Courtesy of Andrew, here is the chaiman of the American Nazi Party on Obama:
White people are faced with either a negro or a total nutter who happens to have a pale face. Personally I'd prefer the negro. National Socialists are not mindless haters. Here, I see a white man, who is almost dead, who declares he wants to fight endless wars around the globe to make the world safe for Judeo-capitalist exploitation, who supports the invasion of America by illegals--basically a continuation of the last eight years of Emperor Bush. Then, we have a black man, who loves his own kind, belongs to a Black-Nationalist religion, is married to a black women--when usually negroes who have 'made it' immediately land a white spouse as a kind of prize--that's the kind of negro that I can respect. Any time that a prominent person embraces their racial heritage in a positive manner, it's good for all racially minded folks. Besides, America cares nothing for the interests of the white American worker, while having a love affair with just about every non-white on planet Earth. It'd be poetic justice to have a non-white as titular chief over this decaying modern Sodom and Gomorrah.
I think the racists like us! Oh, no wait...
Finding out Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president was one of the saddest days in black history. Another legacy of black death is about to begin, just like it began back in the '60s with probably the greatest traitor to black people in modern-day history, Martin Luther King.
Hmm, OK then...
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Of course Andrew reads those comments by the Nazi Party cretin and concludes that the guy is going to vote for Obama. The cretin didn't actually say so, and I doubt very much that it's true.
So here's the scorecard:
Hamas: Obama
al-Qaeda: McCain
KKK: McCain
Am. Nazi Party: Obama
WAR: Obama
Looks like the two-year long campaign news cycle really is winding down. What else to do when the results seem obvious? Publish GOP news releases to make things seem "tight" or run to the fringe...
Tuesday can't come soon enough.
Now that's hate we can believe in.
"WAR:Obama"? What is Buster talking about?
I heard that an american group of black racist decide to endorse McCain rather than Obama.LOOOL.
Funny time we live in.
I believe WAR is the White Aryan Resistance.
When you're the Republican nominee who's running against a black man and you STILL can't win the endorsement of from the rightest of the right; you know you're fucked.
WAR? I thought he meant bombing and shooting and stuff. My bad.
I am not surprised that WAR, and the Nazis are secretly hoping for an Obama victory. It will be excellent for recruitment and publicity. "Fear of a Barack Planet" and all that.
So does this count as 'reverse Bradley'?
Literally astonishing.
In fairness
1: Some of these guys seem to hate Jews more than blacks. This would fit with the actual Nazis, well kind of. McCain is best buddy with Joe Lieberman and was endorsed by a leading member of AIPAC.
2: The ones who seem to endorse Obama have a not-so-subtle hope that a black President will do more to bring out white racism. The National Alliance guy is fairly overt in saying many whites will react negatively to Obama and that'll make at least some of them "open" to the white nationalist cause. So it could simply be a recruitment ploy and does not represent a real belief Obama is better.
I had not seen "gocart mozart" post when I posted.
I think that went rather well, don't you?
Link ferya
http://wordpress.com/tag/fear-of-a-barack-planet/
Finding out Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president was one of the saddest days in black history. Another legacy of black death is about to begin, just like it began back in the '60s with probably the greatest traitor to black people in modern-day history, Martin Luther King.
Stupid Question: How many black people does this guy speak for? I swim in a more-left-than-thou selection of my reading and listening and viewing. I've never heard anyone black slam on MLK before, but I have seen a bunch of bile directed toward BHO for being a sellout for not being the "black" candidate in the way they want him to be.
Is there an audience for this?
I actually take this guy's words at face value. A lot of neo-Nazis & other "racially minded" whites really do think of themselves as restoring racial purity rather than exterminating nonwhites. "Mongrelization," not black & brown people per se, is their big bogeyman. I'm not saying they're not deluding themselves...
"How many black people does this guy speak for?"
The chairman of the American Nazi Party? I'm guessing none black people.
Yes Zak, the point about choosing a black wife was instructive. Its more about "You people stay away from the our white women."
Whoops, sorry - that second quote was from Yahanna, "General, Israelite School Of Universal Practical Knowledge" (the article TNC linked to was misleadingly titled "Why White Supremacists Support Barack Obama"). I'll revise my estimate upward slightly: one black people.
Sorry about the WAR confusion. The acronym was known to me since I grew up in Southern California in the 1980s and 1990s when and where their bluster was most boisterous. So yeah, White Aryan Resistance, not the other thing with bombs and violence and stupidity.
Oy. Nothing like an endorsement based on the overriding hatred of Jews. Reminds me of Tom Lehrer's "National Brotherhood Week"
http://www.guntheranderson.com/v/data/national.htm
I was quoting Joe the Plumber when I typed this: "The our white women"
I hope this doesn't count as threadjacking, but the ISUPK ("Finding out Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president was one of the saddest days in black history") must be seen to be believed. I'm not sure if they're black separatists or a Funkadelic tribute band. Check out the slideshow here: http://www.isupk.org/
Ed,
You'd have to look historically at MLK's contemporaries and the various critiques against "integration" that, at one time, MLK assumed to be "the answer", so to speak.
