stupid discussion on jews, race and other dodgy shit split from other thread [Archive]

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 18:01

Yes. We should also make a poll whether people here like Golden Dawn, or whether people hate them as much as Zionists do.

No wait. That is completely redundant, since we are on a revolutionary leftist forum, and therefore support for fascism, theocracy, conservatism, anti-semitism is out of the question.

If we you want to proclaim support for the far-right, for theocracy, for bonapartist strongmen, and other Tankie stuff, please go to Soviet Empire, and don't bother us with your terrible Tankie politics.

It's completely baffling what self-proclaimed 'communists' throw their support behind, without any regard to communist principles. These Tankie, Stalinoids, and social-chauvinists don't care about class struggle, class independence, they care about satisfying their infantile 'anti-Westernism' where they champion the bourgeoisie of 'the East' over the bourgeoisie of the West. The façade of communism is merely the pretext for their infantile anti-Westernism. Support for Hezbollah, support for Mugabe, support for Putin, support for China, support for Alexandr Dugin (!), support for National-Bolshevism, Aijo Beness , support for Hamas , support for Assad, support for Chavismo, support for Evo Morales, support for Lukashenko. I'm sick and tired of these Tankies polluting communism with their toxic class collaborationism, nationalism, chauvinism, etc. The only solution is to grow communism so these toxic individuals are gradually crowded out, so their insanity doesn't appear to be so vocal.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 18:09

Yes. We should also make a poll whether people here like Golden Dawn, or whether people hate them as much as Zionists do.

I wasn't aware Zionists hate Golden Dawn at all. They seem to encourage these "anti-Semitic" groups in Europe, as it goes well with their propaganda to encourage more emigration of Jews from Europe.

Could you provide some sources showing that Israel has devoted any amount of resources against Golden Dawn? Any sustained media campaigns against this organization?

Cause they certainly have in the case of Hezbollah.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th November 2014, 18:11

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 18:13

Why put anti-semitic in quotes like that?

Are European settlers in Israel "Semites"?

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th November 2014, 18:14

That has nothing to do with my question. Do you question whether golden dawn is an anti-semitic organization?

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 18:19

I wasn't aware Zionists hate Golden Dawn at all. They seem to encourage these "anti-Semitic" groups in Europe, as it goes well with their propaganda to encourage more emigration of Jews from Europe.

Could you provide some sources showing that Israel has devoted any amount of resources against Golden Dawn? Any sustained media campaigns against this organization?

Cause they certainly have in the case of Hezbollah.

Ah yes, anti-semitic conspiracy theories. Zionists promoting Nazism. That's quite a classic. Only an inch removed from blaming Zionists for the Holocaust, because that helped with the establishment of Israel -- or arguing the Holocaust is a Zionist fabrication.

Can we ban this fool already? Then he can join his anti-communist Tankie friends at Soviet Empire.

Are European settlers in Israel "Semites"?

Look up the definition of anti-semitism please.

Or etymological fallacy.

That has nothing to do with my question. Do you question whether golden dawn is an anti-semitic organization?

He probably meant to say anti-"semitic".

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 18:21

That has nothing to do with my question.

It has everything to do with the question, unless you're trying to pull the wool over people's eyes, that is. Then the question is a very inconvenient one.

Do you question whether golden dawn is an anti-semitic organization?

Their propaganda certainly conforms to classical European "anti-Semitism," which saw other Europeans who viewed themselves as being direct descendants of mythological figures like Abraham as being "Semites."

Hezbollah certainly doesn't see things this way at all. They see them for what they are; European settlers. This is made explicit in a lot of their propaganda.

Zionists have no problem with the former "anti-Semitism," but have a huge problem with the latter. Zionists have a long history of collaborating with the former, in fact, while slaughtering the latter. The latter tend to actually be Semitic people as well.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th November 2014, 18:30

No it really has nothing to do with my question, golden dawn is active in Greece not Israel. Their views on Israelis is irrelevant as a result. You're playing some very entertaining games and everything, but I hate to tell you that it's already been run into the ground by people who were more creative than yourself on this forum. Just out of curiosity how do you feel about the rape of European women by soviet troops in world war 2?

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 18:31

Let's summarise. Hardian supports Hezbollah, an anti-semitic, theocratic, far-right organisation, and he upholds anti-semitic positions himself: Zionists promote Nazism, Zionists collaborate with Nazism to promote Israel, Ashkenazim are not real Jews (common sophistic tactic to excuse oneself from any allegations of anti-semitism, and more importantly to deny any ties of Ashkenazim to the land of Israel/Palestine/Levant).

Rafiq

18th November 2014, 18:37

Ah yes, anti-semitic conspiracy theories. Zionists promoting Nazism. That's quite a classic. Only an inch removed from blaming Zionists for the Holocaust, because that helped with the establishment of Israel -- or arguing the Holocaust is a Zionist fabrication.

Firstly, contextually you are right, and I whole heartedly agree with your attacks on Hadrian.

But there is a grain if truth in what he's saying: "Zionists" are not responsible for the European far right, but there is an UNDENIABLE sense of solidarity between groups known to be anti-Semitic in Europe and the US towards Israeli chauvinists. Anti Semites do not tend to care about an identifiable Jewish nation-state but the universal Jew - the rootless cosmopolitan. While many fascists are inherently opposed to Israel's existence, 21st century European Fascism outside of the sphere of Russian influence (rather prominent in Scandinavian countries) is uniquely pro-Israel.

