowly community might finally be getting some of the investment it so desperately needs. The crew was led by a man villagers describe as 'nice and friendly, if a bit weird and ugly', who they later learned was Baron Cohen. It is thought the producers chose the region because locals more closely resembled his comic creation than genuine Kazakhs.

The comedian insisted on travelling everywhere with bulky bodyguards, because, as one local said: 'He seemed to think there were crooks among us.'
While the rest of the crew based themselves in the motel, Baron Cohen stayed in a hotel in Sinaia, a nearby ski resort a world away from Glod's grinding poverty. He would come to the village every morning to do 'weird things', such as bringing animals inside the run-down homes, or have the village children filmed holding weapons.

Mr Tudorache, a deeply religious grandfather who lost his arm in an accident, was one of those who feels most humiliated. For one scene, a rubber sex toy in the shape of a fist was attached to the stump of his missing arm - but he had no idea what it was.

Only when The Mail on Sunday visited him did he find out. He said he was ashamed, confessing that he only agreed to be filmed because he hoped to top up his £70-a-month salary - although in the end he was paid just £3.

He invited us into his humble home and brought out the best food and drink his family had. Visibly disturbed, he said shakily: 'Someone from the council said these Americans need a man with no arm for some scenes. I said yes but I never imagined the whole country, or even the whole world, will see me in the cinemas ridiculed in this way. This is disgusting.

'Our region is very poor, and everyone is trying hard to get out of this misery. It is outrageous to exploit people's misfortune like this to laugh at them.
'We are now coming together and will try to hire a lawyer and take legal action for being cheated and exploited. We are simple folk and don't know anything about these things, but I have faith in God and justice.'

...

The village, like others in the Dambovita region of Romania, is populated mainly by gipsies who say they are discriminated against by the rest of the country.

Pogue

11th August 2009, 15:57

Yes, the film Borat was the perfect example. That Roma village tried suing that zionist fuck for abuse and exploitation but had the case thrown out in court.

Those of you who laughed at that film are unwittingly complicit in yet another dehumanizing humiliation inflicted upon the Roma people.

http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415871/Borat-film-tricked-poor-village-actors.html

I don't think people who found it funny are complicit in anything. After all we didn't know at the time. I no longer find it funny now though.

Killfacer

11th August 2009, 16:49

(edit) delete please

Holden Caulfield

11th August 2009, 21:01

I tired to start a thread on this ages ago and to have some discussion on the topic, however it didn't take off, I would really like to hear what the likes of TC, Des, BK (and others who are good on social discrimination) have to say on the subject

Lacrimi de Chiciură

11th August 2009, 21:14

Gypsies are one of the most oppressed groups of people historically. I have heard that they may have been used as slave labor in the early years of Romani migration by the Persians, etc. but that is a long time ago so it's not certain. It is known however that certain Romani groups were enslaved for hundreds of years in Romania and Austria-Hungary, up until the late 1800s. There are still antiziganer pogroms in Eastern Europe, re-appearing after the collapse of the Eastern bloc. The Italian right wing and Italian government are also famous for their current persecution of Romanies; they are currently carrying out a program of fingerprinting all Romani children. (Clearly very racist.) Meanwhile, I have heard people who think gypsy is just a word for vagrant thieves, etc. This is not true, Gypsies are Romanies. "Gyppy, getting gypped," etc. these are all slurs against a hugely oppressed people.

by the way, there is a Romani Solidarity Group here on RevLeft dedicated to more discussion on this: http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=177 (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../group.php?groupid=177)

gorillafuck

11th August 2009, 21:19

Aeval

11th August 2009, 21:32

Yes, the film Borat was the perfect example. That Roma village tried suing that zionist fuck for abuse and exploitation but had the case thrown out in court.

Those of you who laughed at that film are unwittingly complicit in yet another dehumanizing humiliation inflicted upon the Roma people.

It's absolutely disgusting what he did, but not everyone is romania is roma, and that wasn't a roma village.

khad

11th August 2009, 21:37

It's absolutely disgusting what he did, but not everyone is romania is roma, and that wasn't a roma village.
Liar.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415871/Borat-film-tricked-poor-village-actors.html

It's a feeling Glod is used to. The village, like others in the Dambovita region of Romania, is populated mainly by gipsies who say they are discriminated against by the rest of the country.

Aeval

11th August 2009, 21:47

Liar.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415871/Borat-film-tricked-poor-village-actors.html

My apologies; you are correct. In looking for whether it was or not I accidentally looked up the whole area the village belongs to.

That said, I wouldn't use the daily mail as a source for anything. And it's funny that the mail would whinge about someone else being nasty about the roma, I'm pretty sure I've seen some horrendous stuff in there about 'gypsies' 'stealing and trashing the place' and god knows what else. example: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1105510/It-racist-state-gypsy-camps-frequently-cause-increase-crime-mess--statement-fact.html

khad

11th August 2009, 21:54

My apologies; you are correct. In looking for whether it was or not I accidentally looked up the whole area the village belongs to.

That said, I wouldn't use the daily mail as a source for anything. And it's funny that the mail would whinge about someone else being nasty about the roma, I'm pretty sure I've seen some horrendous stuff in there about 'gypsies' 'stealing and trashing the place' and god knows what else.
You can read the article from the BBC if you like:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7686885.stm

The American judge dismissed the case out of hand.

Regarding the original topic, the status of Roma did improve somewhat in the former socialist states due to various affirmative action-type programs and help in finding employment. They actively encouraged the Roma to abandon their traditional nomadism in favor of a settled mode of life. In places like Yugoslavia and Romania, assimilation appears to have had some success: http://www.osaarchivum.org/files/holdings/300/8/3/text/68-5-129.shtml

Since the collapse, they've become more unemployed, vagrant, and vulnerable. And god knows how xenophobic Eastern Europe as a whole has turned.

communard resolution

11th August 2009, 22:36

Regarding the original topic, the status of Roma did improve somewhat in the former socialist states due to various affirmative action-type programs and help in finding employment. They actively encouraged the Roma to abandon their traditional nomadism in favor of a settled mode of life. In places like Yugoslavia and Romania, assimilation appears to have had some success: http://www.osaarchivum.org/files/holdings/300/8/3/text/68-5-129.shtml

This is part of what interests me about Roma and what I hope to get out of this thread. How did their 'traditional nomadism' come about originally? Was it voluntary and part of their ethnic tradition, or did they find themselves in this situation due to unfortunate circumstances (forced migration, explusion)? What is their social organisation? Do their communities have 'chiefs' and laws? What is their religion and what role does it play in their lifestyle and social organisation? To what extent is their isolation from other societies voluntary?

I'd also be interested to know how gypsy communities have reacted to the assimilation programs mentioned above, what the assimilation programs entail beyond employment opportunities, and what you personally think of such programs and the idea of assimilation?

It would also be intereting to know what their situation was in the former 'socialist' states before the 90s. Were they integrated in collectivist Eastern Bloc/Balkan societies?

Holden Caulfield

11th August 2009, 23:13

It would also be intereting to know what their situation was in the former 'socialist' states before the 90s. Were they integrated in collectivist Eastern Bloc/Balkan societies?

It really would

Lacrimi de Chiciură

11th August 2009, 23:18

This is part of what interests me about Roma and what I hope to get out of this thread. How did their 'traditional nomadism' come about originally? Was it voluntary and part of their ethnic tradition, or did they find themselves in this situation due to unfortunate circumstances (forced migration, explusion)? What is their social organisation? Do their communities have 'chiefs' and laws? What is their religion and what role does it play in their lifestyle and social organisation? To what extent is their isolation from other societies voluntary?

