How about this. I say IzzyR is a Racist. You say no I’m not. I then go about showing how you are indeed a racist. (I’m not actually saying you are, I’m providing an example). You shouldn’t be expected to provide evidence that you are not a racist. How are you supposed to do that. If you say you aren’t I better come back with some evidence that you are, or else I look like a fool making wild assertations with no facts to back them up.
**
I did provide evidence. I provided quotes from other thinkers of the time. I also posted what the reason for the pamphlet was, this is a fact, anyone with a 3rd grade eduation can go and verify the fact for themselves. It’s not my job to go and spend time verifying facts for people to lazy to do it themsleves. I didn’t assert anything. I stated historical facts. See the difference?
**
No, you stated an unfounded theory. You are talking about what people supposedly thought. Someho you know exactly what these peole of the time were thinking, and you don’t need any evidence to back it up. I’m asking you to back that up. You posted this “Even the Zionist thinkers who had that attitude thought it was very negative as well”. Any evidence of that? Please provide some. If you do, I will be satisfied with your inerpretation.
Similar to your assertion regarding the background of Karl Marx’s pamphlet, this is something that can be looked up (though not by “anyone with a third grade education”). I am aware of this through my exposure to Zionist thought over the years. In fact, the idea remains (to some extent) in Israel today, that they (the Israelis) do not have the Diaspora Complex that the Jews have in other countries. It is not my own personal idea of what they were thinking.
But you do not have to be satisfied with this interpretation, if you chose not to look into this. What you should accept is at least the possibility that your quotes of anti-semitic words from Zionist thinkers does not conclusively show that these stereotypes were not percieved as negative.
I think we missed a beat here. Let me go over my interpretation of events, correct me if I’m wrong. You are stating that Zionists later turned what European’s were saying as evidence that they should set up a sperate state. There is some evidence of arguments like “If we set up a seperate state we will differentiate into classes and people can no longer stick that economic Jew stereotype on us.” I’m not disputing that fact. What I’m stating is that the stereoype of te econimic-jew was widespread, so widespread that even jews used it. It wasn’t positive or negative, it could be used in either context. I can provide more quotes if you like, but most of my material is found in reference books, and I REALLY don’t want to have to type more shit in.
Interesting point I overlooked too. In German, at the time, Judentum had the dual meaning of Judaism and Commerce. Juaism as such had very little racial, or religious context for Marx. He was speaking, as usual of economics. He was from the Young-Hegelian milieu of the time, it was a very popular practice to engage in puns and word play. Most of the second half of his Pamphlet can be construed as a pun at Bruno Bauer’s expense.
Sources agree that at the time, to the average German, Jew and trader were synomimus, Judaism and capitalism likewise had the same meaning in people’s minds. The Junkers were referred to numerous times as “the Jews with boots and spurs”.
As such, the synonymy of Jew with commercialism was taken for granted by those who threw epithets at Jews, and those who defended them.
So when you look at the line. “In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.” Which by the way is mistranslated from the German, it should read society instead of mankind.
It means that only by freeing Jews from Capitalism, can we have freedom for Jews. It also helps if you’ve read the original article by Bruno Bauer, the one this is written in response to. Many of the themse make more sense when seen with the original.
Also forgive me if I get some what snippity about it. I once had someone tell me, quite honestly in their belief, that Karl Marx had written a pamphlet called “A world without Jews” I looked around, and found that even some Marxists have fallen into the trap of misnaming the pamphlet. I hate ignorance. errrrrr :mad:
I watched almost every episode of Hart to Hart when it was on TV and I don’t think I ever heard or saw any evidence that Wagner is a Nazi.
What? A different Wagner? Like who, the “handsome guy” on the Carol Burnett Show? I don’t think he had any thoughts at all, much less the idea to exterminate all members of "lesser breeds.’ But I could be wrong…
There is a difference between being anti-semitic and being ready and willing to broil folks in big ovens.
He was a person from a different time. Adolf Hitler used Wagner’s music as a sound track to his escapades, but that is hardly Wagner’s fault.
It seems to me that is Shostakovich isn’t branded as responsible for the gulag concentration camps and bloody political purges of Stalinist USSR – and he WAS alive at the time and DID write music more or less as a producer of official state-sanctioned music – then Wagner should not be identified as a Nazi.
Although I sympathize with anyone who can’t listen to Wagner after knowing it as the soundtrack to Nazi atrocities.
My point is that these are two separate contentions, that do not necessarily follow one from the other, and showing one does not necessarily show the other. So widespread that even Jews used it - yes. Not positive or negative - no.