"Zionists" are certainly not Nazis. Such a word is worthless and ambiguous (to prattle of "Zionism" is meaningless. Why is there a word reserved for those who do not call for Israel's unique destruction? Unless integration of Palestinians into Israeli society and granting them full civic equality is the destruction of Israel). Israeli chauvinists are degenerate reactionaries (while not Nazis) fervently opposed to the liberal world state apparatus (from the perspective of reaction).

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 18:37

No it really has nothing to do with my question, golden dawn is active in Greece not Israel.

Indeed. Hence why Israel doesn't care anything at all about European "anti-Semitic" groups, even utilizing their existence to encourage more European emigration to Israel. But groups that are anti-Zionist they spend enormous resources militarily fighting and building world-wide media campaigns against.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th November 2014, 18:46

Indeed. Hence why Israel doesn't care anything at all about European "anti-Semitic" groups, even utilizing their existence to encourage more European emigration to Israel. But groups that are anti-Zionist they spend enormous resources militarily fighting and building world-wide media campaigns against.

I appreciate that you responded and everything but I questioned your use of the quotes because I thought you were going to defend golden dawn as not being anti-semitic. But then you went to an even deeper level of anti-semitism lol, suffice to say, I don't really wanna talk to you.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 18:48

Firstly, contextually you are right, and I whole heartedly agree with your attacks on Hadrian.

But there is a grain if truth in what he's saying: "Zionists" are not responsible for the European far right, but there is an UNDENIABLE sense of solidarity between groups known to be anti-Semitic in Europe and the US towards Israeli chauvinists. Anti Semites do not tend to care about an identifiable Jewish nation-state but the universal Jew - the rootless cosmopolitan. While many fascists are inherently opposed to Israel's existence, 21st century European Fascism outside of the sphere of Russian influence (rather prominent in Scandinavian countries) is uniquely pro-Israel.

"Zionists" are certainly not Nazis. Such a word is worthless and ambiguous (to prattle of "Zionism" is meaningless. Why is there a word reserved for those who do not call for Israel's unique destruction? Unless integration of Palestinians into Israeli society and granting them full civic equality is the destruction of Israel). Israeli chauvinists are degenerate reactionaries (while not Nazis) fervently opposed to the liberal world state apparatus (from the perspective of reaction).

Do you have any sources for you claim? In my personal experience, anti-semites/white nationalists/neo-nazis are virulently opposed to Israel, and support Hamas and Hezbollah (so many parallels between tankies and neo-nazis). Their main enemy is International Zionism, of which Israel is its headquarters.

DOOM

18th November 2014, 18:50

Are European settlers in Israel "Semites"?

No jews are not european. Europeans have over the last 2000 years made sure that the jews will never be part of their fancy club of accepted ethnicities. And I suggest you to look antisemitism up. You'll notice that it's a) not hatred towards all semites but rather towards jews and b) that it's not a simple form of racism.

DOOM

18th November 2014, 18:54

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 19:01

"The EDL and the Sverigedemokraterna for example, seem to be pretty much pro-Israel, while there are most certainly anti-semitic tendencies in both groups."

Yes, and I expect that Rafiq bases himself on such groups. The SD and the Dutch PVV are pro-Israel, but they are not anti-semitic, nor are they fascist. They are national-conservative parties, pro-Judaistic, pro-Israel, pro-Zionist (at least, I base this mostly on the PVV). I don't think anti-semites support Israel, maybe a handful of exceptions.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 19:08

No jews are not european. Europeans have over the last 2000 years made sure that the jews will never be part of their fancy club of accepted ethnicities.

This discrimination has historically been tied up with religion. The Jews in Europe were never a separate "ethnicity" ("Jewish" isn't an ethnic category any more than "Christian" or "Muslim" is). They were persecuted because they didn't profess the 'one true faith' and all that jazz. Just like the various Christian sects murdered each other in droves over religious doctrine. Being in the 'Euro-Club' has never stopped Europeans from finding ways to kill each other.

The majority of Jews in Israel are of European descent, and even the internal political situation reflects this, as different political parties represent different ethnic groups in Israel.

Per Levy

18th November 2014, 19:20

This discrimination has historically been tied up with religion. The Jews in Europe were never a separate "ethnicity" ("Jewish" isn't an ethnic category any more than "Christian" or "Muslim" is). They were persecuted because they didn't profess the 'one true faith' and all that jazz. Just like the various Christian sects murdered each other in droves over religious doctrine. Being in the 'Euro-Club' has never stopped Europeans from finding ways to kill each other.

its like the holocaust never happend, and all the half and quarter jews wernt put into concentration camps because of their ehtnicity, heck even atheists jews were murdered because they were jews. not to mention that all the anti-semitc propaganda showed a very ethnicitised picture of the jew. you should and probally do know that.

also, anti-semitism is more than widly known as hatred of jews, that includes all jews. funny thing though i've read a similar argument yesterday were a guy ranted about how jews created marxism and all that stuff and when i called them out on that anti-semitc bs they just posted a quote wich pretty much said that jews arnt semitic. seems to be a simple defence from anti-semites.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 19:41

its like the holocaust never happend, and all the half and quarter jews wernt put into concentration camps because of their ehtnicity, heck even atheists jews were murdered because they were jews.