The Romani professor Ian Hancock wrote a book called "We are the Romani People" that answers basically all of these questions in great detail.

Nomadism is to some degree part of Romani culture, because of the migration from Asia to Europe to America and onward, but traveling is also a byproduct of anti-Gypsy laws and racism. But most Romanies today are not nomads.

I think social organization varies a lot from country to country. There are many different groups of Gypsies and there is no monolithic "Gyspy Law." In eastern Europe there is a court system called the "kris" which is used for conflict resolution. Religion also varies from country to country. In western Europe and the Americas, they are mostly Christian, while in parts of the Balkans, Turkey, and the Middle East most Gypsies are Muslim. There are a lot of pentecostal churches among Gypsies in France. Also, there are some parts of Hindu religion that have carried over into Christianity. For example, there is an annual festival in southern France for Saint Sarah/Sainte Sara la Noire, the unofficial "patron saint" of the Gypsies, which is a carry over of a Hindu festival celebrating the goddess Kali or Durga.

Jethro Tull

12th August 2009, 02:13

I think it is a mistake to believe the term "gypsy" offers any legitimately useful social description. Use of the term should be avoided, not only because it's offensive, but because it muddles rather than clarifies discussion.

In addition to the Roma and the Sinti, (who, as we've mentioned before, are of South Asian descent and therefore "colored") the term "gypsy" can also refer to the "white" Yeniche in Switzerland, (who may be Celtic immigrants) as well as the Ceàrdannan and Pavees in Scottland and Ireland. (who, like the Burakumin, are descendents of a traditional socio-economic under-class) and the "småvandringer" in Scandinavia, who are also descended from "white" Scandinavians.

Also, the Bajau, Moken, Orang laut, and Urak Lawoi in Southeast Asia/Austronesia, the Banjara in India, the Domi and Lomavren/Bosha people in the Middle East are referred to as "gypsies".

Regarding Borat, what Mr. Cohen did to those Romanian Roma actors is obviously disgusting. We can (hopefully) all agree on that. However, in terms of economic exploitation, it's par for the course, in terms of exploitation of bit actors and other works, for the production of a Hollywood film. Virtually every film we see is (in one way or another) a product of economic exploitation - (including "independent" and amateur films) and this will be the case until the mode of production is communised. To suggest that working-class people who enjoy Hollywood films are "complicit" in capitalist exploitation serves only to mystify the proletariat's relationship to the mode of consumption. The film Borat actually strongly criticizes anti-Roma sentiment, regardless of the fact that Roma workers were exploited in order to film it.

However, does Khad have any proof that Mr. Cohen is a "Zionist", other than that he is a Jew, and that his films denounce anti-Semitism? The only other time I can remember Mr. Cohen being accused of being a "Zionist" was by an anti-Semitic right-wing conspiracy theorist.

RotStern

12th August 2009, 02:37

people hate gypsies because they supposedly steal everything that isn't nailed down to the floor and they park their caravans on peoples front yard and refuse to leave unless confronted by the police.

SUPPOSEDLY.
all in all they're stereotyped as criminals who hang out by subways and mug people.
Of course there are some gypsies who do this, but i'm sure there are also some who are just like us. :D

Die Rote Fahne

12th August 2009, 03:00

Just quote Lenin. The same point can be made for whichever idendity is being discriminated against.

"The Tsarist police, in alliance with the landowners and the capitalists, organized pogroms against the Jews. The landowners and capitalists tried to divert the hatred of the workers and peasants who were tortured by want against the Jews. ... Only the most ignorant and downtrodden people can believe the lies and slander that are spread about the Jews. ... It is not the Jews who are the enemies of the working people. The enemies of the workers are the capitalists of all countries. Among the Jews there are working people, and they form the majority. They are our brothers, who, like us, are oppressed by capital; they are our comrades in the struggle for socialism. Among the Jews there are kulaks, exploiters and capitalists, just as there are among the Russians, and among people of all nations... Rich Jews, like rich Russians, and the rich in all countries, are in alliance to oppress, crush, rob and disunite the workers... Shame on accursed Tsarism which tortured and persecuted the Jews. Shame on those who foment hatred towards the Jews, who foment hatred towards other nations"

Kukulofori

12th August 2009, 03:18

Here's most of that book.

http://books.google.com/books?id=MG0ahVw-kdwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepage&q=&f=false

khad

12th August 2009, 06:16

Regarding Borat, what Mr. Cohen did to those Romanian Roma actors is obviously disgusting. We can (hopefully) all agree on that. However, in terms of economic exploitation, it's par for the course, in terms of exploitation of bit actors and other works, for the production of a Hollywood film. Virtually every film we see is (in one way or another) a product of economic exploitation - (including "independent" and amateur films) and this will be the case until the mode of production is communised. To suggest that working-class people who enjoy Hollywood films are "complicit" in capitalist exploitation serves only to mystify the proletariat's relationship to the mode of consumption. The film Borat actually strongly criticizes anti-Roma sentiment, regardless of the fact that Roma workers were exploited in order to film it.We all know what this is about. You like the film and want to continue liking it. However, I am not interested in your rationalizations. What Cohen did to the Roma villagers is certainly NOT "par for the course." Going in and physically trashing the homes of "bit actors" is not "standard practice," and you are demented to suggest this.

However, does Khad have any proof that Mr. Cohen is a "Zionist", other than that he is a Jew, and that his films denounce anti-Semitism? The only other time I can remember Mr. Cohen being accused of being a "Zionist" was by an anti-Semitic right-wing conspiracy theorist.
Here are the latest antics from this former youth leader of the Habonim Dror (Zionist pioneers):

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090728/en_afp/entertainmentfilmbrunomideastpalestinian

BEIT SAHUR, West Bank (AFP) – A Palestinian man presented as a "terrorist" in Sacha Baron Cohen's new hit movie "Bruno" said on Tuesday he was not amused at the gay fashionista mockumentary and plans to sue.

Ayman Abu Aita said he intends to take the outrageous British comedian to court after a scene in the movie portrayed him as a leader of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, one of the main armed Palestinian groups.

"I am not a member of Al-Aqsa," said the 44-year-old Abu Aita, a member of a regional committee of Fatah, the ruling Palestinian party to which the militant group is loosely affiliated.

"It's a lie, the whole thing was a lie. We were betrayed by this guy when he said that he was a journalist," said Abu Aita, a Christian.

"We thought he was a foreign journalist and we hoped he would speak about our cause."

Abu Aita joins a long line of unwitting victims hoodwinked by the comedian, both during the filming of "Bruno" and his previous smash hit "Borat", which generated scores of lawsuits.

In "Bruno", Cohen poses as a flamboyantly gay Austrian fashion reporter who in one scene goes to interview a "terrorist" in his quest for fame.

"We thought: what could people see that they've never seen before on film," Cohen said on the Late Show with David Letterman recently. "And we thought one thing would be a comedian interviewing a terrorist." [note how he continues to call the Palestinian man a terrorist and refuses to confirm that it was all fiction]Two posts in, and you're already accusing a senior member of anti-Semitism for saying "Zionist." That, if anything, makes you more suspect than I'll ever be.

Killfacer

12th August 2009, 16:08

Still funny though.

Aeval

12th August 2009, 16:48

Two posts in, and you're already accusing a senior member of anti-Semitism for saying "Zionist." That, if anything, makes you more suspect than I'll ever be.