In 1963, Malcolm X basically called each of the "Big Six" civil rights leaders including MLK traitors who sold out and betrayed the Black revolution which he often contrasted to the Negro Revolution (which really didn't demand or want much) he felt civil rights leaders were leading.
There are Black people who still view what the strategies of civil rights leaders like MLK by noting some of the con's of it. About the closest ones I've ever heard dismiss MLK as someone who failed Black people are some idiot Black conservatives who try to play up their faux Black Nationalism and pretend like MLK was instrumental in perpetuating Black "victimhood."
WAR! Good God! What is it good for!? A damn good acronym Buster dontchyaknow.
This is a perfect example of why I almost never care why someone is doing something and focus on what they actually do.
"Black Hebrew Israelite" movements specifically tend to emphasize black supremacy and separatism.
It's kind of an odd parallel of "British Israelism." Like it there's a more enlightened "Black Hebrew" element of it that believes "Blacks are also Jews." They either see this literally or symbolically, I'm not sure which, but they take it as meaning a since of kinship with Jews or their struggles. I think they also believe in having love for all kinds of people. However there's also an almost "Christian Identity" variant that at least seems to say "Blacks are the True Jews" and actual Jews are phonies plus God prefers black people as his chosen race.
There was one who became known years ago called "Yahweh ben Yahweh." I believe he was also against Martin Luther King. He was eventually arrested for racketeering and conspiracy to commit murder or some such.
I'm not sure how common the black supremacist element of "Black Israelism", to keep up the parallel to British Israelism, but I don't think there's more than a few thousand in all strains of it.
And then there's this endorsement from Erich Gliebe, Chairman of the National Alliance:
“I give Obama credit, he seems to have stuck to his guns as far as pulling the troops out of Iraq. He’s a very intelligent man, an excellent speaker and has charisma. John McCain offers none of that. Perhaps the best thing for the white race is to have a black president. My only problem with Obama is perhaps he’s not black enough.”
Someone...Quick! Find a cure for this severe mental constipation. Or pay their fees to the asylum for the next four years.
Several years ago I was reading a book about white supremacist groups, and it quoted an Aryan Nation leader who described O.J. Simpson as a hero because he killed a Jew and a race traitor.
the stuff that has come out of this race has been illuminating
TNC - here's my vote for having the hook from the Spinners' "Message from a black man" as the rallying cry for the November 4th home stretch - you could even go with the RZA's "You can't stop me now" remix if a touch of the contemporary is warranted.
keep up the good work
Wow. Just. Wow.
From the article:
Fail.
Is he saying Ms. Obama is twice the woman he could ever handle?
Wow.
Thomas R.,
I don't know anything about 'Black Israelites', but it's a pretty common theme in Rastafarian ideology that identifies black people with Jerusalem, and the United States with Babylon. 'Captivity in Babylon' and all that. I think they're referring more to the capitalist, oppressive nature of the state than to the color of white people's skin, though. In that sense it would have more to do with Latin American liberation theology than with anything racial.
Well if you hate Jews, you are you going to vote for, the guy in love with Lieberman or the guy with the Muslim middle name, Muslim father, and Muslim stepfather, whose pastor gave a lifetime achievement award to a black Muslim leader who is known for his hatred of Jews? Even the real Nazis got along swimmingly with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
So, let me get this straight here: Obama is going to get both the bulk of the Jewish vote, which is in fact coming home for him (at least to Kerry levels, according to recent polling), AND the rabid eliminationist anti-Jewish vote? That's a helluva trick.
Hmmm.... Black Hebrew Israelites = Black supremacists but the Jews of the Holocaust and state of Israel, the ruling factions, aren't considered generally "supremacists" no matter how much they subscribe to or claim to be heirs of the "chosen people" mantra.
Amazing...
This reminds me of how excited New Yorkers were before David Dinkins got elected. Finally, the smart black guy who would transcend race and unite us. The Jews loved him. Four years later, they were all voting for Mussolini Jr.
This is tailor-made for you to blog on, TNC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAvxuwl9bGo
I'm still wondering why Steve Sailer wasn't interviewed for the article. He must have been too busy attending Palin rallies.
Is this guy writing in the English language? The same one the rest of us use? Because I cannot understand a word of it.
Well, actually, I can, but I don't want to. Any time that a prominent person embraces their racial heritage in a positive manner, it's good for all racially minded folks. I mean, WTF? It's Bizarro-speech.
Sorry, I'm just tired, it's been a long week...
Nquest, I'm talking about a relatively small fringe group. And anyway yes there are far-right parties in Israel that are "supremacist" for their own ethnicity. I'm not like many conservative types in just loving Israel to pieces. I'd favor deep cuts in military aid to them and there are certainly things about their nation I find objectionable.
That said Israel is there, it's not going away. Many Israelis were born there and do not have a religious view about their place there. I accept their right to exist as a nation and hope they work out an equitable deal.
