Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I call the post brave because the OP DOES not seem to be silenced by being labeled anti-semite, a label which truly has lost its sting or meaning by being used as a weapon to merely silence criticism of any kind.
Moderator cut: Personal remark removed.
As a Gentile, you don’t get to decide what is and is not anti-Semitic any more than I, a white person, get to tell you what is and is not anti-Indian bigotry. You have also proven yourself woefully ignorant on that subject, time and again. OP’s screed could have been lifted word for word from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. This is not dog-whistling. This is dragging the dog from a pick-up truck zooming down the highway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
True hatred exists when people are attacked, killed, oppressed and discriminated, and I don deny that it is happening, not only to jews but for all minorities, not only here but all over the world.
And true hatred can be expressed in written and spoken form as well as physical actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
It is also brave because i expected it to be shut down.
It probably should and perhaps will be shut down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
While this forum attacks all religions, including Hinduism, I have rarely seen Judaism attacked with the kind of vehemence atheists bestow on all other religions.
There are some dogmatic atheist types who bash religion, sure, although not with this degree of hatred and intensity.
I speak out against such nonsense, as do many (and I would venture even most) regular atheist posters do here. I have never attacked religion as a whole, only religious fundamentalists and extremists, and that applies for people of any faith-based tradition.
Part of the reason Jews are criticized less frequently is that outside of Israel and Israeli-occupied areas of the Golan Heights and Palestinian Territories, Jews are a minority with no power or control as a societal force. That has been true since well before the common era. That aside, Jews have not even had the slightest semblance of such power since the destruction of the Second Temple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
In fact none at all and i find that curious why Judaism has escaped the wrath and there was a small discussion about before it got closed.
And here you are doing some dog-whistling yourself. Perhaps this is the start of your own journey to anti-Semitism. Maybe you’ve already been on that journey for quite some time. I’m actually somewhat surprised, although perhaps I should be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
That is another reason I find the post brave.
That is shameful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
I find the discussion interesting because i have always wondered about the effect of harsh climates on the level of violence and aggression that people exhibit.
As if India, a subcontinent of all things, has a uniformly steady and temperate climate? Oh, please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
There can bo no quarrel that the Abrahamic religions have exhibited heart stopping violence and hate historically.
Define historically. Are you talking about stories in the Tanakh, Bible, and Quran, some of which may be kind-of-sort-of true in the broadest and most apocryphal sense, or are you talking about separately documented and more contemporary historical events? Moderator cut: Personal remarks removedmodern Zionism is actually a secular ideology created by Theodore Herzl, an atheist who was so non-observant he didn’t even circumcise his son. That’s not to say Zionism can be completely divorced from religion, in part because the idea of a sustained and promised Jewish homeland in Eretz Yisrael is ultimately religious in origin, and also because modern Zionism is seen through a religious lens for many (but not actually most) of its proponents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
It is not to praise Hindus or Indians but the fact is India was ruled by Arabs who established the Moghul empire for, i dont know, 100s of years. Followed be the British empire for 200 years. Hindu religion and culture did not die like say the Greeks’ did when Christianity was imposed. Hinduism is still the major religion in all of South Asia, like some 70%.
Okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
This is not any religiocentrism but a matter of curiosity. It is not as if Hindus have not gone on killing sprees, it has happened.
That wasn’t really part of your earlier post, but Hindus are hardly exceptional when it comes to the endurance of their faith-based traditions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
As for making assumption about posters about whom i only know by how they express themselve and what they reveal i have no interest in imagining their lives. Moderator cut: deleted
I’m not sure what that means. If you’re criticizing me for having a good memory and ability to make reasonable inferences, then I’m sincerely sorry you feel that way. Moderator cut: Personal remark removed.
Moderator cut: Paragraph deleted
Last edited by Mightyqueen801; 12-01-2023 at 01:25 PM..
Reason: Keep it about the topic, not about the poster.