To be fair, you did initially refer to him as 'that zionist fuck' when his zionism* has absolutely nothing to do with the topic in hand. Unless you're going to tell me he screwed over those people *because* he is a zionist - in which case I'd argue that he mostly did it because he's a rich, arrogant man who's used to getting his own way whilst a ring of people around him tell him how wonderful he is - much like most celebrities. If you brought up his being a zionist because it was an integral part of you argument or something then that would make sense, but the simple fact is that many anti semitic people use it as a short hand for 'jew' so when you use the word 'zionist' not as part of an argument but rather simply as an insult you can't really get shitty when someone else who doesn't even know you thinks it sounds dodgy.

And why should someone give a crap if you're a 'senior member' or not? What does that even mean? I wasn't aware there were ranks here? 'Senior members' will make mistakes too, and new people are perfectly capable of coming up with intelligent observations.

*is he a zionist? Beyond the fact that he was in the youth movement, and lets face it, most kids don't get a choice about which youth group their parents send them to. You may well be right, but it would be nice to see some proof, as Jethro Tull said.

khad

12th August 2009, 17:19

If you brought up his being a zionist because it was an integral part of you argument or something then that would make sense, but the simple fact is that many anti semitic people use it as a short hand for 'jew' so when you use the word 'zionist' not as part of an argument but rather simply as an insult
Yes, because Zionists have been minimizing and excusing Romani oppression for ages now. This is common knowledge, and it is an added layer upon this man's western privilege and arrogance.

http://www.geocities.com/~patrin/lewy.htm (http://www.geocities.com/%7Epatrin/lewy.htm)

you can't really get shitty when someone else who doesn't even know you thinks it sounds dodgy.Where's all the righteous moral indignation over the asshole who excuses the extreme maltreatment of a persecuted minority at the hands of Hollywood capitalists as "par for the course?"

*is he a zionist? Beyond the fact that he was in the youth movement, and lets face it, most kids don't get a choice about which youth group their parents send them to. You may well be right, but it would be nice to see some proof, as Jethro Tull said.Let's see now. This guy interviews a Palestinian representative of Fatah and labels him a "terrorist" for some Anglo-American giggles. Instead of explaining that it was all fiction, he continues to go on Letterman to call the man a terrorist on national TV and puff himself up with a bullshit story about meeting in a secret location under mortal danger from terrorist gunmen. This is a man whose entire career is built upon casting the Middle East and its Muslim peoples as a bunch of nasty, brutish neanderthals who do nothing but spend their time hating Jews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZheYqoKtt60
Anyone with any sense about them would reach a conclusion. I don't see why it's so difficult for you.

Killfacer

12th August 2009, 17:33

Seriously though, senior member? That's ridiculous.

Aeval

12th August 2009, 17:36

Let's see now. This guy interviews a Palestinian representative of Fatah and labels him a "terrorist" for some Anglo-American giggles. When presented publicly with the fact that the man is not part of a terrorist organization, he continues to go on Letterman to call the man a terrorist on national TV. This is a man whose entire career is built upon casting the Middle East and its Muslim peoples as a bunch of nasty, brutish neanderthals who do nothing but spend their time hating Jews.

Anyone with any sense about them would reach a conclusion. I don't see why it's so difficult for you.

Because that's not actually proof now is it? It's perfectly conceivable that a person who was not a zionist would label a Palestinian as a terrorist - lots of people here think they are for example (by here I mean where I live, not on this board) but they aren't zionist they are just ignorant, racists fucktards. I'm not asking for this information to prove a point against you, I would just genuinely like to know if he considers himself to be a zionist or if he's just a thoughtless idiot.

It would be easy to just presume that because he comes from a jewish family and has a track record of insulting certain groups of people that he is a zionist, but I wondered if you had any actual proof about it, you know, a quote from him saying he believes in zionism? Him, as an adult, belonging to a zionist organisation? Something like that, rather than, 'well his an ignorant prick, is happy to exploit people, uses awful stereotypes and happens to be jewish - he's probably a zionist.'

edit:

Where's all the righteous moral indignation over the asshole who excuses the extreme maltreatment of a persecuted minority at the hands of Hollywood capitalists as "par for the course?" Get over yourself, Western hypocrite.

Yea, and what he said was frankly ridiculous, you did a good job shooting him down about it and I didn't feel I had anything to add to what you'd told him. However, I was saying that when you use the word 'zionist' when it doesn't look like it's being used as anything more than an insult you can't expect people not to kick up about it - it's hardly moral indignation, rather me trying to explain why someone might have thought what you'd said wasn't on.

khad

12th August 2009, 17:50

Because that's not actually proof now is it? It's perfectly conceivable that a person who was not a zionist would label a Palestinian as a terrorist - lots of people here think they are for example (by here I mean where I live, not on this board) but they aren't zionist they are just ignorant, racists fucktards. I'm not asking for this information to prove a point against you, I would just genuinely like to know if he considers himself to be a zionist or if he's just a thoughtless idiot.

It would be easy to just presume that because he comes from a jewish family and has a track record of insulting certain groups of people that he is a zionist, but I wondered if you had any actual proof about it, you know, a quote from him saying he believes in zionism? Him, as an adult, belonging to a zionist organisation? Something like that, rather than, 'well his an ignorant prick, is happy to exploit people, uses awful stereotypes and happens to be jewish - he's probably a zionist.'

edit:

Yea, and what he said was frankly ridiculous, you did a good job shooting him down about it and I didn't feel I had anything to add to what you'd told him. However, I was saying that when you use the word 'zionist' when it doesn't look like it's being used as anything more than an insult you can't expect people not to kick up about it - it's hardly moral indignation, rather me trying to explain why someone might have thought what you'd said wasn't on.

It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Lo and behold, it is a duck. Didn't take long to find proof.

http://www.counterpunch.org/atzmon07242009.html

Yes, Cohen’s characters can be entreating, they can make us laugh; yet, the fact that they are rejected contemptibly is far from telling about our society. However, these scenes may throw some light about their creator, Mr Baron Borat Bruno Ali G Cohen and the social conditions he himself is imbued in.
Two years ago while in the process of gathering information about Cohen previous film Borat, I found out that Cohen had put back his wedding to former Home and Away star Isla Fisher due to some deep ‘religious’ reasons. "The couple," so I learned, "have postponed the big day so Isla could study the Bible in Israel before converting to Sacha's religion of Judaism." This was enough to convince me at the time that Cohen wasn’t that different from his chauvinistic, tribally-orientated protagonist Borat. For those who fail to understand the meaning of the above, Cohen is not just Jewish, he didn’t just ask his fiancée to join his extended family, he didn’t send her to a London Rabbi either. He really went for the ‘full Monty,’ that is: the Israeli experience. Cohen is in fact a devout Zionist and it would be interesting to elaborate and analyze his work from a Jewish Identity-politics perspective.

Jethro Tull

12th August 2009, 20:11

Khad, your perspective confuses me. On the one hand, you feel everyone who "laughed at" the film Borat (not just bought a ticket to see in theatres, or bought a DVD, but everyone who watched a friend's copy, pirated it off the Internet, saw it on a bus, etc.) is somehow morally complicit in Mr. Cohen's exploitation of Romanian Roma bit-actors.

On the other hand, you demand respect for spending a large amount of time chattering on the Internet. What about the Chinese or Southeast Asians workers, mostly women and children, who worked in a factory assembling your PC? What about the millions ecomically exploited to obtain the petroleum needed to power both your comuter and this website's server? How are you somehow more morally pure?

I didn't enjoy Borat that much, but I understand why others would. It mocks US imperialism, specifically calling out its genocidal nature. It mocks racist attitudes among American whites. It mocks anti-Semitism, anti-Roma prejudice, and general Western ignorance of Eastern Europe/Central Asia. It mocks male chauvinism. etc.