If the Eastern Europeans who subscribed to Judaism didn't have Jewish names and weren't circumcised, there would have been no way for the Nazi occupiers to tell who was and who was not a Jew (without local informants, which the Nazis utilized heavily). Many European Jews escaped the Holocaust by simply going by a false name, as nothing physical distinguishes a European Jew from another European.

not to mention that all the anti-semitc propaganda showed a very ethnicitised picture of the jew. you should and probally do know that.So? Most Jews don't look anything like that. It's not like Nazis were going around trying to measure the lengths of people's noses or something ridiculous to determine someone's "Jewishness."

funny thing though i've read a similar argument yesterday were a guy ranted about how jews created marxism and all that stuff and when i called them out on that anti-semitc bs they just posted a quote wich pretty much said that jews arnt semitic. seems to be a simple defence from anti-semites.Many Jews gravitated toward Marxism. Millions of people, regardless of religious background, do so. I've not seen any convincing evidence Jews were attracted to Marxism in any greater numbers than other groups. German Nazis made this claim because their biggest political opponents/competitors were the Marxists. It is not based on any real evidence.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 19:49

It's not like Nazis were going around trying to measure the lengths of people's noses or something ridiculous to determine someone's "Jewishness."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Nazi_Germany

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 19:54

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Nazi_Germany

And? Did they utilize this "science" to determine the "Jewishness" of people? No. They utilized it to justify Eastern Europeans as 'lesser' people (they weren't "white" enough). To figure out who was a Jew, they needed local informants.

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 19:56

If the Eastern Europeans who subscribed to Judaism didn't have Jewish names and weren't circumcised, there would have been no way for the Nazi occupiers to tell who was and who was not a Jew (without local informants, which the Nazis utilized heavily). Many European Jews escaped the Holocaust by simply going by a false name, as nothing physical distinguishes a European Jew from another European.

Many compared to what?

So? Most Jews don't look anything like that. It's not like Nazis were going around trying to measure the lengths of people's noses or something ridiculous to determine someone's "Jewishness."

Yeah but actually they were...The Nazis very firmly believed that race (and their superiority/inferiority) could be measured by facial features.

Here is one exmaple:

Image (http://www.johnwheater.net/Pictures/German%20Nose%20Measurement.jpg) -- Literary context (scroll up) (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=g4WalMw26IkC&lpg=PA120&ots=cpVLHcGWZ_&dq=nazis%20measure%20noses&pg=PA120#v=onepage&q&f=false)

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 19:57

And? Did they utilize this "science" to determine the "Jewishness" of people? No. They utilized it to justify Eastern Europeans as 'lesser' people (they weren't "white" enough). To figure out who was a Jew, they needed local informants.

That's just not true. The Nazis developed a system to measure physical racial characteristics, especially of the Jews.

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 20:01

Uh-oh, it looks like Comrade Hadrian is arguing about a topic he clearly understands little about maybe he should make less statements and ask more questions.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 20:04

Many compared to what?You'll have to be more specific.

Yeah but actually they were...The Nazis very firmly believed that races (and their superiority/inferiority) could be measured.What they believed doesn't matter. They weren't going around Eastern Europe with nose-measurers and gathering up people who had big noses. They used local informants, or simply went by the name.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 20:05

Jews are an ethnicity. The comparison to muslims and Christianity is wrong, it should be more like a comparison to Assyrians and Bosniaks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group#Examples

Sasha

18th November 2014, 20:05

considering tool Hadrian has consequently been using ip-proxies and burn email accounts i think he knows how shit works here, i doubt this is his first account here.

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 20:15

You'll have to be more specific.

You said many European Jews and I want to know what you are comparing "many" with when you say "many"? What does "many" mean when you consider how many Jews died in the holocaust?

What they believed doesn't matter. They weren't going around Eastern Europe with nose-measurers and gathering up people who had big noses. They used local informants, or simply went by the name.

I don't understand what you mean. It has nothing to do with what they thought. You said they weren't going around measuring people's noses to determine if they were Jewish and I just demonstrated that they were doing that...

Whether or not they used informants is not really relevant. You attempted to dismiss the Nazi representation of the Jews as insignificant in their day-to-day management of racial policy, but to do that is to be grossly out-of-touch with the whole racial system of Nazi Germany and to whitewash a major aspect of it.

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 20:16

considering tool Hadrian has consequently been using ip-proxies and burn email accounts i think he knows how shit works here, i doubt this is his first account here.

Uh-oh.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 20:19

To quote Der Spiegel:

It's completely undisputed that the Holocaust would never have happened without Hitler, SS Chief Heinrich Himmler and the many, many other Germans. But it's also certain "that the Germans on their own wouldn't have been able to carry out the murder of millions of European Jews," says Hamburg-based historian Michael Wild.

It's a perception that many survivors never doubted. When the Association of Surviving Lithuanian Jews convened in Munich in 1947, they passed a resolution that bore an unmistakable title: "On the guilt of a large part of the Lithuanian population for the murder of Lithuania's Jews."

In the Third Reich with its well-functioning bureaucracy, there were comprehensive registers of the Jewish population. But in the territories conquered by the German army, Hitler's henchmen needed information of the type supplied in the Netherlands by registry offices whose staff went to a lot of trouble to compile a precise "Register of Jews."

And how would the SS and police have been able to track down Jews in the cities of Eastern Europe with their broad mix of ethnic groups if they hadn't had the support of the local population? Not many Germans would have been able "to recognize a Jew in a crowd," recalls Thomas Blatt, a survivor of Sobibor who wants to testify as a witness at Demjanjuk's trial.

At the time, Blatt was a blonde-haired boy and tried to pass for a Christian child in his Polish home town of Izbica. He didn't wear a yellow star and tried to appear self-confident when he ran into uniformed people. But he was betrayed a number of times -- the Germans paid for information on the whereabouts of Jews -- and he always escaped with a lot of luck.