Here I was, giving you the benefit of the doubt on a basic matter of human decency. Don’t worry, I’ll never make that mistake again.
As a Gentile, you don’t get to decide what is and is not anti-Semitic any more than I, a white person, get to tell you what is and is not anti-Indian bigotry. You have also proven yourself woefully ignorant on that subject, time and again. OP’s screed could have been lifted word for word from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. This is not dog-whistling. This is dragging the dog from a pick-up truck zooming down the highway.
And true hatred can be expressed in written and spoken form as well as physical actions.
It probably should and perhaps will be shut down.
There are some dogmatic atheist types who bash religion, sure, although not with this degree of hatred and intensity.
I speak out against such nonsense, as do many (and I would venture even most) regular atheist posters do here. I have never attacked religion as a whole, only religious fundamentalists and extremists, and that applies for people of any faith-based tradition.
Part of the reason Jews are criticized less frequently is that outside of Israel and Israeli-occupied areas of the Golan Heights and Palestinian Territories, Jews are a minority with no power or control as a societal force. That has been true since well before the common era. That aside, Jews have not even had the slightest semblance of such power since the destruction of the Second Temple.
And here you are doing some dog-whistling yourself. Perhaps this is the start of your own journey to anti-Semitism. Maybe you’ve already been on that journey for quite some time. I’m actually somewhat surprised, although perhaps I should be.
That is shameful.
As if India, a subcontinent of all things, has a uniformly steady and temperate climate? Oh, please.
Define historically. Are you talking about stories in the Tanakh, Bible, and Quran, some of which may be kind-of-sort-of true in the broadest and most apocryphal sense, or are you talking about separately documented and more contemporary historical events? While I’m sure you’ll deny this because you never fail to be a know-it-all who shuts her ears when she hears facts that are counter to her preconceived notion of the world is and should be, but modern Zionism is actually a secular ideology created by Theodore Herzl, an atheist who was so non-observant he didn’t even circumcise his son. That’s not to say Zionism can be completely divorced from religion, in part because the idea of a sustained and promised Jewish homeland in Eretz Yisrael is ultimately religious in origin, and also because modern Zionism is seen through a religious lens for many (but not actually most) of its proponents.
Okay.
That wasn’t really part of your earlier post, but Hindus are hardly exceptional when it comes to the endurance of their faith-based traditions.
I’m not sure what that means. If you’re criticizing me for having a good memory and ability to make reasonable inferences, then I’m sincerely sorry you feel that way. I know you’re older (see, there’s that memory again!) so perhaps you’re experiencing cognitive decline (a reasonable inference, although it is a postulation and by no means a declarative statement ).
As you do when confronted with realities you find uncomfortable.
There is plenty about Zionism that can be discussed but this is not the thread.
I try to be objective when I post, so i do not bring any assumptions about the poster to whose post i respond. I may fail and fail many times, but that is what I try to do for the health of my own mind.
As you indicate your age in many posts, I know you are younger than me, but I won’t hold that against you.
As for longevity of Hinduism, again you miss my point, deliberate or I dont know, because you consider yourself very smart. The point is Islam and Chrstianity did not overwhelm the prevailing culture and to the extent Indians all converted and Hinduism died.
India is not temperate climate but it does not have the extreme winters when life can be a struggle against nature, or the dessert. Living is a little bit easier, small huts with thatched roofs can be serviceable. Lighter clothing is enough protection. No hunting and gathering is required so no big weapons except for wars. I am not speaking from any scholarship on the topic, just speculating from experience of growing up in a tropical land. I might ask Bard what it thinks.
Last edited by Mightyqueen801; 12-01-2023 at 01:48 PM..
I see that you're spreading the same antisemitic views that you regularly post on the P&OC forum, such as "Judaism is a practical/materialistic religion of money, power, hierarchy, inequality, and authority'.