Of course what Mr. Cohen did while filming in Romania was par for the course. He actually paid those Roma extras slightly more than what the Romanian government reccomended. What Hollywood films don't destroy whatever community they film in? (Look into, for example, the disastrous effects of the filming of Transformers II) That doesn't mean that workers who enjoy Hollywood films are "complicit", anymore so than workers who enjoy store-bought liquor and cigarettes are somehow "complicit" in the crimes of the liquor and tobacco industries.

Your proof of Mr. Cohen's "Zionism" is very weak, so yes, your accusations border on the anti-Semitic, regardless of how much of a "senior poster" you are. Claiming he's a "Zionist" for belonging to a Zionist youth group puts you in the same camp as the idiots who claim the Pope is a Nazi for belonging to the Hitler Youth. Pope Benedict and Mr. Cohen may both be assholes, but that doesn't make your logic any less spurious. I have yet to see Bruno, I assume the scene with the Palestinian "terrorist" will turn out to be pro-Western/pro-Israeli propaganda, but I can't say for certain. Regardless, it's apparent you would be equally hurt if anyone, including a Palestinain radical leftist, insulted the middle-class bureaucrats who make up the bourgeois "anti-Zionist resistance".

khad

12th August 2009, 20:32

Of course what Mr. Cohen did while filming in Romania was par for the course. He actually paid those Roma extras slightly more than what the Romanian government reccomended. What Hollywood films don't destroy whatever community they film in? (Look into, for example, the disastrous effects of the filming of Transformers II) That doesn't mean that workers who enjoy Hollywood films are "complicit", anymore so than workers who enjoy store-bought liquor and cigarettes are somehow "complicit" in the crimes of the liquor and tobacco industries.
The recommendation of a government that is already racist against the Roma is now somehow a standard to measure exploitation--that is, if anything, what you would call "specious" logic.

So is this logic of equating this example of cultural decadence with tools of communication or even nourishment (and I would condemn the crimes of the tobacco industry with equal vehemence). Many workers in this country depend on things like computers and automobiles to make a living for themselves. It's not like they have a choice in the matter. And, FYI, most of this computer from which I am typing is made of old, secondhand components, which doesn't mean damn thing, really, other than that I'm a cheapass.

It is however, a completely free choice to laugh at a piece of racial exploitation that does not have any bearing on your own material existence. It costs nothing to find such behavior morally reprehensible, yet choosing to condone it, whether tacitly or in your "everything is bad under capitalism, so why bother" attitude only normalizes such social attitudes as acceptable in the future. Not only was Borat anti-Roma, but it was also anti-Muslim, anti-Asian, and implicitly anti-Communist (people on left.ru, FYI, read the character as the Western stereotype of the backwards "Homo Sovieticus").

Your proof of Mr. Cohen's "Zionism" is very weak, so yes, your accusations border on the anti-Semitic, regardless of how much of a "senior poster" you are. Claiming he's a "Zionist" for belonging to a Zionist youth group puts you in the same camp as the idiots who claim the Pope is a Nazi for belonging to the Hitler Youth. Pope Benedict and Mr. Cohen may both be assholes, but that doesn't make your logic any less spurious. I have yet to see Bruno, I assume the scene with the Palestinian "terrorist" will turn out to be pro-Western/pro-Israeli propaganda, but I can't say for certain. Regardless, it's apparent you would be equally hurt if anyone, including a Palestinain radical leftist, insulted the middle-class bureaucrats who make up the bourgeois "anti-Zionist resistance".You'd be hard pressed to find anyone with such reactionary views on Muslims and the Middle East, who also orders his non-Jewish wife to Israel for religious studies when there are perfectly good family members and Rabbis back in Britain, who isn't a Zionist.

Any way you look at it, you are just making excuses for yourself.

P.S. I do appreciate the revleft members who have come out and stated that they no longer find this "comedian" funny.

progressive_lefty

13th August 2009, 11:09

What kind of a stupid thread is this? You want to find out what nasty things the "gypsies" have been upto to be so hated? This is just racist.Hardly fair. I assume the OP wants to know the reasons for prejudice against gypsies as it is a type of discrimination which is obviously little known to him.

The only thing I knew of of the Romani people was from a Tintin book(which actually sympathised with them (wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictional_representations_of_Romani_people))). I certainly did not start this thread to find out why anti-Romani sentiment is justified or unjustified. I just couldn't understand the demonising against them in parts of Europe and particularly Italy.

Jethro Tull

14th August 2009, 00:41

The recommendation of a government that is already racist against the Roma is now somehow a standard to measure exploitation--that is, if anything, what you would call "specious" logic.

Is this how "senior posters" on this message board are expected to conduct themselves - by mocking the spelling mistakes of new posters? And relying upon strawman arguments without shame? What example are you setting, precisely?

Besides strawmen, you're relying on appeals to emotion. To imply that standards set by a racist state cannot be viewed as standards, because one might have (rather obvious) ethical objections to the exploitation being standardized, is absurd. Obviously the state of Romania is racist, as all capitalist states are. (And that includes self-proclaimed "socialist" and "communist" capitalist states) Obviously, since, by definition, states maintain a monopoly on power, a state sets the standards of exploitation.

So yes, Mr. Cohen's exploitation, while unethical, was actually slightly above our exploitative society's standards. That doesn't justify it, however, it does illustrate that the film Borat was not uniquely exploitative in its production. As previously mentioned, enjoyment of all capitalist mass-media is dependent upon economic exploitation. Therefore any communists who enjoy Bob Dylan, for example, should be held to the same degree of scrutiny.

and I would condemn the crimes of the tobacco industry with equal vehemenceGood for you. Too bad we were not discussing whether to denounce the tobacco industry. I was, rather, pointing out that the workers who are addicted to the tobacco, who consume it, are themselves victimized by the tobacco industry, rather than "complicit" in its crimes by their sheer enjoyment. The same goes for mass-media miseducation.

Anyone who sincerely believes the first 20 minutes of Borat is an accurate reflection of life amongst Kazakhs, Romanian Romas, or anyone else, (even though the point of the filmmaker, regardless of his "Zionism" or unethical filmmaking practices, was to mock Western stereotypes, a rather blatant and crude "subtletly", yet one too nuanced for yourself to pick up on, apparently) is being victimized by Hollywood, not participating in and perpetuating its victimization of others.

For better or for worse the film Borat is very popular among proletarian youth in Central Asia and Eastern Europe, for obvious reasons. This doesn't make them "complicit" in the crimes of the Hollywood exploiters, any more than a proletarian youth laughing at any film is "complicit" in the ecocidal production of DVDs.

Many workers in this country depend on things like computers and automobiles to make a living for themselves. It's not like they have a choice in the matter. And, FYI, most of this computer from which I am typing is made of old, secondhand components, which doesn't mean damn thing, really, other than that I'm a cheapass.

It is however, a completely free choice to laugh at a piece of racial exploitation that does not have any bearing on your own material existence.So wait, are you a Gandhian pseudo-Buddhist who is now preaching that the working-class abandon everything "that does not have any bearing on [their] own material existence"? How will that help the workers defeat the ruling-class?

The Borat DVD and your computer are going to wind up in the same dump, the heavy metals from both poisoning a third world worker's body.

Also, are the racially exploited themselves not entitled to laugh at "a piece of racial exploitation"? Different individuals' responses to tragedy are different...the point of Borat, regardless of how many Roma workers were exploited in its production, was not to sincerely expose Westerners to the cultural degeneracy of Roma, Kazakhs, or any other East-European or Central Asian ethnic group, but to expose the bigotries of American society, which is why the film has such a cult following in Kazakhstan and other East-European/Central Asian reigons.