Denunciation was so common in Poland that there was a special term for paid informants "Szmalcowniki" (previously a term for a fence). In many cases, the denouncers knew their victims. And while the French, Dutch or Belgians could submit to the illusion that the Jews deported to the east from Paris, Rotterdam or Brussels would be all right in the end, the people in Eastern Europe learned through the grapevine what lay in store for the Jews in Auschwitz or Treblinka.

The Dark Continent: Hitler's European Holocaust Helpers (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-dark-continent-hitler-s-european-holocaust-helpers-a-625824.html)

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 20:26

To quote Der Spiegel:

The Dark Continent: Hitler's European Holocaust Helpers (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-dark-continent-hitler-s-european-holocaust-helpers-a-625824.html)

Right?...What does that have to do with what I said...?

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 20:29

Maybe split the thread (or ban people take up positions in favour of far-right groups, assuming that theocracy falls in the far-right).

And they did

"Hitler and other Nazi leaders viewed the Jews not as a religious group, but as a poisonous "race," which "lived off" the other races and weakened them. After Hitler took power, Nazi teachers in school classrooms began to apply the "principles" of racial science. They measured skull size and nose length, and recorded the color of their pupils' hair and eyes to determine whether students belonged to the true "Aryan race." Jewish and Romani (Gypsy) students were often humiliated in the process."

http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007679

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 20:55

I don't understand what you mean. It has nothing to do with what they thought. You said they weren't going around measuring people's noses to determine if they were Jewish and I just demonstrated that they were doing that...

Whether or not they used informants is not really relevant. You attempted to dismiss the Nazi representation of the Jews as insignificant in their day-to-day management of racial policy, but to do that is to be grossly out-of-touch with the whole racial system of Nazi Germany and to whitewash a major aspect of it.

I'm not sure whether your misunderstanding is deliberate or not, but I'll just assume it isn't for sake of discussion.

I said Nazis weren't going around Europe with nose-measurers to determine if someone was a Jew or not. You posted a picture from Corbis images (HU036561 (http://www.corbisimages.com/stock-photo/rights-managed/HU036561/measuring-the-features-of-a-german)) and said "Yeah but actually they were." This is false and misleading (but I don't think you're doing so intentionally). How the Nazis actually rounded up Eastern Europeans who identified as Jews in occupied Eastern Europe was via paid informants, as the link I provided substantiates. The image you posted from Corbis images contains hardly any information at all (it's from 1941, supposedly, and taken in Germany). My guess is it's a local experiment by some Nazi "race" "scientist" to prove some bizarre ideas. There is no way to tell.

No one denies Nazis believed all sorts of weird things. These beliefs didn't match up with reality. Regardless of what they believed about "races," it has nothing to do with how they actually carried out the roundup of Eastern Europeans who identified as Jews. Their "science," which was largely an ideological excuse to Other their European neighbors, could not assist them in rounding up Eastern Europeans who identified as Jews. This is because there are no physical features that marks the European Jew as distinct from the locations of Europe they come from. Eastern European Jews didn't have larger noses, darker skin, different color hair, etc, from the other Eastern Europeans around them. This is because Jews aren't an ethnicity, unlike how the Nazis thought (and some people participating in this thread think). So they had to utilize local informants to do their roundup process, as there was simply no other mechanism available to the Nazis for this purpose.

I'm not really sure if this would be confusing to a reader of this thread or not, but it seems fairly clear to me what is being said by both parties here.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 20:59

Comrade Hadrian reminds me of 'Deep Sea'. The first-world European settlers narrative certainly sounds familiar; the class collaborationist 'anti-imperialism' too. I bet if I start quoting Engels about socialism including machinery, he'll claim it is about ancient tribes too.

L.A.P.

18th November 2014, 21:04

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 21:31

I'm not sure whether your misunderstanding is deliberate or not, but I'll just assume it isn't for sake of discussion.

You're discussing how Einsatzgruppens executed their orders in Eastern Europe. I am talking about specific legislative policy of the Nazi regime, not just as an abstract idea, but as practicable actions against Jews.

I said Nazis weren't going around Europe with nose-measurers to determine if someone was a Jew or not.

But that is literally what they were doing and it's well documented. The fact that Einsatzgruppens used a network of informants and the fact that Jews in parts of Eastern Europe didn't share those characteristics, doesn't alter the fact that Nazis not only made specific legislative characterisations, but actualised those characterisations in day-to-day policy at every level.

You are correct in what you say insofar as specific actions against Jews materialised in specific ways in Eastern Europe, but it is also true that Nazis used "scientific" methods to determine the heritage of people living under their control by literally measuring their noses -- amongst other things. So when you dismiss that, you are essentially dismissing a significant aspect of their racial policies and I take objection to that, hence my intervention.

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 22:11

Eastern European Jews didn't have larger noses, darker skin, different color hair, etc, from the other Eastern Europeans around them. This is because Jews aren't an ethnicity, unlike how the Nazis thought (and some people participating in this thread think). So they had to utilize local informants to do their roundup process, as there was simply no other mechanism available to the Nazis for this purpose.

You can't accurately determine any ethnicity by measuring physical characteristics. Why this leads you to the conclusion that Jews are not an ethnoreligious group is beyond me.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 22:22

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 22:29

also, i can recognize 9 out of 10 Ashkenazi jews from a mile away (Sephardi and Mizarahi not so much), since i wasnt raised religious in any shape or form, and i, besides my direct family, had almost zero contact with other ethnic jews growing up i can assure you there is a distinct ethnicity.