"Obama is going to get both the bulk of the Jewish vote, which is in fact coming home for him (at least to Kerry levels, according to recent polling), AND the rabid eliminationist anti-Jewish vote? That's a helluva trick."
Isn't it though? I don't really think Obama will carry the "Anti-Semite" vote, but I actually wouldn't be surprised if he does well with it. Even people who aren't entirely solid as Anti-Semites believe that "The Jews fear Obama" and would likely not believe Jewish people are going for Obama. I think even some young Jewish entertainers were concerned, for a time, that older Jewish people wouldn't warm to Obama. Ironically the last Gallup Poll I saw older Jewish voters were more likely to vote Obama than younger ones. They were the only demographic where older voters preferred Obama more.
So anyway Obama will win the Jewish vote. Winning the Anti-Jewish vote as well would be strange, but I don't think it's impossible.
off-topic: Coates, your brief appearance in New York Magazine (I think) where you talk about what you'll do after the election was pointed out in Reason Magazine's blog. I'd be interested to hear what that conversation with your son is like, if you'd want to share it.
Re the discussion above about Nazis' views of blacks vs. mongrelization, i.e. whether they hated blacks per se or race-mixture, obviously it's both but recall that the real Nazis, the German ones, tried to cultivate Africans during the war...of course that was to subvert French and British power more than anything else, but they weren't so allergic to blacks that they would balk at the idea. There was even a Hogan's Heroes episode about it.
Thomas R, what are you talking about?
I raised the issue of who is consider having a 'supremacy' mindset or, more specifically, how come the Jews of the Holocaust and the state of Israel aren't considered "supremacists" because of the "chosen people" concept.
For you to talk about Israel's "right to exist", shows a complete disconnect and your inability to deal with stuff you brought up. I wasn't talking about any British group(s). I'm not talking about some fringe or far-right group in Israel. I wasn't expressing any opposition to the state of Israel.
I mere raised the issue questioning why the Jews of the Holocaust and the state of Israel ***generally*** aren't considered "supremacists" -- that means most European Jews or Jews with a family history in Europe/the West in the last centuries. I'm assuming most of them, Israeli Jews (and others) in general (and not just some small sect or "far-right parties") consider themselves "the chosen people" by virtue of the religion or familial cultural heritage. Either you have an answer for that or you don't.
I also said nothing about you being a conservative. I'd appreciate it if you can deal with the point I raised. Or maybe you think the Jews of the [German/Poland] Holocaust and the ruling Jews of the state of Israel are "the chosen people" and don't have a problem with that unless there's some this "supremacist for their own ethnicity" element involved.
How is that relevant when the issue I raised was that of those who consider themselves "the chosen people?" My understanding is that the "chosen people" concept is part and parcel of Judaism.
So I'm asking directly about ALL Jews (or most of them) who include the Jewish Holocaust of the 1930's and 1940's as part of their collective history.
Plus Hebrew Israelites are serious about their claims and reside in Israel...
http://www.africanhebrewisraelitesofjerusalem.com/
Not to mention Ethiopian, "Beta Israel", Jews.
Coming from a man whom thinks that the conservatives of America are responsible for his marriage to considered legal is a delicious irony.
That said the opening line had me ROTFLMAO. McCain a "nutter". Obama a successful black man" whom did not marry white. It can't get any better.
NQuest,
I'm really not a fan of the 'Chosen People' idea, and I find it theologically and morally problematic- and if I was having a theological debate with a Jewish rabbi, I would make that point. But theology isn't the rationale for the modern State of Israel. Nor is racial supremacy. The State of Israel was founded because the Jews are a people, and like other peoples have at least an arguable right to a homeland of their own. Wherever you create such a homeland you are going to create animosity with the people who are already living there. It's sad that the Palestinians got screwed, but in 1948 the choice was to screw the Jews or to screw the Palestinians, and the Jews had been screwed quite enough already. Plus, Hajj Amin Husseini had thrown his lot in with the Germans in WWII, so it made sense to exact territorial concessions from his country.
Nquest,
I have no interest in starting a flame war here and do not wish to hijack this thread.
However, I want to make some quick corrections to your conception of Jews and Israel:
The "chosen" concept in Judaism refers to Israel being chosen by God to accept the Torah and its obligations, not any claim to racial superiority. It mainly refers to the fact that according to Judaism, other people who must only fulfill the seven commandments of the Noahide covenant to find favor with God, the Jews must supposedly fulfill the 613 precepts of the Torah or face divine consequences. The claim was later twisted by antisemites to the point that your conception of it has become mainstream and that is a shame.
The concept was later appropriated by the Christians, who felt the church was elected to be the "New Israel," as well as by Islam, who felt that the Muslim Ummah was chosen through Muhammad to replace the disobedient Jews as God's chosen people.
While there is certainly a chauvinistic strain in Judaism, and while, like pretty much all religions at the moment, that chauvinist fundamentalist voice seems to be ascendant, it is not the mainstream. So the answer is no, most Jews in Israel or America do not see themselves to be a superior "chosen people," although most certainly take pride in their religious and cultural heritage.
