For the record, when I said your defense of one of the more bloody pogroms of the 17th Century was “anti-Semitic bullshit” I wasn’t accusing you of being anti-Semitic.
However just as defending lynchings is racist bullshit, defending pogroms is anti-Semitic bullshit.
I don’t know anything specific about what IS wrote, cite it or stop talking about it.
Er, you’re the one who proclaimed that the Jews of the 17th Century Ukraine were “the dominant group”, that they oppressed the Christians of the Ukraine and that the Christians were forced to revolt against them.
Please stop trying to hand wave away what you said.
Now, please explain to me why your moronic assertions that the Jews were “the dominant class” and that they were an “oppressing people” and were persecuting the Christians of the Ukraine are actually the truth, as you assert, as opposed to being anti-Semitic bullshit.
You’re the one who has claimed that the Jews of the 17th Century Ukraine were “an oppressing people” and that they were “the dominant class”.
Please provide evidence for such an asinine, anti-semitic claim.
If what you are saying is the truth then you shouldn’t have a problem doing so.
Please do so, or we’ll have to assume that the anti-Semitic bullshit you were proclaiming had no basis in reality.
Moreover, you have yet to explain whether or not you though that Israel Shahak’s claim that Jewish children are taught to utter religious curses as they pass gentile graveyards is true or is anti-Semitic crap.
Please tell us what you think.
Thanks.
I said i got that impression, i really don’t know either way, and unless you’ve read the original source neither do you.
Also “in mass” is interchangaeble with “en masse”. I suppose that translating might offend some orthodox cynephile might have a beef with it. I think it’s completely irrelevant and understandable, but whatever floats your boat.
-me
-me
Sure the second bit sounds more positive than it should, but again I obviously haven’t read the source, just a general gleaning. I think I made that pretty clear.
Again cite it or drop it. Context and facts do matter regardless of what professional defamers might have you believe.
I’ve made it pretty easy for you to “get me” if you’re correct about the origination of this claim about IS. so do a little work and “get me”. (Or again drop it if you prefer, unless you think defamation is reasonable without evidence for some strange reason)
I’m sorry but this attempt to claim its up to me to prove something is utterly moronic.
You’re the one who stated that the Jews of 17th Century Ukraine were “an oppressing group”, were “the dominant class” and that due to the oppression they heaped upon Christians, the Christians revolted and killed them.
Now produce evidence to back up your claim or admit it was anti-Semitic bullshit.
Thanks.
I gave no specifics, I said that my impression was that some jews some time more than a couple hundred years ago were revolted against and slaughtered. You are making it specific, I’m not sure where you’re getting your specifics, but if its from a credible source, please cite it. I never mentioned Ukraine. That was you. You have a source for your opinion about this criticism you are for whatever reason not sharing.
Cite it.
Here, I’ve starting dong your work for you, here’s a cite to his book online (I’m guessing this is one of the obscure difficult to investigate sources of Chomsky’s that make him so impossible to check): http://archive.org/stream/JewishHistoryJewishReligionTheWeightOf3000Years-I.Shahak/Jewish.history.jewishReligion-the.weight.of.three.thousand.years#page/n0/mode/2up Took me 5 minutes to find (now finding where in the very long book this claim of his obvious antisemitism comes from I have no idea)
Bullshit, you were the one who made “specific” claims and you never said “that was my impression”.
Here once again are the specific claims you made regarding the Jews of 17th Century Ukraine.
Now, either back up your accusations or admit you were spewing anti-Semitic bullshit.
Where did i say Ukraine? Or say anything that could tie my impression to a specific event that might actually been something we could analyze in any rational way?
You know something specific, cite it or admit you were wrong from the beginning to take the hard-line on this.
Ok, this is comical. You’re now trying to shift the goal posts and demanding to know where you mentioned “a specific event” that might be something we could analyze.
In post #85, Jackmannii brought up Shahak’s nutty claims and specifically referenced the “Chmielnicki massacres of 17th Century Ukraine”.
After being repeatedly asked to address those charges, in post # 116 you declared.
Now, you specifically referred to “the Jewish massacre you[Jackmannii] mention” which is a reference to a specific event, the Chmielnicki Pogroms, which can be analyzed, and they took place in the Ukraine.
Now, are you trying to insist you were referring to some other Jewish massacre, that occurred a few centuries ago?
If so, your comment was extremely unclear, because Jack didn’t refer to any other massacres in the post you were responding to.
So anyway, if you were referring to the Chmielnicki massacres please provide evidence that the Jews of the Ukraine were “an oppressing people” and “the dominant class”, or we’re you under the impression it took place somewhere other than the Ukraine.