I hope you're not suggesting that you can look at a person and determine their ethnicity because of some shared physical characteristic... because that would be bullshit.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 22:34

Sasha

18th November 2014, 22:39

nah, i wouldnt be able to say why, but lets say my azkhenazi radar is almost as good as my gaydar and that one is excellent. obviously there are plenty of margin of error but just as i can instinctively recognize someone from the Moluccas over the rest of people from Indonesia (while i wouldnt be able to see the difference between someone from java and from sulawesi) because they are a distinct ethnic group i have a lot of contact with.

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 22:46

How's that bs? Most ethnicities have shared physical characteristics. Most people can tell West Africans apart from East Africans pretty easily; or Austronesians from East Asians; or Slavs from Western Europeans; or Arabs from Turks.

Seriously? I honestly couldn't tell the difference between a Slav and any other European or a Turk from an Arab. I thought ethnicities had a shared cultural identity not shared physical characteristics.

Help me out here. Mikhail Botvinnik, Stanley Kubrick, Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud, what is the common physical characteristic that ties all these people together and would make you go "Ah, well clearly these men are all Ashkenazi Jews."?

nah, i wouldnt be able to say why, but lets say my azkhenazi radar is almost as good as my gaydar and that one is excellent. obviously there are plenty of margin of error but just as i can instinctively recognize someone from the Moluccas over the rest of people from Indonesia (while i wouldnt be able to see the difference between someone from java and from sulawesi) because they are a distinct ethnic group i have a lot of contact with.

Okay, so is it more that you recognise what people from particular cultures are like as opposed to being able to discern their ethnicity via some kind of shared physical trait? If what I'm saying makes sense.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 22:49

Maybe the Nazis could have saved some money on local informants if Sasha's Ashkenazi-dar could distinguish between an Eastern European and his neighbor that thought he was a descendent of Abraham.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 22:51

i wouldnt now but i could pick them with above chance result out of a group of 50 non ashkenazi...

Sasha

18th November 2014, 22:52

hey hadrian, it was my family getting gassed by the nazi's, why dont you just fuck off voluntarily...

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 22:55

i wouldnt now but i could pick them with above chance result out of a group of 50 non ashkenazi...

Yeah, maybe if they were wearing yarmulkes...

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 23:02

i wouldnt now but i could pick them with above chance result out of a group of 50 non ashkenazi...

So what is it about Albert Einstein that would identify him to you as an Ashkenazi if all you knew about him was his physical appearance?

Like, what is it about him that would set him apart from say Nikola Tesla?

(I have to look up the ethnicity of these people before I post, like I was going to use Carl Sagan as an example instead of Nikola Tesla but apparently Carl Sagan is from a Jewish immigrant family, who'd have know? Not me, not by just looking at him at any rate.)

Sasha

18th November 2014, 23:05

like said, i wouldnt dare to hazard a gues but they are nearly as distinct for me as a Somali and a Kenian

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 23:09

Don't cha know, Skinz, the Ashkenazi are 'white' white. Sephardi Jews are 'white' like Italians are (i.e., just barely). Mizrahi are practically Palestinians in their non-whiteness.

Zoroaster

18th November 2014, 23:12

Well this thread is kinda bullshit.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 23:12

or its easier to recognize your own ethnic group than one you had little to no contact with ever... which might explain why Hadrian cant see the difference and i can... you know my point about mollucans visavis indonesians...

Lord Testicles

18th November 2014, 23:15

like said, i wouldnt dare to hazard a gues but they are nearly as distinct for me as a Somali and a Kenian

I wouldn't be able to tell if someone was a Somali or a Kenyan just by looking at them either... your apparent ability to tell someone's ethnicity by merely looking at them is still a profound mystery to me.

or its easier to recognize your own ethnic group than one you had little to no contact with ever... which might explain why Hadrian cant see the difference and i can... you know my point about mollucans visavis indonesians...

Well that's not true, not for me at least. I couldn't tell if someone was Welsh, English, Irish or Scottish just by looking at them.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 23:20

i might confuse an Ethiopian for a Somali and a Zambian for a Kenian and like said i claim not its an exacvt science so maybe i have only 7 out of 10 good but its above chance.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 23:25

I wouldn't be able to tell if someone was a Somali or a Kenyan just by looking at them either... your apparent ability to tell someone's ethnicity by merely looking at them is still a profound mystery to me.

They're a Nazi race-hierarchy chart in the Holocaust Museum in DC. Can't seem to find it online anywhere, but no doubt Sasha could pick out each group of people accurately. There was like 30 of them, lol.

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 23:32

Prepare the Ban-Canon!

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 23:35

Skinz, from personal experience with my friends, most can easily tell Moroccans and Turks apart, but some can't, which kinda surprises the rest. I suppose it's something you either see or not.

What sets Eastern Africans apart is their bulging foreheads, small long nose (which has historically meant, based on pseudo-science, that they were regarded as Hamitic Aryans). Then there's some subtle details between Ethiopians and Somalis, but yeah. But most times I can't explicitly state what sets ethnicities apart.

(Deep Sea2 tries to paint Sasha as white nationalist or something, not realising Sasha is ashkenazi himself).

They're a Nazi race-hierarchy chart in the Holocaust Museum in DC. Can't seem to find it online anywhere, but no doubt Sasha could pick out each group of people accurately. There was like 30 of them, lol.

