Karl Marx: An Anti-Semite?

[AlwaysAnarchy]

I have read that Karl Marx was an anti-semite. Most people attacking Marx or accusing him of this base their accusation on a book he wrote called "On The Jewish Question"

Here are some excerpts of what Marx said that made people to accuse him of anti-semitism:


Originally posted by Marx
“What is the object of the Jew’s worship in this world?” Marx asks. “Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.... What is the foundation of the Jew in this world? Practical necessity, private advantage.... The bill of exchange is the Jew’s real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange.”

Now, if some member wrote those exact words today in this forum, would he not be banned by the CC??? :huh:


So was Karl Marx an anti-semite?

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

There are probably a few famous leftists from history that would be banned by the CC if they joined RL

Marx probably was anti-semetic, looking at the time he was writing it was probably a very institutional thing and much more culturally acceptable - I suppose he'd done well to throw off the chains of capitalism, breaking out of mainstream prejudices would have been a veritable 'toughie' I suppose...

The thing to realise is that 'marxists' don't cult-worship Marx, they simply view his socio-economic ideals to be desirable... There isn't a giant degree of which any anti-semitism on his part should impact our perception of his views on economics

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

Woah! I never knew that. BUt i must agree with Kevis, that most marxist or maoists, leninists, trotskyists etc. dont agree 100% with every word that ca,e out of their mouth, but simply extract the bits they agree with, and develop them.

[chimx]

Both of Marx's parents were Jewish, making Marx Jewish if you were to ask a rabbi today. He of course was an atheist.

Historically Jews were marginalized throughout Europe. I think Marx was attacking their cultural distinction based on this marginalization, and had little to do with viewing Jews as a distinct "race" that one should scorn. Still, hardly some of his best work.

[Lamanov]

Nope. You didn't get the point. Read further:


Originally posted by Marx
...The bill of exchange is the Jew’s real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange. Well, fine! Emancipation from exchange and money is the self-emancipation of our time.

[Emphasis added.] That is, the emancipation of a pre-Israel stereotype Jew is at the same emancipation of everyone on the planet. Emancipation from money, exchange, capital, is the general emancipation of both Marx's and our time, not only for Jews.

Besides, Marx was a "Jew". That is, he came from a Jewish family. If I'm not wrong, I think he's a son of a rabbi.

Peacefull["]Anarchist["], did you actually read On the Jewish Question, or did you just run by that quote somewhere else?

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2006 08:32 pm
Both of Marx's parents were Jewish, making Marx Jewish if you were to ask a rabbi today.
being Jewish by descent doesn't really prevent you from making anti-semitic statements...

Alan Ginsberg was Jewish by descent and was rather the anti-semite

[Comrade Marcel]

Marx family did convert to Christianity in order to assimiliate into European society, Karl's father was a lawyer.

In this essay he was criticising modern "Jewishness" as he called it (a culture and practice, not a race or religion). Actually, Marx wasn't even a Marxist yet, so to speak. He was really young when he wrote that and was still in his Hegelian stage. A lot of enemies of Marxism try to take this essay out of context and out of the time it was written in to make him look anti-Semetic; of course he was not.

[Comrade Marcel]

Originally posted by Kevis+November 28, 2006 08:45 pm--> (Kevis @ November 28, 2006 08:45 pm)
[email protected] 28, 2006 08:32 pm
Both of Marx's parents were Jewish, making Marx Jewish if you were to ask a rabbi today.
being Jewish by descent doesn't really prevent you from making anti-semitic statements...

Alan Ginsberg was Jewish by descent and was rather the anti-semite [/b]
How do you back up Ginsberg being anti-Semetic? This is the first I've ever heard. I read his testimony on "Naked Lunch" and the defense actually asked him to explain Bourrrough's critiques of ameriKan anti-Semetism in the book.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 28, 2006 10:09 pm
Actually, Marx wasn't even a Marxist yet, so to speak. He was really young when he wrote that and was still in his Hegelian stage.

He was never a Marxist, so to speak.


In this essay he was criticising modern "Jewishness" as he called it (a culture and practice, not a race or religion).

There's more to it than simple "Jewishness".

[Nakam43]

Karl Marx was NOT anti-semitic but he described Ferdinand Lassalle as a "jewish nigger".

[Severian]

The overall point of that article was actually to argue for the civil emancipation of the Jews. It was a polemic against Bruno Bauer, who argued that Jews could only have legal rights when they gave up their religion.

It does have it's problems - it was from the period before Marx was a communist, before he joined a revolutionary worker's organization. (The League of the Just/Communist League.)

One of the past threads on "The Jewish Question" by Marx (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=56265)

[bezdomni]

Peacefull["]Anarchist["], did you actually read On the Jewish Question, or did you just run by that quote somewhere else?


Do you actually expect him to read anything that wasn't written by a hippie or Michael Moore?