You ultimately turned out to be quite informative.
Oh well, for once I stirred up a bit of controversy and forgot to look back and see what happened…
Anyway, for further evidence of Marx’ racial antisemitism, I refer to his comments on Lassalle. I can’t quote my original reference since I am currently about 1000km away from my books, so I quote from the web: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~sprague/johnson.htm
German Jews (especially former/baptised Jews) did indeed often look down on their eastern European coreligionists, but this sort of rhetoric is a bit extreme.
Of course, originally on this thread I wanted to make the point that not most Jews in the 19th century were antisemitic, and wanted only to name one who was.
I vas most certainly not a Nazi. I moved here to Argentina long before ze var. Now, all zose who haf accused me uf being a Nazi vill please report for showers. Ve need to delouse you. You know, I zink I haf reached ze final solution uf ze SDMB problem.
Oh, Richard Wagner? Well, that’s different. Never mind.
A couple of things. One, your source prints several misinterpretations and several outright falsehoods. I’m uninclinded to believe him. Likewise, I can not find any other source on this letter, it is not in any other sites, and it appears to be the only source of any “anti-semetic” comments whatsoever. Given this writers clear anti-marxist bias, and the habit of people to forthrightly lie about things Marx has said, I’m inclined to dismiss it.
However, let us say that these quotes were indeed in a letter, of course I can not find the “letter”, so I can not put them in context. Someone could easily take some of my quotes from the debate on Israel and label me a raging anti-semite. Also, take into account that this was a personal correspondce to Engels, and there is no other mention of ANY anti-semetic remarks in any other of Marx’s or Engel’s work.
Also, as I’ve stated earlier in regards to his pamphlet on the Jewish question, you’re unlikely to find any thinker of the time who didn’t make comments that we would currently find “anti-semetic” regardless of what the thinker actually thought.
I can understand your scepticism. Unfortunately, I don’t have a copy of Marx’ letters at hand, and am in fact far away from my own books and things at the moment, but I have seen this quoted in other sources. I also had a hard time finding a citation on the web, but I’ve had harder times finding (or usually not finding) other things I’ve looked for. But, I will be on the lookout for a better source, and will post it when I find it (when I’m back in Germany at the latest). Or maybe someone else out there has something where they are?
I’m not sure what you mean by all this. The writer clearly cites “Marx-Engels Werke, vol. xxx, p. 259” as the source of the letter. Presumably this is something that can be verified by “anyone with a third grade education”, so there’s no point just besmirching the writer. I did a cursory internet search myself for “Marx-Engels Werke” but only came up with it in German. Perhaps a communist like yourself would have it in English.
This assumes you are familiar with entire body of Marx’s work (you may indeed be).
Marx was not a professional anti-semite, even if you assume that he was one in private. He was a communist, and his work focused on that aspect of his thought. There have been many public figures who were revealed to have been bigots by their private correspondence, though they gave no indication of this in their public persona’s.
**
I do have access to the collected works in English, and was unable to find said letter. Also the inacuracies I was referring to were in other parts of the linked site. Considering that I have also seen “absolute proof” that Karl Marx was a satanic priest, I am understandably quite skeptical.
**
I am pretty familiar, although not completely. The main point is that I have seen frequent attempts to paint Karl Marx as an anti-semite. These works always rely on only one piece of evidence, namely his pamphlet on the Jewish question. This is the only author I’ve seen even bring up that particular letter. If there was more evidence, you can be sure that the anti-communists would have dredged it up and posted it all over. Since they haven’t. Coupled with my own knowledge of is work. I feel it is safe to assume that there is none.
does this mean that you have vol. xxx of Marx-Engels Werke, looked on page 259, and the letter is not there? Or is “collected works” another collection?
In every different language, the works tend to be slightly different. Some have different material than others. sigh. In the English collected works, I could not find this letter.
Unfortunately, no one seems to have posted the entire MEW on the internet. I will have to look when I’m back in Germany (probably be a few months, though.) But I doubt that this has been completely made up by the secondary sources.
Anyway, it’s always better to read things in their original language. Translators have also been known to skew texts, usually, but not always, inadvertently. I could, in fact, imagine that the editors of the English edition didn’t want the anti-Semitic letters to reach a greater public.
I could definetely see that. The problem with Marx and Engels is about half of their major work is in English, and half is in German. With a couple of French articles thrown in. No matter what language compiles the works, there will have to be some translation.
No, in fact, many scholarly compilations leave everything in their original languages. In Germany, anyway, it is assumed that students of modern history are able to read German, English and French. Not a bad idea, either, if you really want to get to the heart of the matter.