Telling people apart makes one a Nazi now huh. Racial pseudo-science of the nineteenth century based themselves on phenotypical observations, and from there inferred the existence of races. That doesn't mean that if you can see 'hey, that man is East Asian, and not West African' you are a Nazi. Kinda pathetic that you try to frame it as such. I mean, I bet you can tell East Asians apart from West Africans.

In Amsterdam, phone shop employees yell out to Eritreans "cheap phone card to Somalia" but not to Afro-Surinamese. All of them are Nazis too I guess.

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 23:35

Anyone know where I can get a pdf of Rachel Shabi's We Look Like the Enemy: The Hidden Story of Israel's Jews from Arab Lands (http://www.amazon.com/We-Look-Like-Enemy-Israels/dp/0802715729/ref=pd_sim_sbs_b_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=15ZVVKYN0KBB7HHCXQ9T)? lmao

Comrade Hadrian

18th November 2014, 23:42

Telling people apart makes one a Nazi now huh...That doesn't mean that if you can see 'hey, that man is East Asian, and not West African' you are a Nazi. Kinda pathetic that you try to frame it as such. I mean, I bet you can tell East Asians apart from West Africans.

I bet you can't tell the difference between an Ashkenazi Jew and a European.

Just like the Nazis couldn't.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 23:43

Not always. But I think in most cases I could.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

18th November 2014, 23:47

I bet you can't tell the difference between an Ashkenazi Jew and a European.

Just like the Nazis couldn't.

you're an idiot. I'm an Ashkenazi Jew. And a European. Stop being a disgusting race ideologue. Fuck off.

Tim Cornelis

18th November 2014, 23:54

But yeah, I don't get what's so controversial about being able to distinguish between ethnicities, to the point of me being a Nazi. Again, anyone can tell the difference between a West African and East Asian; everyone can to varying degrees.

you're an idiot. I'm an Ashkenazi Jew. And a European. Stop being a disgusting race ideologue. Fuck off.

He wasn't really saying that. He was saying we can't see the difference between Ashkenazim and Europeans, because Ashkenazim are Europeans.

Sasha

18th November 2014, 23:54

And obviously its not all body features, I would find it easier to recognize different ethnic group from video than from photo, easier with sound than without. And like said familiarity is a big factor. Unless they are oergoerian I couldn't say where one chinese is from from the other. Just as all native Americans look alike to me while someone who is themselve a Chinese or native could make way more nuances.
To come full circle, I couldn't pick out the Sephardic between most spanish nor most meshrazi between most Arabs. Which makes the whole Nazi idea of a unified Jewish race bull. but I can pick Ashkenazi ethnicity more easy out of a group of eastern Europeans as I can pick a dutch person out of a group of French (while recognizing when we would talk about dutch and Germans the acuraucy level would probably drop to chance if i couldnt here their voices)

The Feral Underclass

18th November 2014, 23:57

I can tell the difference between a black person and a white person most of the time.

Lord Testicles

19th November 2014, 00:03

i might confuse an Ethiopian for a Somali and a Zambian for a Kenian and like said i claim not its an exacvt science so maybe i have only 7 out of 10 good but its above chance.

Okay, I hate to piss on your chips but I think that's an ability that you think that you possess not one that you necessarily do.

Skinz, from personal experience with my friends, most can easily tell Moroccans and Turks apart, but some can't, which kinda surprises the rest. I suppose it's something you either see or not.

How do you know how accurate your friends are? Do you sit around and guess people's ethnicities and then ask the person to confirm it? I can't help but think that there might have been other factors that determine whether they thought someone was Moroccan or Turk other than just physical appearance.

What sets Eastern Africans apart is their bulging foreheads, small long nose (which has historically meant, based on pseudo-science, that they were regarded as Hamitic Aryans). Then there's some subtle details between Ethiopians and Somalis, but yeah. But most times I can't explicitly state what sets ethnicities apart.

I don't think you can explicit state what sets ethnicities apart because what sets ethnicities apart isn't physical characteristics but culture and history, both of which aren't immediately obvious when looking at someone.

The problem with your Eastern African example is that "East African" isn't an ethnicity and secondly there are plenty of ethnicities in East Africa which don't conform to those characteristics.

For example, look up pictures of the Luhya people and then look up pictures of the Luo people and tell me what physical characteristics separate them.

(Deep Sea2 tries to paint Sasha as white nationalist or something, not realising Sasha is ashkenazi himself).

Don't worry, I don't think that Sasha is a white nationalist. I've been here long enough to know that isn't the case.

Tim Cornelis

19th November 2014, 00:03

Brits tho. Everyone can tell brits apart from continentals. Basically rooney.

Tim Cornelis

19th November 2014, 00:28

Okay, I hate to piss on your chips but I think that's an ability that you think that you possess not one that you necessarily do.

How do you know how accurate your friends are? Do you sit around and guess people's ethnicities and then ask the person to confirm it? I can't help but think that there might have been other factors that determine whether they thought someone was Moroccan or Turk other than just physical appearance.

I don't think you can explicit state what sets ethnicities apart because what sets ethnicities apart isn't physical characteristics but culture and history, both of which aren't immediately obvious when looking at someone.

You're wrong on that. Ethnicities come in different forms. Ethnoreligious, ethnocultural, ethnolinguistic, etc. And there's certainly aggregate or collective genetic differences between Arabs and Turks, (see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/The_history_and_geography_of_human_genes_Luigi_Luc a_Cavalli-Sforza_map_genetic.png )

The problem with your Eastern African example is that "East African" isn't an ethnicity and secondly there are plenty of ethnicities in East Africa which don't conform to those characteristics.