It costs nothing to find such behavior morally reprehensibleYet it also accomplishes nothing.

yet choosing to condone it, whether tacitly or in your "everything is bad under capitalism, so why bother"Why bother with what? Putting death-orders on Mr. Cohen? Excuse me if I think the communist movement has bigger fish to fry.

only normalizes such social attitudes as acceptable in the future.Hatred of Roma is already normalized, regardless of whether individuals choose to laugh at Borat.

Not only was Borat anti-RomaBorat was much worse than anti-Roma. It allowed non-Roma (and Roma, for that matter) to laugh at hurtful anti-Roma jokes under the pretense of exposing anti-Roma prejudice. You're failing to recognize Borat for the Social Democratic, neo-colonial drivel that it is. Your only capacity to engage in cultural criticism is to just mindlessly brandish everything as reactionary and imperialist.

but it was also anti-Muslim, anti-AsianMaybe, but in the process it also exposes the psychotically anti-Muslim and anti-Asian attitudes of chauvinistic white Americans as the blatant foolishness that it is. Hence why I understand why others may enjoy it, or find humor in it, or at least recognize the cleverness of it given the intrinsically culturally homogenizing and exploitative context in which it occurred.

and implicitly anti-Communist (people on left.ru, FYI, read the character as the Western stereotype of the backwards "Homo Sovieticus").No matter how much hateful anti-Slavic psychological baggage was tapped to fuel anti-Soviet propaganda during the Cold War, it still won't justify your mischaracterization of the Soviet political project as "communist". Hollywood also used harmful racial stereotypes in manipulating public sympathy against the Japanese imperialists, however that doesn't make the Japanese imperialists any less genocidal or, well, imperialist.

To suggest Mr. Cohen is trying to perpetuate an anti-Soviet message because he uses Slavic stereotypes (even though the entire point of his infantile routine is, not that Slavs are wacky foreigners, but that Americans are too stupid to tell the difference between Kazakhs and Slavs, much less a white American pretending to be a Slav) that happened to be used against the Soviet Union shows a total lapse of logic. To then imply that this is anti-communist...unless you're trying to imply that modern-day Kazakhstan is a communist system.

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone with such reactionary views on Muslims and the Middle EastJust judging off the film Borat, which denounces (in its own sophomoric way) the murder of Iraqis by the US military, something US mass-media, for the most part, totally refuses to do, I'd say it would definitely be easy to find US mass-media voices that are more "reactionary" (whatever that word is supposed to mean in this context - don't the "reactionaries" in the US tend to sympathize with the Islamist populist-right?) in regards to Muslims and the Middle East.

who also orders his non-Jewish wife to Israel for religious studies when there are perfectly good family members and Rabbis back in Britain, who isn't a Zionist.Again, how does the personal actions of the individual, regardless of how unethical, effect enjoyment of the film Borat?

So, just to clarify, is any white Jew who travels to Israeli-occupied Palestine for any reason a "Zionist"?

Any way you look at it, you are just making excuses for yourself.No, as I said, I did not enjoy the film Borat. Parts of it were amusing (such as the rodeo scene, the interview with the travelling frat bros, etc.) but other parts were tiresome and gratuitous. All and all, a C film. But enjoying any film is not the same as being "complicit" in economic exploitation that occured throughout the production of the film.

Revy

14th August 2009, 06:03

I don't believe there are many Romani communities in the US, except for maybe some Romani immigrants from Europe.

But there is a phrase, "gypped" which comes from this prejudice, and it is commonly used in the US to describe being cheated out of your money (one of the stereotypes associated with the Romani).

I think a lot of people here might not even know that so-called "Gypsies" exist as a real ethnic group. The stereotypes here seem to be that Gypsies are "magical" or have psychic abilities. This was especially clear in the movie "Thinner" (based on a Stephen King novel), in which a gypsy curses a fat man with uncontrollable extreme weight loss as revenge.

Jethro Tull

14th August 2009, 20:57

Actually, a good deal of Romani did immigrate to the US, however, unfortunately, like most Southern and Eastern European immigrants, they've been almost entirely culturally assimilated at this point.

Pogue

14th August 2009, 21:00

Actually, a good deal of Romani did immigrate to the US, however, unfortunately, like most Southern and Eastern European immigrants, they've been almost entirely culturally assimilated at this point.

I may misunderstand the use of 'assimilated' here, but what is so wrong with them adopting the cultural norms of the country they move too, as long as it is voluntary?

kharacter

14th August 2009, 21:14

Jethro Tull

14th August 2009, 21:32

I may misunderstand the use of 'assimilated' here, but what is so wrong with them adopting the cultural norms of the country they move too, as long as it is voluntary?

If a Jew assimilates into Goyish society because he knows that talking, dressing, and acting like a Jew makes him more prone to harassment by cops, discrimination by potential employers, etc., how is that "voluntary"?

Pogue

14th August 2009, 22:30

If a Jew assimilates into Goyish society because he knows that talking, dressing, and acting like a Jew makes him more prone to harassment by cops, discrimination by potential employers, etc., how is that "voluntary"?

Which is why I checked if we were using the same term for assimilation. I don't see anything wrong with adopting the cultural characteristics of the area you move too, unless its forced, as I said. And being harrassed and discriminated against is not voluntary, is it?

Korchagin

16th August 2009, 08:12

I noticed that the perception of Gypsies being thieves and all-around troublemakers was widespread during my visit to Italy.

Die Rote Fahne

18th August 2009, 05:46

Which is why I checked if we were using the same term for assimilation. I don't see anything wrong with adopting the cultural characteristics of the area you move too, unless its forced, as I said. And being harrassed and discriminated against is not voluntary, is it?

Multiculturalism ftw

BabylonHoruv

18th August 2009, 06:39

Just a note the correct term is Roma or Romani, Gypsy is considered offensive and comes from the false belief that the Romani people came from Egypt when in fact they originally came from India. My guess is their hatred comes from general xenophobia in which they have been used as scapegoats for crime and other bad things happening (i.e. historically blamed for black magic). Also the Romani people have a strict code of ritual purity limiting their contact with non-Romani.

Not strictly correct. Gypsy is used to cover a variety of different people not just the Roma. It is also applied to the Tinkers who are culturally quite distinct from the Roma. Probably some other nomadic people as well. One of the reasons Europeans have so much trouble with Gypsies (Romany, Tinker and other kinds) is that there are some cultural differences as far as property is concerned. Nomadic people are naturally going to come into conflict with a culture which has strict concepts of land ownership.

BabylonHoruv

18th August 2009, 06:53

Can we get the lengthy debate over whether or not Sasha Baron Cohen is or is not a zionist removed from the thread? looks like threadjacking to me.

Lacrimi de Chiciură

24th August 2009, 18:06

Not strictly correct. Gypsy is used to cover a variety of different people not just the Roma. It is also applied to the Tinkers who are culturally quite distinct from the Roma. Probably some other nomadic people as well. One of the reasons Europeans have so much trouble with Gypsies (Romany, Tinker and other kinds) is that there are some cultural differences as far as property is concerned. Nomadic people are naturally going to come into conflict with a culture which has strict concepts of land ownership.

It's my understanding that "Gypsy" is almost always used to refer to Romanies. They were originally called "Gypsies" (Egyptians) because they were darker than Europeans in the countries they migrated to. Calling any group of travelers "Gypsies" is a misapplication of the term (even if the term was originally a misapplication itself.) Also, it should be understood that the discrimination and hatred against Roma/Sinti has little to do with nomadism. Most Romanies are not nomads. It is more to do with racism, constant scapegoating, and the fact that they were enslaved for hundreds of years, in Eastern Europe, also in the 1500s by the Spanish in the Americas.

communard resolution

28th August 2009, 17:18

Ovi

29th August 2009, 00:48

Madonna spoke out against discrimination of Romani people during her recent gig in Romania, where anti-gypsy sentiment is rampant.