That's literally how Karl Marx described it. If you read Marx, everything I've said in this thread is supported(except my comments about Islam which he didn't cover but we all know is true).
You completely ignore the historic context wherein Jews in the diaspora were not allowed to own land nor join the trade guilds, thus were were forced to practice moneylending, which was forbidden by whatever Church was in charge at the time.
The Jews were moneylenders/moneychangers everywhere and always. They were always businessmen. Just look at Jesus throwing over their tables in the Temple. Islam didn't simply ban usury among Muslims, it banned usury for everyone. Which is why Jews were dirtfarmers under Islam.
Even if Jews were barred from many professions in Europe, the Jews chose to move to Europe because life under Islam was worse. It was only under Christianity that Jews could thrive(which is still true).
Regardless, Judaism is a materialistic religion in its outlook. It is focused on this world. It establishes a nation. A nation that is ethno-religious.
Christianity on the other hand is anti-materialistic in its outlook(except evangelicals). Christianity is fundamentally ascetic. It is a denial of nature, of wealth, of desire. It is a universalist religion which at its core is anarchic(anti-state, anti-nation).
Christianity is the most absurd religion. It can only function when "the state" under which Christians live is not Christian except in name(IE secular/Jewish/Islamic).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
1) They would not only lend money to individuals, but to the royals and governments. Of course, when the people in power decided they didn't want to repay their debts to the Jews, they would simply expel them from the country.
2) How is that a "religion of power"?
1) From what I read it was quite the opposite. The Kings would invite the Jews in not only as moneylenders, but also as tax-collectors and other businessmen/merchants. The Jews would then establish businesses whereby they attempted to remove all competition and create a monopoly(sometimes that monopoly was granted by the king himself in exchange for Jewish loans). The Jews then used their position to exploit Christians both materially and even sexually(seducing young women with their money), while also holding their supremacist Judaic views alongside their contempt for the goyim, until the common people had enough and threw them out.
2) I fail to see the contradiction. Just because they couldn't hold onto power doesn't mean they didn't want it. For that matter, I'm not even going to condemn them for wanting power. Why wouldn't they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
In contrast, Judaism is a religion of learning and striving to improve the world through the results of that learning. That's why the Jews have provided the world with so many medical, scientific, and social advances. If Jews despise non-Jews (especially Christians) so much, why have they given so much to society at large? According to your theory of how Jews believe, we should have kept all of our knowledge and talent to ourselves instead of bringing it to the world, often at our own peril (for example, our strong support of the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s). IMO, your view of Jews and Judaism is extremely skewed.
They sold these things to the goyim for profit, and guaranteed themselves future profits through copyrights and royalties(monopolies). The Jews would be in absolute poverty if they couldn't skim a profit off the poor and downtrodden. To believe Jews are acting out of benevolence is to believe capitalists, corporations, Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc, are acting out of benevolent motives, not purely selfish and materialistic ones.
I agree though that the Jews have a natural spirit for learning and material advancement. The Christian's head is always in the clouds, while the Jew is focused intently on Earth.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 11-28-2023 at 05:39 PM..
In short, what exists is what is strong. What works.
If you are an evolutionist then you should understand that just as biological evolution doesn't favor some simplistic power or strength dynamic, or some subjective good like enjoyment, but rather simply survival long enough to bear and adequately nurture the young ... so in other realms what exists is ultimately at least what results in conveying beliefs, traditions, memes and concepts to others and to upcoming generations, that tend to result in the long-term sustainable sort of society that doesn't produce despair and want. Competition for power and wealth are superimposed on that, but ultimately, the concentration of wealth and/or power undermine the stability of society and culture and are not sustainable and therefore ultimately neither work, nor are "strong". Authoritarians and wealthy elites (often one and the same) destroy themselves if unchecked. Nazi Germany enjoyed arguably a 15-year heyday and then imploded, for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
The role of religion historically was three-fold... Firstly, to create unity and a shared identity between large numbers of people(a form of pan-tribalism), to increase birthrates, and to give the masses something worth enduring hardship for, sacrificing for, or even dying for.