If however, you weren’t referring to the Chmielnicki massacres then please tell us what centuries old massacre you were referring to and please provide evidence from a reliable cite that the massacred Jews were “an oppressing people” and “the dominant class” of that region.
Thanks.
This thread is hilarious!
[QUOTE=Ibn Warraq]
If however, you weren’t referring to the Chmielnicki massacres then please tell us what centuries old massacre you were referring to and please provide evidence from a reliable cite that the massacred Jews were “an oppressing people” and “the dominant class” of that region.
[/QUOTE]
Which should be a good trick if he can pull it off, since I can’t think of any place in the world a couple of centuries ago where the Jews WERE ‘an oppressing people’ AND ‘the dominant class’ in any region or country. You will most likely be asked for another cite though to back up U_P’s assertion though, so be prepared. 
I’m still unsure of Untoward_Parable’s…let’s say intent in this thread. However, given his unique parsing of certain other things, “Jewish dominant class” just very well may mean “the upper crust among the Jews” and not “Jews who happen to be upper crust in general society.”
The rest of his postings are pure fantasy, though.
Unfortunately as I said, I had only originally gleaned comments about the accusation. As I only found the accusation on attack sites lacking in direct links to the source material characterized as antisemitic I didn’t give it much credit.
I any I case I think it’s pretty obvious from how vague I was that I did not know the source or the history being talked about. If I was wrong in assuming that over hundreds of years that jews managed somewhere to find themselves as the elites of a society well, it seems strange that history with so many exceptions wouldn’t have something but if it doesn’t and I was wrong it really is irrelevant. The thread isn’t called “Is Untoward_Parable a bigot?” Its about Chomsky. And Jackmanni is trying to assign to N.C. guilt by association based on his association with Isreal S.. Of course this means that the truth of the case in this instance again has nothing to do with me. Again I think it is obvious that sie I am not the one making the defamatory accusation of a lauded Israeli civil rights activist and scholar that it is not my responsibility to provide the evidence.
But whatever. I wanted to look it up and did. Of course to my great surprise.. There is nothing remotely antisemitic about the passage referenced by Jackmanni and the attack site(Ok I wasn’t surprised). Interested to know a little more about I.S. I read the first chapter of the book last night (since its free online). I can see why apologists for Israeli policy wouldn’t want you to read the thing. He goes into intense detail about the various objective mechanisms used to disenfranchise anyone in Israel who is not a jew. From lacking the right to vote, to lacking the rights to own the vast majority of the property to a second class legal status in disputes to not being able to work in most occupations as a non-jew. He correctly makes the case that if in Europe, N. America, or the UK tried for similar provisions for Christians against non-Christians there would be massive protests.
The book itself is on the subject of Anti-semitism and Jewish chauvinism and the relevant history that contributes to the expression of each. As many have observed in Israel today the jewish citizen is a special class above all other persons and that conditions and opportunities and justice for non-jews is very poor. The author also notes the importance of anti-semitism in the context of the jewish state’s culture and politics. He, I think correctly, says that in Israel it is Jewish chauvinism that is more problematic for obvious reasons. (In the united states before blacks were given greater equality it is fairly obvious that black hatred of whites was less of an issue than white hatred of blacks). He states that he believes that only by confronting both antisemitism and jewish chauvinism at the same time can any progress be made on either.
(I don’t think jews are any more lent to bigotry and oppression than other religions or cultures but it has been noted by some that to oppress a group of one people by another leads without exception to the bigotry of the dominant group against the subjugated group. This I think results from the natural human need to rationalize ones environment even if the rationalization is completely illogical)
The section the attribution in question comes from is entitled “Anti-Jewish Persecutions”. Over the course of 7-9 paragraphs I.S. makes a distinction between antisemitism that is top down in the case of the Nazis and bottom up in the classical period. In each of these cases, especially in the Chmeilnicki massacre in 1648 I.S. describes that these bottom up revolts (IE peasant/artisan revolts) ended up killing jews in large numbers as part of a revolt against the ruling class that were not jews. The anti-semitism of the poor when given freedom of a roaming force killed jews because of the opportunity while the revolts were mostly against the non-jewish rulers (In this Chmeilnicki case against polish catholics rulers). He describes the killing of jews in this incident “an act of gratuitous antisemitism…”
The next section is entitled “Modern Antisemitism”
Nothing about this is in any way antisemitic. (pretty much the opposite).