I expect a shitstorm against Madonna (capitalist this, corporate that...), but hey - do cut her some slack. It is a very noble gesture of her, and a risky move too.

This isn't like some NOFX type band moaning about 'RepubliKKKans' to a liberal skaterpunk audience - she couldn't have predicted the response of the crowd at all.

Actually the anti-gypsy sentiment is not exactly rampant. And the response was not about discrimination but about 'stop teaching us'. After all the racism in countries like Italy and Ireland many people here got sick of the lessons we are constantly given by western coutries about tollerance because many such countries are far more racist. A survey this year in seven EU countries found gypsies the least discriminated in Romania. http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-international-5643692-sondaj-tiganii-din-romania-declara-cel-mai-putin-discriminati-din-uniunea-europeana.htm

*Red*Alert

29th August 2009, 01:27

*Red*Alert

29th August 2009, 01:45

Very insightful and tolerant of you, "comrade".:ohmy:

I'm not saying that they are all like that, but all of those I've had the displeasure of meeting, have unfortunately been like that.

I would discriminate equally against people practicing such behaviour, regardless of race, sex, creed, hair colour, eye colour, shaved or unshaved!

RaÃºl Duke

29th August 2009, 01:52

While I was in Italy I mostly seen them beg or just hang around in streets.
But the issue is those are the "most noticeable ones."
There's Roma people or decendent of Romas who work, live what we are accustomed to think are normal lives, etc.
However, there's a disgusting part to this racism...I've heard of attacks against Roma "settlements" (I guess they are like temporary homes or camps) in Northern Italy.

Although I also heard, but not sure exactly, that in the region I was in at least (Tuscany) they sometimes give free housing and aid to Romas who decide to send their children to school and/or settle down. Some Italians are touchy about that because there's old Italians, etc in the streets with small pensions who can't, allegedly, get free/subsidized housing. (from one source, it could all be wrong)

*Red*Alert

29th August 2009, 01:56

So based on your limited experiences, you conclude that they "beg, pillage and disappear" and that they serve no purpose to class struggle! Suddenly I feel racists are tolerated too much on revleft.

The ones I have saw have either been engaged in organised street begging or have come to at least three public multi-cultural events to promote different cultures by sampling their food, music, etc. and several Roma (at least one of whom is part of the organised begging) turn up and simply crowd around the different tables eating as much food as possible, but sharing nothing about themselves or their culture.

This has happened several times now despite people approaching them to set up a stall to share their food and/or music. It costs very little, the instruments are already on site and other migrant communities (even the Islamic community) all take part.

RedRise

29th August 2009, 07:16

The ones I have saw have either been engaged in organised street begging or have come to at least three public multi-cultural events to promote different cultures by sampling their food, music, etc. and several Roma (at least one of whom is part of the organised begging) turn up and simply crowd around the different tables eating as much food as possible, but sharing nothing about themselves or their culture.

Well what would you do if you were starving?:confused: And maybe they're scared to draw attention to themselves because there's a long history of people attacking gypsies, etc.

communard resolution

29th August 2009, 08:28

Actually the anti-gypsy sentiment is not exactly rampant. And the response was not about discrimination but about 'stop teaching us'. After all the racism in countries like Italy and Ireland many people here got sick of the lessons we are constantly given by western coutries about tollerance because many such countries are far more racist. A survey this year in seven EU countries found gypsies the least discriminated in Romania. http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-international-5643692-sondaj-tiganii-din-romania-declara-cel-mai-putin-discriminati-din-uniunea-europeana.htm

I stand corrected. I met a girl from Romania last year who really was the female version of Borat (to hark back to an earlier topic in this thread) in how she went on about gypsies continuously. I asked her several times to stop and told her I didn't enjoy listening to her crap, but there was no way she would. It seemed to be a major annoyance to her that "people always confuse Romanians with gypsies, but we hate gypsies". I had a feeling she was parroting what I assumed to be mainstream sentiments in Romania at present.

Then I probably read something about attacks on Romani settlements in Eastern Europe and subconsciouly arrived at the conclusion that anti-gypsy sentiment must be rampant in Romania too. But thanks for pointing out that I was misinformed.

Now that I watch the Madonna clip again I realise how she claims that "we" (= Americans) believe in equality for all and therefore "you" (= Eastern Europeans) should be more like "us". But you know, pop stars tend to be sheltered people who are ignorant of the intricacies of politics and ground level reality.

I still think that her intention was a good one. Had I been Madonna, I would have probably spoken out against anti-Romani discrimination based on the little information I had before you corrected me. It's a good thing she had the heart to flog a few egalitarian lines about Romani, homosexuals and "people who are different" to the audience. I believe she did the best she could.

Ovi

29th August 2009, 11:06

I stand corrected. I met a girl from Romania last year who really was the female version of Borat (to hark back to an earlier topic in this thread) in how she went on about gypsies continuously. I asked her several times to stop and told her I didn't enjoy listening to her crap, but there was no way she would. It seemed to be a major annoyance to her that "people always confuse Romanians with gypsies, but we hate gypsies". I had a feeling she was parroting what I assumed to be mainstream sentiments in Romania at present.

Then I probably read something about attacks on Romani settlements in Eastern Europe and subconsciouly arrived at the conclusion that anti-gypsy sentiment must be rampant in Romania too. But thanks for pointing out that I was misinformed.

Now that I watch the Madonna clip again I realise how she claims that "we" (= Americans) believe in equality for all and therefore "you" (= Eastern Europeans) should be more like "us". But you know, pop stars tend to be sheltered people who are ignorant of the intricacies of politics and ground level reality.

I still think that her intention was a good one. Had I been Madonna, I would have probably spoken out against anti-Romani discrimination based on the little information I had before you corrected me. It's a good thing she had the heart to flog a few egalitarian lines about Romani, homosexuals and "people who are different" to the audience. I believe she did the best she could.
There is some discrimination against gypsyes but it's not exactly off scale. Most of it is due do their lesser integration in society. For instance according to the census there are half a million gypsies in Romania; unofficially there are 2 millions, of which at least half a million don't have any sort of ids. That means they can't go to school nor they can't get a job. Many of these become beggers or thieves which degrades the situation even further: those are the only ones most people see or hear about because obviously the hard working ones aren't much of a show off; companies sometimes refrain from hiring gypsies in many positions because they are afraid they would steal, which again prevents many from working and so on. It's a vicious cycle.

There are other things that fuel discrimination, one of them being cultural differences: for instance it's their tradition to mary their children when they are 12 or so and have many children. This agains lessens their integration by not having proper education. And of course there is the media: news depicting rich gypsies forcing their children to abandon school in order to get married, 'estimates' that show how gypsies will become majoritary in Romania by 2050, roma thieves in western countries that are confused with romanians (many romanians try to explain the difference by saying: but we hate them too!), reports where beggers say they will not work because they earn more by begging (considering the minimum wage is less than 150 euros it doesn't surprise me a bit) , the manele, which is the music they sing, although highly popular around here (I would say number 1 in a large part of the country) is also criticized for the performers bragging of how rich, smart and attractive they are in their songs...

In the end, much of the discrimination has to do with the poor economic situation in Romania: small salaries, huge level of corruption, everything is expensive (last year the rent I paid for a 2 rooms apartment in Bucharest was 500 euros; considering the minimum wage of 150 euros, that's a bit expensive). When there will be enough, better paid jobs I assume the situation would improve a lot.