This is why the various kingdoms of Europe often converted to Christianity. Not because their kings read the bible and believed it was true, but because Christianity essentially created an alliance structure which preserved their kingdoms both from Christian aggression and against their neighbors. You can think of "Christian Europe" as a kind of NATO or European Union(democracy). With Rome as the center instead of Brussels.
I don't disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
The reason Christianity is on the decline isn't actually because we are more educated now. It is because Christianity is no longer a useful tool for conquest/expansion. Islam is an iron wall against Christianity, and Islam is fundamentally superior to Christianity in that it has all the benefits of Christianity while also being closer to human-nature/evolution. Thus Islam should always defeat Christianity over the long-run.
I'd argue that freely available / affordable knowledge and education are like kryptonite for ANY authoritarian / fundamentalist religion, including fundamentalist Islam.
Islam seems more dominated by its fundamentalist element and seems not to understand that it can't project so much power worldwide so as to force everyone to (even just outwardly) convert to Islam. I see its dreams of a worldwide caliphate as just that ... a dream. That does not mean it it won't meet with any progress anywhere, but for a society to thrive takes more than power ... it takes viable ideas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Since the political elite can no longer use Christianity as a means of expanding their power/control, they have been creating new ideological systems that can permeate and subvert what exists. Thus atheism, liberalism, communism, etc, can theoretically expand everywhere. Overthrowing everything that existed before.
Everywhere in the West (or Christendom, if you will) that fascism is on the rise -- Hungary, Poland, the US -- it is leveraging Christianity quite effectively. Or at least it has undermined Christian moral codes (such as they were) and reprogrammed them to support their power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
You are correct insofar as religion creates an irreconcilable division/tribalism/competition which can often end in war/violence. And that abolishing religion removes that division. But ideology creates the same division/tribalism/competition which can likewise lead to war/violence. In fact, the greatest war in history was fundamentally an ideological war(for global hegemony). Thus if your goal is to end division and violence, it could only be accomplished if there were but one ideology across the entire face of the Earth.
Oh ANYTHING involving people and their cherished preconceptions will create division ... I don't think there are easy or quick ways out of the things that keep us humans making the same mistakes. It will be slow process on the order of many centuries, but I think what we have to develop is a respect for reason and good evidential standards driven by facts rather than "what is pleasant and intuitive to me, and requires as little as possible from me in terms of thought", which has governed humans until now, and still does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Thus there are really two types of atheists. Those who think atheism is useful for creating the society they want, and those who despise all authority and just want to be free.
Atheism is not an ideology, it is a belief position on a single topic. When religion becomes a fringe concept and not a topic of passion to most people, atheism ceases to exist because it becomes irrelevant ... as I think I mentioned, as useless a concept as "a-philatelist" for those who do not collect stamps or a-runnism for those who do not jog.
Humanism is an ideology and many humanists are atheists (many are also agnostics or liberal theists), and I think its strength is that it's an organic outgrowth of the general idea that one holds whatever religious beliefs they have very loosely rather than very seriously, and are more biased to evidence and reason. This is, IMO, the way forward, but it is VERY early days and who knows if humanity will survive long enough for it to fully develop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Furthermore, atheism seems to be incapable of sustaining itself, especially without an outside enemy. Thus atheism can only be a transition from one form of oppression to another. Otherwise it is but an evolutionary dead-end.
As I said, atheism is simply a foil to theism. That is a feature, not a bug. I wish we could discard atheism in my lifetime ... I would welcome it. But theism will not fade away that quickly. And mind you, I see theism as organically fading away ... as people voluntarily drift away from the various dogmas. They will see, as I did, that the dogmas are false and give no advantage. It will be the work of many generations, of course, to succeed in any general way at scale. AND it is quite possible that religion could enjoy a temporary resurgence, if there's enough trouble in the world ... in the same way that sometimes a dying man will suddenly rally and become really animated just before the end.