For example, look up pictures of the Luhya people and then look up pictures of the Luo people and tell me what physical characteristics separate them.

Often it's about people either one of us know. But Moroccans and Turks can quite easily be distinguished. I can't really explicit what is so distinguishable apart from the hair. But ask any Turk or Moroccan and each will tell each other apart with only a small margin of error I'm sure. Most in my experience are surprised when they are mistaken for the other.

I didn't say I can tell every ethnic group apart. Without studying or familiarity as Sasha said, I can't distinguish Luhya or Luo people. But for instance, a Bushman or a Zulu can quite easily be told apart. Bushmen, high cheekbones, their specific hair, crude flat nose, bulging head make them really distinguishable.

I used ethnicity for lack of a better word. It's not race, it's not 'ethnocultural', but clearly groups of people are distinguishable. Geneticists, for instance, can tell 'ethnicities' apart by simply looking at people. And others, forgot which field, can tell gender apart by merely the skeleton.

I dunno man, it's not as 'out there' as you make it out to be.

Lord Testicles

19th November 2014, 00:36

You're wrong on that. Ethnicities come in different forms. Ethnoreligious, ethnocultural, ethnolinguistic, etc. And there's certainly aggregate or collective genetic differences between Arabs and Turks, (see: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/The_history_and_geography_of_human_genes_Luigi_Luc a_Cavalli-Sforza_map_genetic.png )

I don't know if I'm wrong, but I'll be surprised if any of those ethnicities use physical characteristics as their basis for categorising people.

And others, forgot which field, can tell gender apart by merely the skeleton.

Anthropologists?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenice_method

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenice_method)
I dunno man, it's not as 'out there' as you make it out to be.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenice_method)
I don't know if it's "out there." I just don't think that people can tell someone's ethnicity with any degree of accuracy just by looking at them, even if their familiar with that particular ethnicity.

For example, I doubt anyone would be able to look at a Brit and tell whether he was English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish, Manx or Cornish by appearance alone.

Tim Cornelis

19th November 2014, 00:43

what about these guys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWa9sJzgM4A

Wouldn't you instantly recognise most as Russian by looks alone?

Lord Testicles

19th November 2014, 00:47

what about these guys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWa9sJzgM4A

Wouldn't you instantly recognise most as Russian by looks alone?

:laugh:

But seriously, they look like they're from Hull.

Rurkel

19th November 2014, 03:49

Originally posted by Tim Cornelis
or Slavs from Western EuropeansReally? Your ethnicity radar must be extremely well-attuned. I have no idea how you would distinguish between them. I basically agree with Skinz - ethnicities do not have to be defined by physical characteristics and most are not, making the grand "Can You Find Out Who's An Ashkenazi Jew By Looking At Them, And If You Can't, Does This Mean They Are Not An Ethnicity" debate moot.

Danielle Ni Dhighe

19th November 2014, 05:54

This discrimination has historically been tied up with religion. The Jews in Europe were never a separate "ethnicity"
That's simply not true. For example, Ashkenazi Jews had a separate language, culture, and religion. How are those not markers of ethnicity?

Palmares

19th November 2014, 08:27

I can tell the difference between a black person and a white person most of the time.

Interestingly enough, in Tasmania where I grew up, Tasmanian Aboriginals are commonly white in complexion. On top of straight up genocide, this also stems from the tactic know as "breeding out the colour".

So with all this talk about ascertain someone's ethnicity from physical appearances, I think we are treading on a very thin line here. How are we defining ethnicity/race here? Of course I do believe it is possible to have educated guesses on where somewhere may be from, or where their ancestors may be from, but to claim to have some authoritative ability to ajudge thus is wishful thinking from my viewpoint.

As someone who consistently has people "guessing" my ethnicity, most are wrong. In Mexico people think I'm Mexican. I'm pretty sure local Mexicans know what a Mexican looks like, yet they are very wrong about me. It was only an American who guessed I wasn't local. I've had similar experiences elsewhere.

And of course some have guessed right. Good for them. I won't give them a medal for it. But you know, it's cool if you know what you're talking bout, but it's not a game of "Guess Who?".

Check out the threads on this anthropology forum where they are playing "Guess Who?":

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/forum/157176/

The Feral Underclass

19th November 2014, 08:47

Interestingly enough, in Tasmania where I grew up, Tasmanian Aboriginals are commonly white in complexion.

Cultural appropriation!!! Stop stealing our heritage!

Sasha

19th November 2014, 09:19

anyways, Comrade Hadrian banned.

Rafiq

19th November 2014, 20:36

Do you have any sources for you claim? In my personal experience, anti-semites/white nationalists/neo-nazis are virulently opposed to Israel, and support Hamas and Hezbollah (so many parallels between tankies and neo-nazis). Their main enemy is International Zionism, of which Israel is its headquarters.

Let's be clear: When Marxist speak of fascism, we do not refer to a specific theory or general doctrine - nor the official declarations of certain groups. Likewise, we speak of antisemitism as a general pathology, and not an identity.

It's quite clear that all far-right pro-Israel groups are inherently anti-Semitic and that the same ideological foundations which spawn anti-immigrant fervor are anti-semitic. No far-right group that seeks legitimacy is going to make the mistake of openly admitting this - but we can find manifestations of widely held ideas in works like Ander's Breivik's manifesto:

So, are the current Jews in Europe and US disloyal? The multiculturalist (nation-wrecking) Jews ARE while the conservative Jews ARE NOT. Aprox. 75% of European/US Jews support multiculturalism while aprox. 50% of Israeli Jews does the same. This shows very clearly that we must embrace the remainingloyal Jews as brothers rather than repeating the mistake of the [Nazis].