Rjevan

29th August 2009, 11:59

There's an interesting article on "Spiegel Online" about Romas in Hungary:

Four neo-Nazis were arrested in recent days for a spate of horrific killings of Roma in Hungary, where economic woes and the rise of race-bating right-wing parties has exacerbated existing ethnic tensions. Now, the Roma minority is moving to organize its defense.
...
But the Roma community in Hungary is frightened after a recent series of killings. Six Roma have been killed in nine attacks since November.
The latest incident occurred on Aug. 3, when a Roma woman, Maria Balogh, was killed in her sleep and her 13-year-old daughter seriously injured in the town of Kisleta in eastern Hungary.
In February, a father and his five-year-old son were shot dead when they ran from their house in Tatarszentgyörgy in central Hungary after it had been set on fire.

Last Friday, police arrested four men suspected of being behind the Roma killings. On Tuesday, police said they had found the DNA of two of the men at several of the murder sites. They said the murders were racially motivated and had been carefully planned. According to the Hungarian media they had swastikas tattooed on their bodies and they were known as Roma-haters.
...
Despite a lack of reliable statistics, there are many signs that the divide between Roma and non-Roma in Hungary is widening.
"The segregation is growing," said János Ladányi, a professor at Budapest's Corvinus University who specializes in the Roma. Under communism everybody in Hungary had a job and the social differences were manageable. But since the 1990s, many low-skilled unemployed have been pushed out of the cities to so-called "ghetto villages," further reducing their chances of finding jobs. In this category the elderly and the Roma are overrepresented.

As the Hungarian population ages and thins out, the young Roma population is growing, said Ladányi. On top of the structural problems come discrimination and the urge to look for a scapegoat. The economic crisis only serves to enhance the problem.
During the European Parliament elections in June the far-right party Jobbik got nearly 15 percent of the vote in Hungary. Jobbik's main campaign promise was a tough approach of "gypsy criminality."

"The gypsies only have themselves to blame," said Polgár. "They are criminals and they are a threat to us, the majority. They make more children, they're taking over."

Viktória Mohácsi, a Hungarian Roma and until June a member of the European Parliament, agreed. "I feel like I'm in a war," she said with teary eyes. Just that morning she had received another death threat. "I get more than a thousand threatening e-mails every day."

The Roma are organizing themselves, Mohácsi said, and they are using the wakes for the murder victims to do so. "Roma leaders call me up and say they want to organize against the neo-Nazis. But what do they expect me to do? I'm a woman who weighs 40 kilograms and has no weapons or money."
Still, she admitted, there are not too many options. "We can either set up an army or flee."

It's just the same like anti-semitism; when people are facing hard times, financial problems and unemployment they tend to start to look for scapegoats and who could be responsible for all this if not those strange fellows who have no country on their own, hang just out with their own kind, take away our jobs, money and women (though they just hang out with their own kind...) and obviously want to destroy our culture and country?

Really really sad to see that people still think that way, are that ignorant and intolerant and have obviously learned nothing.

Here's the full article:http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,645369,00.html

communard resolution

29th August 2009, 12:05

communard resolution

29th August 2009, 12:18

Most of it is due do their lesser integration in society. For instance according to the census there are half a million gypsies in Romania; unofficially there are 2 millions, of which at least half a million don't have any sort of ids. That means they can't go to school nor they can't get a job. Many of these become beggers or thieves which degrades the situation even further: those are the only ones most people see or hear about because obviously the hard working ones aren't much of a show off; companies sometimes refrain from hiring gypsies in many positions because they are afraid they would steal, which again prevents many from working and so on. It's a vicious cycle.

There are other things that fuel discrimination, one of them being cultural differences: for instance it's their tradition to mary their children when they are 12 or so and have many children. This agains lessens their integration by not having proper education.

I'd like to know your opinion on something I asked earlier on in this thread:

I'd also be interested to know how gypsy communities have reacted to the assimilation programs mentioned above, what the assimilation programs entail beyond employment opportunities, and what you personally think of such programs and the idea of assimilation as such?

roma thieves in western countries that are confused with romanians (many romanians try to explain the difference by saying: but we hate them too!),

This is unacceptable to me. It's more or less what the girl that I met was doing, though I told her that I really hated racism and she kept doing it still.

the manele, which is the music they singHad a quick search on youtube. Seems like it's a gypsy version of turbofolk (a dancefloor/folk crossover from the Balkans). Is this music performed exclusively by Romani? Is the industry that produces this music Romani owned?

criticized for the performers bragging of how rich, smart and attractive they are in their songs...
People from underprivileged beginnings often adopt these patterns - see gangsta rap, which really espouses the values of capitalism (fucking people over, getting rich, dominating women, etc).

Ovi

29th August 2009, 14:30

I'd like to know your opinion on something I asked earlier on in this thread:

There is little information about their situation on the web. I found some information at http://www.edu.ro/index.php?module=uploads&func=download&fileId=1626 Here are some translations:
School becomes mandatory and by 1966 almost all roma had primary education.
On another resource I found that a quarter of all roma children today between 7-9 years were never sent to school.
The pro-natalist politics of Ceaușescu and the welfare system helped the poor roma families, but the moral and economic hardship pushed many families to give their children away to state institutions.
It seems like some things were better, education was more widespread among gypsies and were more employed. However despite the eforts to destroy nomadism, the action didn't really succed. There were beggers just like now (but probably less), there were still nomads and poverty.

This is unacceptable to me. It's more or less what the girl that I met was doing, though I told her that I really hated racism and she kept doing it still.

What's even more surprising is that there is a fascist organization in Romania (noua dreaptă=the new right), but no anarchist one.

Had a quick search on youtube. Seems like it's a gypsy version of turbofolk (a dancefloor/folk crossover from the Balkans). Is this music performed exclusively by Romani? Is the industry that produces this music Romani owned?

The majority are gypsies but in the last few years, some romanian manele singers also appeared, mainly because it sells. About the industry I don't know that much because I'm not much of a fan.

People from underprivileged beginnings often adopt these patterns - see gangsta rap, which really espouses the values of capitalism (fucking people over, getting rich, dominating women, etc).
Here are a few lyrics:
"Sunt un fat frumos, asa barbat versat, si iubaret si inimos, sunt flacau misto, si ma duc sa mor eu,am priza la femei,si sunt pe post de gigolo" something like "I am Prince Charming, so smart, loving, a cool guy, womens dig me and I'm like a gigolo"

"Auzi mare nebunie, Ce mia venit in cap mie, Ca fac concurs cu dusmanii, Care da mai mult cu banii" which means "What a crazy idea I got, to make a contest with my enemies, who throws more money away"

Not much of a translation, but you get the idea.

The Good Man

29th August 2009, 14:50

The majority of them I've met are lumpen proles who beg on the streets of towns and show up to community events where they simply pillage the free food and disappear, so they serve no use to any struggle as far as I am concerned. But I agree that they are the most discriminated against minority in Europe

I'm sure they don't steal food for fun, perhaps they are unable to pay for food because people refuse to employ gypsies??? What other choice would a mother have to feed her children? There seems to be a belief that they they would steal for pleasure rather then necessity.

ZeroNowhere

29th August 2009, 14:54

The ones I have saw have either been engaged in organised street begging or have come to at least three public multi-cultural events to promote different cultures by sampling their food, music, etc. and several Roma (at least one of whom is part of the organised begging) turn up and simply crowd around the different tables eating as much food as possible, but sharing nothing about themselves or their culture.

This has happened several times now despite people approaching them to set up a stall to share their food and/or music. It costs very little, the instruments are already on site and other migrant communities (even the Islamic community) all take part.
Uh, excuse me? You think gypsies are greedy, anti-social beggars more than non-gypsies? Are you joking? What a douchebag you are.