If you are an evolutionist then you should understand that just as biological evolution doesn't favor some simplistic power or strength dynamic, or some subjective good like enjoyment, but rather simply survival long enough to bear and adequately nurture the young ... so in other realms what exists is ultimately at least what results in conveying beliefs, traditions, memes and concepts to others and to upcoming generations, that tend to result in the long-term sustainable sort of society that doesn't produce despair and want. Competition for power and wealth are superimposed on that, but ultimately, the concentration of wealth and/or power undermine the stability of society and culture and are not sustainable and therefore ultimately neither work, nor are "strong". Authoritarians and wealthy elites (often one and the same) destroy themselves if unchecked. Nazi Germany enjoyed arguably a 15-year heyday and then imploded, for example.
1) I agree that evolution as it relates to humans is complex. It is social not individual(we are a social animal/Dunbar's number). When we were hunter-gatherers, the most important human attributes were cooperation and loyalty. This can apply both between members of a family/band/tribe, as well as between tribes. So yes, we have to be careful not to be too simplistic when it comes to power dynamics. But at the same time, the possibility of war is ever-present. And in ancient times, losing a war could mean oblivion/extinction for an entire tribe/ethnicity.
2) Islam expanded through conquest. For that matter, the Nazis only lost WWII because of power. The Soviet Union lost the Cold War because it went bankrupt. You could argue that since these ideologies "lost" it is proof of their weakness. Yet although the Nazis lost to the Soviets, was that because of a superior ideology or simply superior numbers/resources? The United States conquered the world, is that because of our superior ideology or because we control a massive territory protected by two oceans?
3) I agree that society must be sustainable to survive, but Christianity/Judaism/Islam can all produce a sustainable society. My question was which of the three is best "adapted" for the world we live in. Basically, which will ultimately outcompete the others.
My view is that in the end, it can only be Islam or Judaism. Christianity is an abomination which can only exist where the church is separate from the state, and/or where the state uses means and pursues ends which are not Christian.
You can think of Islam as being a combination of Christianity and Judaism. Judaism conquered the Canaanites, established an exclusionary state, then treated non-Jews as second-class citizens at best, and livestock at worst. Islam wants to conquer the world, establish an exclusive state where Muslims are always on top, and where non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens and livestock. On the other hand, true Christians are basically Amish/Mennonites. They don't believe in the state but they accept state authority as divine will(Romans 13). Basically, Christians are the perfect slaves, and the Christian state is an absurdity and a contradiction.
The concept of "separation of Church and State" can only exist in Christianity because Christianity does not establish a state. That doesn't mean there haven't been Christian states, but their existence has absolutely nothing to do with the tenets of Christianity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
I'd argue that freely available / affordable knowledge and education are like kryptonite for ANY authoritarian / fundamentalist religion, including fundamentalist Islam.
To be fair, the Islamic world was more secular in the past than it is today. There is no evidence that atheism is caused by greater knowledge. There does exist a weak correlation in western countries which have become more secular since WWII, but communist countries were almost entirely secular and have become more religious in recent decades. Ataturk almost completely secularized Turkey after WWI, but Erdogan is practically an Islamo-Fascist.
Regardless, you seem to imagine religion as an organic system that comes from below instead of a socio-political system from above via a priest class whose job is to ideologically indoctrinate the masses for the benefit of the state.
That doesn't mean the common people don't have free will, but without Paul issuing his proclamation in "Romans 13", Christianity would gone the way of the Branch Davidians.
Basically, I see religion as a quasi-political institution whose purpose is to condition man's mind in ways beneficial to the state. But let me clarify something, "The State" is slavery. You cannot be governed and be free. The role of religion is thus to enslave men without them knowing it. And even if they are aware of their slavery, religion is there to tell them that god will reward them for their sacrifice, and for enduring injustice. In the case of Islam, god will even reward them for fighting for him(with virgins?).