This is not a "new" attack on Marx, and it is just as inane and irrelevent as it ever has been.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Kevis+November 28, 2006 02:45 pm--> (Kevis @ November 28, 2006 02:45 pm)
[email protected] 28, 2006 08:32 pm
Both of Marx's parents were Jewish, making Marx Jewish if you were to ask a rabbi today.
being Jewish by descent doesn't really prevent you from making anti-semitic statements...

Alan Ginsberg was Jewish by descent and was rather the anti-semite [/b]
Right. I don't know about Ginsburg, but there are Jews in the LaRouche organization for example.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Originally posted by Comrade Marcel+November 28, 2006 10:12 pm--> (Comrade Marcel @ November 28, 2006 10:12 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2006 08:45 pm

[email protected] 28, 2006 08:32 pm
Both of Marx's parents were Jewish, making Marx Jewish if you were to ask a rabbi today.
being Jewish by descent doesn't really prevent you from making anti-semitic statements...

Alan Ginsberg was Jewish by descent and was rather the anti-semite
How do you back up Ginsberg being anti-Semetic? This is the first I've ever heard. I read his testimony on "Naked Lunch" and the defense actually asked him to explain Bourrrough's critiques of ameriKan anti-Semetism in the book. [/b]
I might be getting confused

but i remember some quote saying

I was originally an anti-zionist, but this gradually grew in to anti-semetism

I'm just paraphrasing, i think I used it in my history coursework last year

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Check this out:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1977/kmtr1/app1.htm

It's the best thing on this subject.

[Faceless]

Peaceful Anarchist, go and read the Jewish Question!
Look at how many [...]'s there are in your quote! Do you know how many paragraphs were skipped over to condense Marx's whole essay into some sort of attack on the Jews?
This essay was an attack on Bruno Bauer, who suggested that we shouldn't fight for the emancipation of the Jew, but that the emancipation of the Jew would only be achieved by him renouncing Judaism. As DJ-TC said, Marx was actually arguing in favour of the emancipation of the Jews.
I wouldn't reply if it wasn't for the fact that no one wants to actually hear it from the horses mouth.

Interestingly
You quoted:

“What is the object of the Jew’s worship in this world?” Marx asks. “Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.... What is the foundation of the Jew in this world? Practical necessity, private advantage.... The bill of exchange is the Jew’s real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange.”

This is the extent of the essay between the first part of your "quote" and the last part:


What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.

Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time.

An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible. His religious consciousness would be dissipated like a thin haze in the real, vital air of society. On the other hand, if the Jew recognizes that this practical nature of his is futile and works to abolish it, he extricates himself from his previous development and works for human emancipation as such and turns against the supreme practical expression of human self-estrangement.

We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time, an element which through historical development – to which in this harmful respect the Jews have zealously contributed – has been brought to its present high level, at which it must necessarily begin to disintegrate.

In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.

The Jew has already emancipated himself in a Jewish way.

“The Jew, who in Vienna, for example, is only tolerated, determines the fate of the whole Empire by his financial power. The Jew, who may have no rights in the smallest German state, decides the fate of Europe. While corporations and guilds refuse to admit Jews, or have not yet adopted a favorable attitude towards them, the audacity of industry mocks at the obstinacy of the material institutions.” (Bruno Bauer, The Jewish Question, p. 114)

This is no isolated fact. The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him, money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews.

Captain Hamilton, for example, reports:

“The devout and politically free inhabitant of New England is a kind of Laocoön who makes not the least effort to escape from the serpents which are crushing him. Mammon is his idol which he adores not only with his lips but with the whole force of his body and mind. In his view the world is no more than a Stock Exchange, and he is convinced that he has no other destiny here below than to become richer than his neighbor. Trade has seized upon all his thoughts, and he has no other recreation than to exchange objects. When he travels he carries, so to speak, his goods and his counter on his back and talks only of interest and profit. If he loses sight of his own business for an instant it is only in order to pry into the business of his competitors.”

Indeed, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism over the Christian world has achieved as its unambiguous and normal expression that the preaching of the Gospel itself and the Christian ministry have become articles of trade, and the bankrupt trader deals in the Gospel just as the Gospel preacher who has become rich goes in for business deals.

“The man who you see at the head of a respectable congregation began as a trader; his business having failed, he became a minister. The other began as a priest but as soon as he had some money at his disposal he left the pulpit to become a trader. In the eyes of very many people, the religious ministry is a veritable business career.” (Beaumont, op. cit., pp. 185,186.)

According to Bauer, it is

“a fictitious state of affairs when in theory the Jew is deprived of political rights, whereas in practice he has immense power and exerts his political influence en gros, although it is curtailed en détail.” (Die Judenfrage, p. 114)

The contradiction that exists between the practical political power of the Jew and his political rights is the contradiction between politics and the power of money in general. Although theoretically the former is superior to the latter, in actual fact politics has become the serf of financial power.

Judaism has held its own alongside Christianity, not only as religious criticism of Christianity, not only as the embodiment of doubt in the religious derivation of Christianity, but equally because the practical Jewish spirit, Judaism, has maintained itself and even attained its highest development in Christian society. The Jew, who exists as a distinct member of civil society, is only a particular manifestation of the Judaism of civil society.