Ovi

29th August 2009, 15:24

Uh, excuse me? You think gypsies are greedy, anti-social beggars more than non-gypsies? Are you joking? What a douchebag you are.
There are morons of any nationality. Saying that all gypsies are anti-social beggars is stupid and racist (and I didn't see Red Alert claiming that).

Lacrimi de Chiciură

29th August 2009, 19:07

Thanks for this, Rjevan. It partly answers my earlier question whether the various gypsy tribes were integrated in collectivist Eastern Bloc societies or not, though we can't be sure whether the Hungarian example applies to the rest of the Bloc as well.

I also have my doubts whether the Romani were really fully integrated for 40+ years and then, in the 90s, just 'returned' to the nomadic lifestyle of their grandpartents. Anyone got more info on this?

According to this article (http://www.geocities.com/%7Epatrin/robotwork.htm), Ceausescu in Romania was an advocate of keeping Romanians racially "pure." Roma are also disproportionately encouraged/forced to give their children up for adoption. However few people want to adopt their children because of racism, and the death rate in these orphanages has been between 50% and 65%. I would like to hear what our Romanian comrade has to say regarding this though.

brigadista

29th August 2009, 20:16

La Caíta singing El pájaro negro- if you go to the youtube link there is an English translation of the words- from the film Latcho Drom -Roma music from all over the world starting in Rajastan...

In the film are also Taraf de Haidouks from Romania filmed in their village - they play all over the world to support their village

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_VRFwz3xTI

Ovi

29th August 2009, 20:36

According to this article (http://www.geocities.com/%7Epatrin/robotwork.htm), Ceausescu in Romania was an advocate of keeping Romanians racially "pure."

The Gypsy children in the Romanian institutions are the result of Nicolae Ceausescu's plan to create a superior "Dacian" people by selective breeding and population engineering. Ceausescu's fascination with Hitler's racial policies is no secret; "In the early 1970s, when Ceausescu learned that Romania had over 600,000 emigrés abroad, he became very interested in Hitler's Fifth Column. That was not too surprising, as Ceausescu had always studied Hitler's 'charisma,' and had repeatedly analyzed the original Nazi films of Hitler's speeches ... In almost every speech, he recalls the Romanian people's origins in proud Roman and Dacian warriors, just as Hitler harped on the Aryans...

I am no supporter of the ex regime but this is just pathetic. The pro dacian politics started quite late and as far as I know it had nothing to do with "racial purity", but about his plans to make the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact void; in the end he did condemn the occupation of Moldova by the Soviet Union at the last congress of the Communist Party.

According to another source http://www.edu.ro/index.php?module=uploads&func=download&fileId=1626 , as I found in a few others:

The roma problem becomes acute during the '60s after the Communist Party tries to consolidate the national union and to to homogenize the romanian society. Emanuelle Pons says that it was being considered to create an ethnically homogenous nation by assimilating the other minority groups... According to this point the roma were a considered a foreign element which had to be romanianized...

So there were plans to assimilate the gypsy minority. How is that "racial purity" to you?

Roma are also disproportionately encouraged/forced to give their children up for adoption.

How? During those years any sort of contraceptives or abortion were banned. The children that ended up in the state institutions were given by their parents due to poverty. The conditions in these institutions were horrible, but so were at their parents homes, otherwise they wouldn't have given them up in the first place. The reason most of the children were gypsies is simply because they were generally more poor and they had more children than other ethnic groups.

However few people want to adopt their children because of racism, and the death rate in these orphanages has been between 50% and 65%. I would like to hear what our Romanian comrade has to say regarding this though.
The human rights organization Terre des Hommes in Den Haag reports that the annual death rate in some of these homes is between 50% and 65%.

As I said the conditions were horrible (not just for gypsies, but to all children); But saying that the annual death rate in all of these orphanages was 65% is unrealistic. The numbers don't add up.

And your source is anything but neutral. Or even realistic: the romani minority according to the 2002 census represent 2.5% of the population; unofficial sources go to 8-9%. Your source goes to 20%!

BogdanV

4th September 2009, 00:33

To add onto what comrade Ovi_1 said; ethnical relations in state-capitalist Romania were quite normal. Indeed, the police (called militia back-then) swept the streets, registering people and sending them to work and as a side-note, even disabled people were treated better as there were working places specially adapted to their capabilities. Unemployment was mostly cleansed which also implied that the Gypsy minority had, in a greater proportion than today, housing and id cards. They were just like any ordinary citizen.

As for today, well, people are suffering and we all need skapegoats, and some Romanians make a living out of skapegoating instead of doing something to change the situation.
Once the "revolution" came, privatization went crazy. Research and the Industrial sectors were smashed to the ground, large numbers of workers went unemployed and most have gone to work in foreign countries.
So, the Gypsy minority went mostly unemployed and because factories started shutting down thanks to "glorious privatization", people moved away from cities, back to rural areas. Here, we're facing another problem : poverty. Thanks to privatizations, local CAPs (agricultural cooperatives for production) shut-down and were looted, and the lands they were built-on got illegally in the hands of the burgeoise, so again, not much to help the Gypsy minority.
Poverty resulted in generations ending-up on streets or being taken-care of by the state, while those who still had ids and housing got old and are barely living of their pensions and their children ended up working as sweepers or construction workers.
Basically poverty forced them to go illegal. Its not like they had a choice here.
Apart from this, we have the local mafia which seems to be pretty ethnically organized in clans. This phenomena, with the unoficial backing of our politicians, combined with poverty has exposed many Gypsies, leaving them no choice but to "follow the trend", either by will or by force.
As Lenin put it, who says we can't have burgeoise Gypsies ? Of course we have!
These are the people who love to show their wealth by building large palaces and driving exotic cars in sheer defiance of any law.
These are the people that bring up the most anger in Romanian citizens. This combined with petty-thefts and the lifestyle and mentality promoted by manele music (synonimous to gangsta rap as one comrade remarked) and its high rate of approval/following within the empoverished Gypsy youth has lead to a lot of hatred coming from the rest of the ethnic spectrum (yes, this hatred is not only manifested by the Romanian majority but also by the Hungarian one, for instance).

The situation is really sad. I can't agree with this hatred, but then again, I can't blame the average proletarian for its attitude. I also can't blame those stuck with living of thieving because I understand that you simply can't just get a job and its over.
The current situation is simply the sum of all our actions (intended or not), taken both by the Gypsy minority and the Romanian majority, during more than a century. Because of this, mentalities, misconceptions and stereotypes were born, are being shaped and continue to be shaped, while the individual is simply faced to adapt to the social environment he is thrown in.
As for non-profit organizations; some are linked to burgeoise interest here so you can't really trust them. Of course not all are like this, but so far, we've only had infrequent and unbalanced activities from their side. Anyway, the end result just isn't showing for the likes of me or just about any other random guy out here.
Also, a last note, before I sign-out : I once listened to a radio report about houses being build and people getting id cards in a Gypsy community. A local ethnic was interviewed and he complained that people in his community aren't following this trend because they saw that others are better without id cards (getting housing and being registered as a citizen entitles you to pay taxes, water, electricity, gas, etc = lots of money compared to the puny income and ofcourse, you could be more easily be tracked by the police). It seems that the power of example has a very negative impact on these people since the only examples, culture and education they get are from manele music.

PS. To those who may consider the usage of the therm Gypsy a rude gesture from my side, please excuse me. Its the way people call this minority for more than a century, regardless of wether or not the speaker in question hates them or not, so in its proper meaning, its not used as a racist word. Gypsies themselfs use this word when speaking Romanian (this has been going on before people even knew the existance of the "Roma" word; atleast us Romanians)