As a matter of fact, most Israeli and other Jews are either secular or traditional (seculars who include religious and cultural aspects in their lives) in their orientation, and don't give too much thought to such things except through humor. Concern with "chosenness" is pretty much limited to the "hardal" and "hareidim" on the hard right who believe that disobedience of the commandements brought on the holocaust. It is also present in some thinkers on the hard left who argue that because of Israel's history of being persecuted, it must think and act on a higher level than other people. Both contain aspects of moral triumphalism.
Here are some quick links I found on the topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_a_chosen_people
http://www.jewfaq.org/gentiles.htm
Also, it would help when discussing Israel if people were more aware of Israel's reality as opposed to gleaning bits of history and sociology from the news. Most Israeli Jews are actually not European but Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews (like my family) who fled and were expelled as refugees from Muslim lands from the 1800s to roughly the 1960's. This process began with the encounter of modernity and ideas of the enlightenment and colonialism such as secular nationalism and the nation state and was driven by events such as the Damascus Blood Libel and pogroms such as the Iraqi Farhood. Things obviously came to a head with the competing secular nationalisms of Pan-Arabism on one hand and Zionism and Palestinian Nationalism on the other.
While the fall of the Soviet Union brought tons of Soviet Jews to Israel, the European and Middle Eastern communities are now roughly equal (as well as merging through marriage and culture) with the Sephardic still slightly larger.
There was a story on NPR about this. The older supremacists are just against Obama. The younger ones have some sort of fatalistic downfall of the United States on their mind. And by young it sounded like people under the age of 50 or so.
There is also an interview with David Duke on NPR and its amazing how the racists have appropriated all of this PC language for themselves, to somehow make their position more palatable.
I think this election is sort of a wake-up call for everyone about race, who thought for some silly reason that this had all been sorted out, for those of us that are a part of this global society and love people of every kind, because they are the people who have made our lives better. I grew up in a very diverse community in Houston. One of my oldest friends is from The Sub-continent and he introduced me to TNG. In thinking of that friend and the rights and values that might inform us all, I give you Picard at this best:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keZlextkcDI
The "chosen" concept in Judaism refers to Israel being chosen by God to accept the Torah and its obligations, not any claim to racial superiority.
I never made any claims that Jews claim some sense of "racial superiority." I questioned the idea of questioning Black Hebrew Israelites for their claims of being the "chosen people" while that criticism isn't generally applied to the Jews of the Holocaust, the ruling Jews of the state of Israel and those with ties to those Jews.
And "flame war"? What the hell are you talking about?
So the answer is no, most Jews in Israel or America do not see themselves to be a superior "chosen people," although most certainly take pride in their religious and cultural heritage.
You're answering a question that was never asked. The question I posed was how the Jews of the Holocaust, Israel (and America) aren't questioned with regards to the "chosen people" concept.
Either you can deal with that or you can't. It makes no sense for you to direct comments to me over things you've created in your head that don't relate to things I actually said.
As a matter of fact, most Israeli and other Jews are either secular or traditional
I haven't asked questions about Israelis or what Jews themselves think about themselves but the very existence of secular Jews throws a wrench in your "obligations" argument. And let's get one thing straight...
I did not speak of "my" conception of "chosen people." The idea was already on the board. I did not introduced it. I questioned it and why it isn't applied across the board.
Either you can deal with that or you can't.
Most Israeli Jews are actually not European but Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews
Since you like to Wiki... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel
* Ashkenazim (about 37% of the national population): Jews whose ancestors came from Germany, France, and Eastern Europe.
* Mizrahim and Sephardim (about 39% of the national population)
Now, once you get your facts straight then maybe you can explain why that's relevant to anything I've said. Note: I've made no claims as to what type of Jews compose "most" of Israel.
I'd appreciate it if you stop the non-sequiturs.
Since you raised it (and Wikipedia), go ahead and respond to this:
Ashkenazi Jews in Israel
Today, Ashkenazi Jews constitute the largest group among Jews, but comprise a slight minority of Israeli Jews (see Demographics of Israel). However, they have played a prominent role in the economy, media, and politics of Israel since its founding. Tensions have sometimes arisen between the traditional Jews of the Middle East (the Sephardim and Mizrahim) and the mostly European Ashkenazim who founded Israel. Later migrants hailing from the various non-Ashkenazi groups sometimes claim that they are discriminated against in terms of education, jobs/income, housing and in other areas.
Hector, just so you know, those Jewish apologetics are laughable.
This conversation was started when comments were made about Black Hebrew Israelites whereby their "chosen people" claims are seen as some kind of "Black supremacy." No matter how "screwed" Black people have been I doubt any one of the people oddly trying to justify the state of Israel or argue for its "right to exist" when that is nowhere near the issue here would argue for a Black homeland in any scenario let alone at the simple mention of Africans/African Americans as a historically "screwed" people.
So, even while these odd responses like yours do raise the giggle-factor, they are interesting (and revealing) none the less.