In any case, religion became a necessity after humans ceased to be hunter-gatherers and began living in hierarchical and unequal civilizations. It was the only way to prevent the common people from rebelling against the injustice of the state, to keep the peasants producing children for an unfair system that treats them like livestock, and fighting wars for a government that hates them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Everywhere in the West (or Christendom, if you will) that fascism is on the rise -- Hungary, Poland, the US -- it is leveraging Christianity quite effectively. Or at least it has undermined Christian moral codes (such as they were) and reprogrammed them to support their power.
They aren't leveraging Christianity per se, they are leveraging hostility to Islam. Moreover, all of these supposed Christian fascists(Trump, Orban, etc) are the biggest Jew worshippers on the planet. Every single one of them is aggressively pro-Israel and wants Gaza turned to rubble and ethnically-cleansed. Their "Christian nationalism" is just Judaism in disguise(see evangelicalism), and their biggest financiers are Jews who are worried that Muslims aren't as easy to control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Oh ANYTHING involving people and their cherished preconceptions will create division ... I don't think there are easy or quick ways out of the things that keep us humans making the same mistakes. It will be slow process on the order of many centuries, but I think what we have to develop is a respect for reason and good evidential standards driven by facts rather than "what is pleasant and intuitive to me, and requires as little as possible from me in terms of thought", which has governed humans until now, and still does.
Power has always ruled the world, and power will always rule the world. I think you give "the people" too much credit. The average person is mildly retarded. Moreover, we're currently facing a rising China, a resurgent Russia, an increasingly monolithic Islam, all while the west is collapsing politically, socially, demographically, etc.
I know in your fairytale-land these theoretical discussions have value, but in the real world, not only does power rule, but all "states" must pursue power because otherwise they will be overcome/conquered by those who do. And when you're conquered, these theoretical discussions not only won't matter, but won't even be allowed.
I'm interested in ideologies that are powerful, not ideologies that are true. If they are powerful, they will become true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Atheism is not an ideology
The point I was making is that people "choose" to be atheists. Atheists have a psychological-profile just like theists do. I'm an atheist because I want to be free. Others are atheists because they're disgusted with religion and think we can do better.
I agree that atheism isn't an ideology(it is nothing), but at the same time, an atheist will look at the world differently than a theist. His behavior, his outlook, his perceptions, his morality will all be shaped by his "lack of belief". In short, atheists understand that this life is all there is, and they think and act accordingly.
The problem with atheism is that the behavior endemic to atheists, especially in an individualistic society like ours, is not self-sustaining. Atheism, at least atheism as you imagine it, would inevitably destroy itself and be conquered/replaced by something else.
The highest birthrates by far are among religious people. The more religious they are, the higher the birthrates. Whatever cognitive mechanism makes it possible to believe in the absurdity of religion can only become more common as time goes on. An atheist in Medieval Europe likely wouldn't have reproduced, or possibly killed himself. Whereas the devout likely had a dozen children.
Basically, I think you're fighting a lost cause. You cannot defeat religion(unless you can remove power from the world/one-world government). On the other hand, you can exploit it, but only in ways that are powerful.
Regardless, the inspiration for this thread was my dread of Islam or Judaism "winning".
Last edited by Redshadowz; 11-29-2023 at 01:54 AM..
While this forum attacks all religions, including Hinduism, I have rarely seen Judaism attacked with the kind of vehemence atheists bestow on all other religions.
Yes, crushing peoples heads with stones, burning people at the stake, threatening people with eternal torture.
Oh, wait ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
In fact none at all and i find that curious why Judaism has escaped the wrath and there was a small discussion about before it got closed. That is another reason I find the post brave.