Judaism continues to exist not in spite of history, but owing to history.

The Jew is perpetually created by civil society from its own entrails.

What, in itself, was the basis of the Jewish religion? Practical need, egoism.

The monotheism of the Jew, therefore, is in reality the polytheism of the many needs, a polytheism which makes even the lavatory an object of divine law. Practical need, egoism, is the principle of civil society, and as such appears in pure form as soon as civil society has fully given birth to the political state. The god of practical need and self-interest is money.

Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities. Money is the universal self-established value of all things. It has, therefore, robbed the whole world – both the world of men and nature – of its specific value. Money is the estranged essence of man’s work and man’s existence, and this alien essence dominates him, and he worships it.

The god of the Jews has become secularized and has become the god of the world. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Nice one Faceless; you managed to summarise Draper in a few sentences. :)

[I am not being sarcastic here either!!!]

[gilhyle]

Was RIchard Pryor racist cos he used the word Nig*er ?

(And dont tell me he later stopped using it - I know - and it does not affect the point.)

[OkaCrisis]

Here's what John Sutton, who wrote my Law textbook (sociology of law) has to say on the matter:


This may be the time to raise the difficult issue of the many patently anti-semetic remarks that appear in Marx's essay [The Jewish Question]. This has been a matter of great concern to some writers, who have sought to prove or disprove whether Marx was personally prejudiced against Jews. I can shed no light on this question. I prefer to think he was not; while I find many passages in this essay painful to read, I treat them as examples of his often over-the-top sarcasm, expressions of the kind of virulent interethnic hostility that can persist even in polite democratic societies. I can think of reasons why it's easy to misread him, such as his persistent failure to use quotation marks when lampooning the statements of those he detested. But then I'm fond of Marx and don't like to think ill of him; in any event, it doesn't matter for out purposes.

I like it.

[propertyistheft]

An interesting note, is that the russian anarchist bakunin when he split with marx, ridiculed marx for being jewish. Not the anarchist movements shining movement. Back then many progressive thinkers appeared anti semitic in their writings. I think this was more of a hatred of the stereotypical jew not the actual one. They never took it to hitlers level and said that jews should be exterminated because of their geneology

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2006 09:26 am

Peacefull["]Anarchist["], did you actually read On the Jewish Question, or did you just run by that quote somewhere else?


Do you actually expect him to read anything that wasn't written by a hippie or Michael Moore?

This is not a "new" attack on Marx, and it is just as inane and irrelevent as it ever has been.
he might have got it even from Wikipedia. i remember Karl Marx article was once vandalized by an asshole. They have archived the discussion about this issue.

Dissussion regarding Marx's Antisemitism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Karl_Marx/Archive_3#Marx_the_anti-Semite).

PA i advice you again b4 making stupid posts like this one do a research.
/*

Edit: Deleted personal attack on Peaceful Anarchist.....

*/

[Delirium]

Quit attacking PA, he only had a question.

[Guerrilla22]

Marx probably was anti-semetic

He was Jewish himself, untill his father renounced his religion so he could continue to work as a lawyer after the French were finally booted out of Prussia. As for on the Jewish question, people often mistake its meaning. Marx was essentielly saying that no society can trully be liberated untill all religion is ablolished, he was attacking all oraganized religions, not just Juddaism, he was simply using Juddaism as an example of how religion divided the Jews from the rest of Prussian society.

[Fawkes]

Yeah, PA was just askin' a question, and calling him an "asshole" for that is a little harsh. Anyway, for the original question: who cares if he was anti-semitic? Marxism is not a cult. Not all Marxists have to agree with everything he says. Proudhon, thought by many to be the "Father of Anarchy", was very racist himself, but, I have yet to meet a racist anarchist.

[Fawkes]

Yeah, PA was just askin' a question, and calling him an "asshole" for that is a little harsh. Anyway, for the original question: who cares if he was anti-semitic? Marxism is not a cult. Not all Marxists have to agree with everything he says. Proudhon, thought by many to be the "Father of Anarchy", was very racist himself, but, I have yet to meet a racist anarchist.

[Fawkes]

Yeah, PA was just askin' a question, and calling him an "asshole" for that is a little harsh. Anyway, for the original question: who cares if he was anti-semitic? Marxism is not a cult. Not all Marxists have to agree with everything he says. Proudhon, thought by many to be the "Father of Anarchy", was very racist himself, but, I have yet to meet a racist anarchist.

[ern]

Peaceful Anarchist I think this article answers your question
160 years on: Marx and the Jewish question (http://http:en.internationalism.org/ir/114_jewish_question.html)
Agree with Freedom for ALL, calling someone an "arsehole" should have not place in discussions. As far I can see Peaceful was asking a question that many people ask. It would be interesting to hear what he thinks of the replies and above all whether he thinks that Marxi was an anti-semite