This is retrospective inevitability. Madagascar was considered by Herzl, and would have removed the religious bullshit from what was then viewed as a practical issue of survival.
I'm sure there would have been huge unforeseen problems from it, but it's hard to see how it could have been worse than the current situation.
It's hard to imagine that any of the problems encountered with the creation and existence of the state of Israel were "unforeseen" the same way the problems with the current Iraq war are hard to dismiss as "unforeseen."
I'm not sure why you've used my unforeseen in quotes, when it has nothing to do with your statement.
Concern with "chosenness" is pretty much limited to the "hardal" and "hareidim" on the hard right who believe that disobedience of the commandements brought on the holocaust.
You lump in the NRP-types (who for a bunch of reasons are way more dangerous than the Haredim) and you are talking about a quarter of the Jewish population. They aren't an insignificant problem.
My last post was about your post, not any of mine. It should be clear that I simply stated how I disagree with your idea that there were "huge unforeseen problems." Obviously, I think there was no reason for any of the "huge" problems to be unforeseen. The quotes are there because I abuse them and because of the explicitly stated disagreement.
Well, you refer to the existing state of Israel when I was referring to the past possibility of a Jewish state in Madagascar, and I made no mention of the Iraq war either.
But abuse away anyway, knock yourself out.
Nquest,
The reason I brought up the traditional meaning of the chosenness doctrine was specifically because "chosenness" as historically preached by the Black Hebrew Israelites often relates to their roots of chauvinistic nationalism as an offshoot of the Nation of Islam in the USA, their beliefs that Black Jews are the only true Jews and the belief in Black superiority. It is my understanding that modern Black Hebrew Israelites have splintered and that many are now in agreement with many traditional Jewish doctrines and that it is specifically the hardcore nationalist group which is condemned for its chosenness doctrine because it is related to arguments of superiority. This is similar to statements made by hareidi groups like extremist chabadniks and others which are condemned by most sane Jews and others. It does not accord to the traditional interpretation of "Klal Yisrael" as espoused by mainstream Jews whether Ashkenazim, Sepharadim, Mizrahim, Teimanim or Beta Israel. I hope this answers your question.
"I haven't asked questions about Israelis or what Jews themselves think about themselves but the very existence of secular Jews throws a wrench in your "obligations" argument."
I am a secular Jew who also participates in traditional practices on occasion. I don't really understand how that alters the traditional concept of the "mitzvot" or "the election of Israel" or its meaning for those who hold by it.
My statement about Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews was in in response to this statement of yours:
"why the Jews of the Holocaust and the state of Israel ***generally*** aren't considered "supremacists" -- that means most European Jews or Jews with a family history in Europe/the West in the last centuries."
The issue of the discrimination against Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews is an important one to me and much of it relates not just to actual discrimination but in the wholesale ignorance and ignoring of our very existence. When people bring up Israel and mean European, that bothers me and I assert my existence. That's it. In regards to the demographics in Israel, I wrote this, Sephardic Jews were the overwhelming majority until the fall of the Soviet Union. Now they are only a slight majority in numbers as I wrote above and as you quoted as percentages (Ashkenazi 37%, Sephardi 39%). In fact the numbers may actually be higher since ex-Soviet Jews are usually lumped in with Ashkenazim, while many are Sephardic from places like Georgia, Tajikistan, Bukharans etc.
My facts are fine and I obviously didn't feel they were non-sequiturs or I wouldn't have stated them in this context.
Lachish, where did you get the idea that Black Hebrew Israelites are "offshoots" of the Nation of Islam?
...And you shall know them by the trail of Firebirds.
nquest,
"non-Ashkenazi groups sometimes claim that they are discriminated against in terms of education, jobs/income, housing and in other areas."
I'm not really sure what you're looking for here. I'm more than aware of discrimination against non-Ashkenazi Jews - from civil rights even down to the fact that Ashkenazi food is called "Jewish" while ours is called "ethnic." My family and I have experienced it firsthand, including from the Jewish community in America.
I am most concerned with how this plays out in regards to the peace process, since the left in Israel (Mapai, Avoda etc.) is often regarded similarly to the Republicans in America - looking out only for the interests of rich people of European descent. This has helped lead to the historical alignment of Sephardic Jews with the right and the rise of reactionary religious forces such as Shas which I believe are destructive not only to the peace process but also to traditional religious moderation in my community and socioeconomic advancement for non-Ashkenazi Jews.
The issue of the discrimination against Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews is an important one to me and much of it relates not just to actual discrimination
Explain how that is possible and, most importantly, relevant when you felt like you needed to say something addressing my comments.
That is, how can Sephardic/Mirahi Jews be discriminated against in the state of Israel. Who subjects them to said discrimination? Ashkenazis?
Say it ain't so...
When people bring up Israel and mean European, that bothers me and I assert my existence.
In other words, you have a knee-jerk reflex. But maybe you can tell me how I wasn't specifically referring to Ashkenazis when I specifically used the phrase "Jews of the Holocaust" and qualified my reference to Jews of Israel by saying the "ruling factions"?