I know you live in your rose tinted fantasy world, so perhaps we can forgive your ignorance about the fact that Jews use many of the texts in the OT. When we vehemently say we do not believe in all gods, that includes the Jewish / Christian / Muslim god.
That's literally how Karl Marx described it. If you read Marx, everything I've said in this thread is supported(except my comments about Islam which he didn't cover but we all know is true).
The Jews were moneylenders/moneychangers everywhere and always. They were always businessmen. Just look at Jesus throwing over their tables in the Temple. Islam didn't simply ban usury among Muslims, it banned usury for everyone. Which is why Jews were dirtfarmers under Islam.
Even if Jews were barred from many professions in Europe, the Jews chose to move to Europe because life under Islam was worse. It was only under Christianity that Jews could thrive(which is still true).
Regardless, Judaism is a materialistic religion in its outlook. It is focused on this world. It establishes a nation. A nation that is ethno-religious.
Christianity on the other hand is anti-materialistic in its outlook(except evangelicals). Christianity is fundamentally ascetic. It is a denial of nature, of wealth, of desire. It is a universalist religion which at its core is anarchic(anti-state, anti-nation).
Christianity is the most absurd religion. It can only function when "the state" under which Christians live is not Christian except in name(IE secular/Jewish/Islamic).
1) From what I read it was quite the opposite. The Kings would invite the Jews in not only as moneylenders, but also as tax-collectors and other businessmen/merchants. The Jews would then establish businesses whereby they attempted to remove all competition and create a monopoly(sometimes that monopoly was granted by the king himself in exchange for Jewish loans). The Jews then used their position to exploit Christians both materially and even sexually(seducing young women with their money), while also holding their supremacist Judaic views alongside their contempt for the goyim, until the common people had enough and threw them out.
2) I fail to see the contradiction. Just because they couldn't hold onto power doesn't mean they didn't want it. For that matter, I'm not even going to condemn them for wanting power. Why wouldn't they?
They sold these things to the goyim for profit, and guaranteed themselves future profits through copyrights and royalties(monopolies). The Jews would be in absolute poverty if they couldn't skim a profit off the poor and downtrodden. To believe Jews are acting out of benevolence is to believe capitalists, corporations, Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc, are acting out of benevolent motives, not purely selfish and materialistic ones.
I agree though that the Jews have a natural spirit for learning and material advancement. The Christian's head is always in the clouds, while the Jew is focused intently on Earth.
Yes, Judaism focuses on this world, and improving this world. It is our mission. However, as far as establishing a nation, we have only established one very tiny one, and the rest of the world apparently resents us for even doing that. And that was only allowed after 6 million Jews had just been slaughtered during the Holocaust. I don't see Jews as being a materialistic religion in that sense, unlike Christianity which is always seeking to establish new territories and nations in which to spread its message and acquire converts. A good example is the rampant wave of protestant evangelism linked with the imperial expansion of the British Empire. The same holds true with Catholicism as Spain explored the New World, although their conversion methods tended to be a tad more lethal to the already existing population.
As far as Jews selling "things to the goyim for profit" (an offensive term, btw), that is the nature of any business. Every retailer sells things for profit, or they go broke. The Jews also sold to other Jews for profit, just as Christians sell to each other for profit. That is the definition of retail business.
To say that Christianity is ascetic and anti-materialistic is laughable, at least in reality. It may have been taught that way, but is certainly not practiced as such. One only has to look at Congress, the heads of most corporations (most of whom are Christian), the "old money" families who are in control behind the scenes, and the young tech wizards, and one sees Christians wealthy beyond imagination.
The idea that Jews used their position to exploit Christians, specifically by seducing young women, is just a canard unless you have proof. It falls into the same kind of trope as "blood libel" and is just as vicious.