This is the same Anders Breivik which is fervently pro-Israel, the same Breivik who calls for a "crusader-Jewish" alliance against the peoples of the Near East. Anti-Semitism is not the simple hatred of the Jewish people, or all Jews. It is the aversion of the archetypal Jew, the ideological Jew, the rootless cosmopolitan with no clear national loyalties. So long as the Jews display clear, identifiable and clear national identities, they are not a problem for European anti-Semites. This is the form European ('civilized' Bourgeois) anti-semitism takes today. Similarly, the American far-right, inherently anti-semitic is also supportive of the Israeli state. Take note that individual Jews are also very much capable of being anti-Semites themselves - intellectuals like Zizek point out that the Israeli state has already adopted the pathology of European anti-semitism in its harassment and suspicion of left-liberal Jews critical of the state's policies.

Anti-semitism thrives in western countries precisely because of the utter impotence of Liberalism in addressing it's existence - in this ideological totality, Liberalism actively sustains or harbors anti-semitism (the possibility of it) as capital's insurance policy. Anti-semitism is regarded simply as a form of discrimination, another form of intolerance. What is the liberal counter-argument to the idea that Jews control everything? "Not all Jews do" (this is quite evident among Anti-Zionism which posits that "Zionists" control everything - apparently because Zionist is substituted for Jew, it is no longer anti-semitic. The point isn't that it fosters hatred toward Jews. The point is that it is an ideological universe which is antithetical to proletarian consciousness) and so on - it doesn't grasp the problem at its core. This sufficiently breaths life and legitimacy into the idea, or the possibility that Jews have this pervasive influence on society (as an actual interest). Ruling ideology, no matter how vehement in its condemnation of anti-semitism (which I always suspect is a form of superego - insecurity of its own predispositions toward it) does not recognize anti-semitism for what it is. It has nothing to do with individual jews as such but the ideological archetype of the Jew.

Petty bourgeois (Russian) antisemitism, conversely, recognizes Israel as not a real legitimate nation state, but the Jew among nations - the Jewish nation-state among the world which controls and manipulates the powerful governments of the world. The Jews have one identifiable motive to Russo-Antisemites, which is the utilization of their apparently already held vast financial, political or whatever positions in order to strengthen and serve the interests of the Israeli state.

Of course, in reality, anti-semitism manifests itself in varying degrees of both, often times in obscure combinations. It's hilarious how anti-semites make it as though media and entertainment are "controlled" by Jews: With a careful eye it is really easy to see modern manifestations of anti-semitism in media (movies, video games).

Slavic

20th November 2014, 01:59

Lord Testicles

21st November 2014, 20:49

Check out the threads on this anthropology forum where they are playing "Guess Who?":

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/forum/157176/

Well, that's one creepy fucking forum.

Illegalitarian

21st November 2014, 23:56

I'm with Skinz on this one, I couldn't tell you the difference between any of the 'white races', couldn't tell you the difference between a european jew or any other white person, a middle eastern jew or an arab, any of the east asian ethnicities, etc.

The differences are arbitrary (there's no real big genetic differences between people obviously) in reality so I don't give a fuck, but it's something that clearly matters to some people, and it's definitely not a mistake you want to make in certain parts of the world.

I think most people are the same way though, despite what they may say. During the Rwandan genocide a great deal of both "ethnicities" were killed because the only way you can tell the difference between a tutsi and a hutu is by their identity cards, since tutsi and hutu pre-colonization were economic differences with a basis in feudalism, rather than ethnic differences (though I think tutsi's did originally come from the Horn)

Anglo-Saxon Philistine

22nd November 2014, 18:57

Its not farfetched to understand that when members of an ethnic group procreate more often within their own ethnicity, dominant genes become more homologous and the population as a whole become more readily differentiated from another ethnic group.

It is genetics and probability.

And that's precisely why claims about being able to distinguish the ethnicity of one person are problematic: the differences between various heredity groups are mostly a matter of statistical distribution of various traits. I mean, someone with Slavic heritage might have a higher chance of having red hair than someone with Hungarian heritage (I don't know if that's actually true, I'm assuming it is for purposes of this example), but that doesn't justify assuming that someone with red hair is a Slav.

(And the differences when it comes to physiognomy seem to be extremely easy to lose; the Bulgarians, for example, taken as a whole, look indistinguishable from Macedonian Slavs although the original Bulgarian population was Turkic; their "Turkic" traits were mostly lost in a few centuries of intermixing.)

There are, of course, some traits that are almost universal in one heredity group and almost nonexistent in others - black skin in people with an African, Melanesian or native Australian heritage, cushions of fat around the eyes for "East Asians" and so on. But these, at best, allow you go guess a very broad geographic region from which an individual comes.

I don't think anyone can really distinguish Ethiopian and Somali individuals, particularly since a lot of Ethiopians are Somali.

Anyway, the original thesis was, what, that "Jews" are European and that this is why the European and American bourgeoisie support Israel? Which is a pretty whacked-out claim that can be pretty much disproved by pointing to Liberia, whose ruling caste of Amero-Libians is definitely not "European" in any meaning of the term.

I say "Jews" because, really, the various groups thought of as Jewish are separate, with their own languages, customs and so on. The Hebrew-speaking people in Israel are obviously not the same as Ladino-speaking people in the former Yugoslavia (all five of them left, sadly), or "assimilated" Jews who retain some of the culture but speak the same language as their non-Jewish neighbours.