But maybe I'm wrong for assuming that Ashkenazis are the "ruling" factions of Israel. Maybe Israel came into existence by a movement pushed by Sephardic/Mirahi Jews and Sephardic/Mirahi Jews are discriminated against by the ruling Sephardic/Mirahi elite.
I think thou dost "assert your existence" too much.
I'm not really sure what you're looking for here.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to "assert your existence" in response to what I said which was about the very Ashkenazis you're now highlighting as those who have defined their customs, etc. as "Jewish" -- the people (Ashkenazis), who by all appearances, are the ones who discriminate against non-Ashkenazis Jews (Sephardic, Mirahi, etc.) in Israel.
As clumsy as my language was, it was still clear that I was talking about Jews of European descent.
So, really, what is your issue with the question I raised which has everything to do with why Ashkenazis Jews (were Sephardic/Mirahi Jews part of the Holocaust?) aren't generally considered "supremacists."
Ed Marshall,
I included the extremist national religious under "hardal." Absolutely, they are far more dangerous than the hareidim in regards to foreign policy. From what I have experienced with many national religious people, many would theoretically accept peace and territorial compromise. However, the hilltop youth and hardal are very dangerous and a growing minority amongst them, even though they have become somewhat more marginalized since the Gaza pullout. With them there is no compromise, either with Arabs or even with other Jews. I didn't mean to minimize their threat.
So, with all things considered, my question still remains. As we've seen here, the very idea of "Black Nationalism" carries and is spoken of in a negative connotation. But the history of the state of Israel that is marked by the presence of Ashkenazi discrimination against Sephardic/Mirahi Jews, not to mention the treatment of Arab Israelis or Palestinians, isn't framed in the negative. Ashkenazi Jews aren't generally considered "supremacists" even when the history and practice makes a better argument for it than anything Black Hebrew Israelites have done.
Once again I say, "Amazing!"
nquest,
Yes, Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews are major players in the contemporary power structure of Israel, including presidents, chiefs of staff, leaders of the top parties etc. The discrimination that exists is cultural, socioeconomic and unofficial.
Yes, Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews were in the holocaust. Almost the entire community of the Balkans was wiped out and my family were in North African concentration camps set up by the Germans and staffed by Arabs as well. There were also pogroms and massacres against Jews by fascists and Nazi sympathizers in Iraq, Egypt, Palestine and other places. The wholesale destruction that met the Ashkenazi Jews would have continued throughout the Sephardic communities as well if the Germans hadn't been defeated before they had better control of North Africa and continued to spread.
Yes, Sephardic Jews were instigators and drivers in the Zionist movement, both good and bad. Rabbi Yehuda Al-Kalai was the first modern political Zionist thinker and influenced Herzl. Zionist groups and parties were present and active in all Sephardic communities where they weren't successfully repressed (such as Syria). And while Sepharadim and Mizrahim were pretty much banned from the Haganah, they were major players in both Etzel and Lehi.
Also, I object to the characterization of the Ashkenazi community as supremacists. Just because there were and are racist elements among that community (and all others) does not mean the entire community deserves to be painted with that broad brush. Also, just as much of the discrimination was ideological. The Mapai elite of the time was secular, socialist and western in outlook. The vast majority of Sephardic Jews were religious and were not socialists. Misguided progressive paternalism played a very large role. The problems were not always black and white then and they are not now.
Anyway, I have to get work done and I said I did not want to hijack this thread.
btw it's "Mizrahi" or sometimes "Mizrachi." Not "Mirahi."
I like to eat bagels.
I object to the characterization of the Ashkenazi community as supremacists.
What characterization are you talking about? It's amazing, I say, amazing how you keep imagining things that were never said.
I also find it amazing that specifically took issue with what you called the "chauvinistic nationalism" of the Nation of Islam and certain Black Hebrew Israelites when you're apparently hold no such oppositional views to the nationalism that produced the state of Israel.
Wow. All I can say is wow. Makes me wish that Dave Chappell still had his show. John McCain just got sonned by the only people that he could be absolutely sure of voting for him. Wow.
The "chosen" concept in Judaism refers to Israel being chosen by God to accept the Torah and its obligations, not any claim to racial superiority. It mainly refers to the fact that according to Judaism, other people who must only fulfill the seven commandments of the Noahide covenant to find favor with God, the Jews must supposedly fulfill the 613 precepts of the Torah or face divine consequences. The claim was later twisted by antisemites to the point that your conception of it has become mainstream and that is a shame.
I think that one could argue that misunderstanding this was one of the problems that Israel had in the Old Testament times. That is, that a lot of the people began to view their chosenness as superiority rather than asking God what it was they were chosen to do.
Definitely there were some anti-supremacist elements in the book of Jonah (onah was called upon to help one of Israel's enemies to repentance, and most of his troubles came from his desire for the enemy not to repent so that they would be destroyed).
Jews must supposedly fulfill the 613 precepts of the Torah or face divine consequences
I wonder how many of the precepts secular Jews feel they have to fulfill.