I would cut and paste more of it but its not online in a page that I can do that with, but I don’t expect you to take my word for it, read it yourself: http://archive.org/stream/JewishHistoryJewishReligionTheWeightOf3000Years-I.Shahak/Jewish.history.jewishReligion-the.weight.of.three.thousand.years#page/n55/mode/2up The cite is from the last paragraph on page 56. To understand some of the context of the section you should also at least read the first paragraph of the section on the previous page.
Maybe you can see why I initially thought they were talking about jewish oppression, it ends up not being that but complicated by a bit of nuance.
Again though there is no way in any universe this is anti-semitic. It’s just something ginned up to destroy a man who is inconvenience to the politics of some.
I find few things as disgusting as the organized effort to distort the truth and silence the scholarship of history through defamation.
I would have hoped people in the thread cared enough about the integrity o their opinions about people to look up a source for themselves but don’t worry. I really don’t expect much of most people.
I’ll note that for some reason Untoward Parable felt the need in his post to repeatedly refer to “jews” and “jewish” instead of “Jews” and “Jewish”.
Why that is, I can’t imagine.
Beyond that he failed to provide a single shred of evidence to support his conclusion that the Jews murdered in the Chmielnicki Pogroms were “an oppressing people” who were “the dominant class” and due to their brutality, the Christians revolted against them.
He also, quite amusingly, never explained how he knew so much about he Chmielnicki massacres that he could confidently proclaim the Jews brought it on themselves because they were “an oppressing people”(his words) but didn’t know that they took place in the Ukraine.
Perhaps, he can actually provide compelling evidence from a reliable source, Shahak doesn’t count, to prove that the Jews of the Ukraine were “an oppressing people” and were “the dominant class” in the region and also explain why he had such strong opinions about the pogroms but was completely unaware than they took place in the Ukraine.
You need to read my post again because you’re mistating how i characterized the event in this, my researched response on the sourcing.
And ya, I’m not going to respond to anymore of your posts where there are no actual cites or addressing the actual content of mine.
Please explain how I was guilty of “mistating(sic) how [you] characterized the event”.
Thanks.
Of course I was “addressing the actual content of [your’s]”.
So anyway, please provide evidence that the Jews of the Ukraine were “an oppressing people” and “the dominant class” in the region.
Also, please explain how you knew enough about the Chmielnicki Pogroms to make such strong statements but knew so little about them that you didn’t know they took place in the Ukraine.
Thanks.
They were not “an oppressing people” or “the dominant class”. Polish catholics were. If you had read my post and interpreted it competently you would know thats what I said.
Ok, this is absolutely hysterical.
I’m actually literally laughing as I’m typing this.
You’re now insisting that you never claimed that the Ukrainian Jews were “an oppressing people” or “the dominant class” and that anyone who “competently” interpreted your post would thing that, but in post #116 you said.
Now, you very clearly state, as anyone who can read English can see “people of Jewish faith\background were an oppressing people over another group” but you’re now desperately trying to hand wave away this post and pretend that “Polish catholics(sic)” were actually the “oppressing people”.
Ok, please explain to me how it was “incompetent” of me or anyone with a functioning brain and literate in English to interpret your statement “where people of Jewish faith\background were an oppressing people over another group” to mean that people of “Jewish faith\background were and oppressing people”.
Please explain how when you claimed “**people of Jewish faith\background **were an oppressing group” you actually meant “**Polish Catholics **were an oppressing group.”
Also, please explain how “Polish Catholics”(your words) were “the oppressing group” and “the dominant class” in 17th Century Ukraine.
Thanks.
Perhaps it really was a typo — after all, it’s Catholics rather than Jews who can be killed in Mass.
Way too lazy to contribute more to this thread than a stupid pun.
You are not reading my posts or are interpreting them very strangely (you are fixated only on a vague post of mine without the more relevant more recent ones), you are not reading my cites or the same as above, tx anyway, but I don’t feel we are closely matched in being able to decipher posts and I am sorry but I cannot continue this with you. Thank you for your attempts to debate the topic but unless I see some massive improvement in your ability to debate this subject I cannot in good conscience continue to communicate with you.
You should’ve gone with “Monty hit it, I was being very vague and thus it’s hard, nay, nigh on impossible to glean what I’ve been talking about here.” What you have here, on the other hand, is a snippet from a rather lenghthy post that basically says, “I just made it all up. But it doesn’t matter because I have now pronounced all my mistakes as irrelevant.” Given your adoration of Chomsky and your refusal to accept facts regarding his comments, I can’t say that I’m all that suprised.
I’m not about to describe that posting of yours in more detail because of the moderator warning above and the board rules. I will make a suggestion to you though. Quit making up stuff and pretending like other people don’t know better.