Beyond that, since it was mentioned here, I wonder what was the mindset behind the creation of the state of Israel when, as I'm convinced, problems couldn't help but be foreseen. But maybe there were some Old Testament thinking that clouded Zionist minds at that time.
Nquest I'll admit something to you that would get me hated with many people. I don't agree with Zionism, or even the creation of Israel, as such. Like the creation of Liberia it was an arguably bad idea. However like Liberia
1: It's been here for generations, it's not going away.
2: I reject the idea the people who reside in it are inherently ethnic supremacists.
Many Israelis are secular and even the religious ones aren't necessarily supremacist. I think you don't understand Judaism at all.
When I was talking about certain extreme "Black Hebrew Israelite" groups I meant pretty small groups that do see "chosenness" in a specifically ethnic supremacist way. I was basically criticizing just a few doomsday cults and a guy who went to prison for murder. I wasn't even meaning to criticize "mainstream" groups like the Church of Saints, I think it's called, who believe blacks are a "chosen people" in a more open and tolerant way.
At least a President Obama would put the Zionists in their place, as the Rev. Jesse Jackson noted. Obama could really be the next President Carter: tough on Israel, double digit interest rates and inflation (after his record deficits start piling up), malaise at home, etc.
NQuest,
What the f---? I'm not a Jew, so please don't imply that I am. I have no brief for Judaism as a religion, and in fact as a Christian I have many theological disagreements with them. All I said was that at this moment in time, the Jews are as entitled to a homeland as the Slovaks, the Timorese, the Eritreans, or any other people. I would make that argument on secular nationalist grounds, not theological ones.
1: It's been here for generations, it's not going away.
Very sorry rationale. WTF is that supposed to mean? How is that relevant to anything said here?
Your logic is as ridiculous as saying Islamic extremism, Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden are not going away so we should just live with it which is odd because the question I raised had nothing to do with what we choose and don't choose to live with and what is or isn't "going away."
And you and Lachish have these strange knee-jerk reactions to things that aren't there. Lachish "objects" and you "reject" something that was never said. Basically...
2: I reject the idea the people who reside in it are inherently ethnic supremacists.
What are you "rejecting"? Whose idea but your own?
I merely raised a question. A question you still haven't answered.
Ed Marshall asked how many Black people "slam" or slammed MLK the way the chairman of the American Nazi Party did. All that was required for you to answer that was for you to say, "I believe Yahweh ben Yahweh was against Martin Luther King" but you had to go into a thing about Black Hebrew Israelite movements speaking pejoratively about so-called Black supremacy and Black separatism -- two terms, supremacy and separatism, you refuse to apply or use across the board.
I think you don't understand Judaism at all.
It's clear you're the one who brought up the "chosen people" concept. No matter how its conceived/perceived, the idea of Jews being the "chosen people" (I never attempted to define the idea) is, indeed, part and parcel of Judaism.
I merely asked you how come you and others don't speak of Jews in negative terms because of the concept you introduced. How it's perceived of or was historically conceived of by Jews is a non-issue especially when it comes to the state of Israel, its creation and "right to exist" vis-a-vis Palestinians/Arabs.
Lachish says the discrimination Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews face is "cultural", etc. but Lachish first presented it as an unmistakably "ethnic" (as if the two, culture/ethnicity, aren't related):
*** "The issue of the discrimination against Sephardic/ Mizrahi Jews is an important one to me and much of it relates not just to actual discrimination but in the wholesale ignorance and ignoring of our very existence. When people bring up Israel and mean European, that bothers me and I assert my existence."
*** "I'm more than aware of discrimination against non-Ashkenazi Jews - from civil rights even down to the fact that Ashkenazi food is called "Jewish" while ours is called "ethnic."..."
What the f---? I'm not a Jew, so please don't imply that I am.
More giggles. I implied nothing of the such. I simply stated that your Jewish apologetics were laughable and I was specifically referring to your argument:
"The State of Israel was founded because the Jews are a people, and like other peoples have at least an arguable right to a homeland of their own."
And I explained why. Your idea of "extracting territorial concessions" is laughable as well. No such chunk of Germany was extracted and you obviously didn't argue for Palestinians' "right to a homeland." I suppose you could pick out nice fertile ground in the lower 48 in the USA since the US has thrown its lot with the Zionist.
That alone makes your apologetics -- i.e. your excuses for Jews -- laughable and so transparent.
Geez, does it always have to be about the Jews? No wonder the blacks started hating you in the Sixties. You may have started the NAACP for them and helped them get Civil Rights, but you can be such pains in the asses.
Interesting little Wikipedia nugget (under the heading of "Chosenness is not superiority"):
The Encyclopedia Judaica provides a secular, historical explanation of this belief, stating that "It would seem that the more extreme, and exclusive, interpretations of the doctrine of election, among Jewish thinkers, were partly the result of reaction to oppression by the non-Jewish world. The more the Jew was forced to close in on himself, to withdraw into the imposed confines of the ghetto, the more he tended to emphasize Israel's difference from the cruel gentile without. Only thus did his suffering become intelligible and bearable... When the Jew was eventually allowed to find his place in a gentile world, the less exclusivist aspect of the doctrine reasserted itself."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_a_chosen_people
Regardless, it's pretty hard to square either interpretation of "chosenness" with the reality of the (creation of the) state of Israel and the Conflict.
Well I guess what bothered you is I insulted "Black Hebrew Israelite" groups.
Okay, maybe I was wrong there. I though that specific term was what denoted the extremist portion, but on reflection I got that idea from Wikipedia and I know it's a horrible source on religion. Maybe many "Black Hebrew Israelite" groups are fine upstanding people who help the homeless, feed the hungry, and believe in tolerance.
Still whatever you call the more radical fringe that's what I meant. I don't want the remnants of the Nation of Yahweh hunting me down, but I'm not going to say I think they're okay either. Or that their views are no different than being a citizen of Israel or being of a Hopi kiva religion or whatever.
And on the whole I'd say I'm more against "White Nationalist" than "Black Nationalists", but no I'm not particularly fond of either.
I'm not real fond of nationalism of any kind. I've said the Pledge of Allegiance at 9-11 memorials, as a sign of solidarity, but mostly I don't believe in it. In fact the first time I found myself saying it at such a memorial I was shocked and a little disgusted with myself. Nations are ephemeral divisions of people to me. What matters is loving God and your neighbor. (To me anyway)
That being said nationalism is more sensible when it involves an actual nation. Being a Seminole nationalist, a Jamaican nationalist, a Kenyan nationalist, a Swazi nationalist, etc makes sense to me. So I'd admit I do find that more acceptable than "Black", "White", or "Red" nationalism. If you want to gasp at that okay.
I'm more against "White Nationalist" than "Black Nationalists", but no I'm not particularly fond of either.
This isn't about White vs. Black Nationalist. You spoke of Black Hebrew Israelites and, by extension Black Nationalism, in pejorative terms which was complicated or made worse by your deferential treatment of what is essentially Jewish Nationalism via Zionism/the state of Israel.
At every turn you insisted on putting Jewish Nationalism that's responsible for way more deaths than a temple full of Yahweh ben Yahwehs in a wholly different and more favorable category.
Re: Your "actual nation" comment... who gives a f-ck what kind of nationalism "makes sense" to you. The only questions asked were how many or what Black people "slammed" or are/were against MLK and, as a result of your answer to that, how come the Jewish Nationalism that is/led to and sustains the state of Israel isn't spoken of in pejorative terms.
Maybe many "Black Hebrew Israelite" groups are fine upstanding people who help the homeless, feed the hungry, and believe in tolerance.
Curious snark when you've made unprovoked, knee-jerk statements like:
"I reject the idea the people who reside in it are inherently ethnic supremacists."
Here you are going out of your way trying to defend your inexplicably difference in perception and treatment of Jewish Nationalism vs. Black Nationalism. All that you've done with your curious conclusion jumping is affirmed how you refuse to apply the pejorative terms, supremacy and separatism, you were so casual with when it came to Black Hebrew Israelites across the board. An affirmation solidified by your recent comments and the obvious contrast.
For some reason, there's no question in your mind that "many" Jews/Israelis are fine, upstanding, tolerant people no matter what kind of extremists or extremism exists among them. For Black Hebrew Israelites and, apparently, Black Nationalists in general, you feel like you have to question whether that is true.
Amazing.
Amazing how you can never respond directly to things I say. Amazing how you find your own new tangent talking points instead of responding what I've said in response to your previous talking points.
I asked you what does this recurring "it's not going away" theme of yours actually mean and how it's relevant and you have no answer. I also asked what are you "rejecting" when you, oddly, wanted to come to the defense of people who reside in Israel and declare them as people who aren't "inherently ethnic supremacists" as if someone made that claim... and you have no answer.
You're so busy trying to guess (i.e. concoct) what "bothers" me that you find it too hard to address what I actually say.
I'd admit I do find that more acceptable than "Black", "White", or "Red" nationalism.
It's revealing how you, the Wikipedian that you are, find Black Nationalism more akin to White Nationalism than you do to both the expressed and historical akin-ness of the Black and Jewish experience.
Then there's the dissonance where you speak of Black Nationalism via (certain) Black Hebrew Israelites as a type of "ethnic" expression but now you fix Black Nationalism in a racial-color context ("Black", "White", or "Red") like Black people aren't an ethnic group.
I think you're reading things into me that are solely in your mind. Or you have opinions I consider frankly nuts and no longer feel the need to try to explain myself to you.
Late to the thread here, but can I just say whenever I hear about the American Nazi Party, I want Jake and Elwood to run them over with the Bluesmobile?
I think the fact that everyone's laughing at the ANP the day before the election bodes well for Obama.
Crazy.
I just read another blog talking about this. Different story, but similar quotes.
http://noah-cicero.blogspot.com/2008/11/political-debates-at-work-danger-to-our.html