Yes, Judaism focuses on this world, and improving this world. It is our mission. However, as far as establishing a nation, we have only established one very tiny one, and the rest of the world apparently resents us for even doing that. And that was only allowed after 6 million Jews had just been slaughtered during the Holocaust. I don't see Jews as being a materialistic religion in that sense, unlike Christianity which is always seeking to establish new territories and nations in which to spread its message and acquire converts. A good example is the rampant wave of protestant evangelism linked with the imperial expansion of the British Empire. The same holds true with Catholicism as Spain explored the New World, although their conversion methods tended to be a tad more lethal to the already existing population.
As far as Jews selling "things to the goyim for profit" (an offensive term, btw), that is the nature of any business. Every retailer sells things for profit, or they go broke. The Jews also sold to other Jews for profit, just as Christians sell to each other for profit. That is the definition of retail business.
To say that Christianity is ascetic and anti-materialistic is laughable, at least in reality. It may have been taught that way, but is certainly not practiced as such. One only has to look at Congress, the heads of most corporations (most of whom are Christian), the "old money" families who are in control behind the scenes, and the young tech wizards, and one sees Christians wealthy beyond imagination.
The idea that Jews used their position to exploit Christians, specifically by seducing young women, is just a canard unless you have proof. It falls into the same kind of trope as "blood libel" and is just as vicious.
Basically, I think you're fighting a lost cause. You cannot defeat religion(unless you can remove power from the world/one-world government). On the other hand, you can exploit it, but only in ways that are powerful.
Again, the most powerful thing is not brute force but powerful ideas.
Change often comes in fits and starts, as a product of better ideas superseding poorer ones. One doesn't have to defeat as in battle, a government; it just has to coax people to see their own rational self-interest such that they eventually let go of bad ideas and embrace sustainable and good ones.
Yes it's a lost cause in terms of the zero to thirty years left to me on this earth. I won't see it realized. But I can move it along. If I were (and wanted to be) a sufficiently public thinker it might be that some day many generations from now, I would be one of those countless "giants" that people say they stand on the shoulders of. But I don't need that for myself. As one author put it, the world is a better place mostly for those who reside in unvisited tombs.
However, as far as establishing a nation, we have only established one very tiny one
I'm not talking about Jews, I'm talking about Judaism. Judaism established the first nation-state in history. Israel is literally an ethno-state(on the "promised land") with laws dictated by god, where the people are presumably descended from Abraham.
Islam also established a "state" governed by laws(Sharia) dictated by god. The "state" is inseparable from both Islam and Judaism. The state is everything to them. Whereas Christianity was essentially a revolt against the state. A revolt against (human) authority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
1) And the rest of the world apparently resents us for even doing that.
2) And that was only allowed after 6 million Jews had just been slaughtered during the Holocaust.
1) No, they resent you for stealing land and mistreating the Palestinians.
2) Here are a couple letters/statements from Albert Einstein. Enjoy.
I don't see Jews as being a materialistic religion in that sense, unlike Christianity which is always seeking to establish new territories and nations in which to spread its message and acquire converts.
Christianity does want to convert people, yes. But Christianity is fundamentally an ascetic religion. It is opposed to wealth and power. The example for Christians is Jesus, who spent all his time railing against the rich and powerful. The meek will inherit the Earth. The first will be last and the last will be first. Etc.
As a Jew, you should understand that the Romans killed Jesus because he was rebelling against their authority(and encouraging others to do so). The story about "the Pharisees, taxes, and give unto Caesar" only came about because Jesus was obviously preaching resistance to Roman rule. And even that story doesn't make it clear whether Jesus' followers should pay their taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
A good example is the rampant wave of protestant evangelism linked with the imperial expansion of the British Empire. The same holds true with Catholicism as Spain explored the New World, although their conversion methods tended to be a tad more lethal to the already existing population.
As I said, Christianity only functions when its rulers aren't Christian. They just use Christianity as a means to create slaves(Christians are the ideal slaves).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
As far as Jews selling "things to the goyim for profit" (an offensive term, btw), that is the nature of any business. Every retailer sells things for profit, or they go broke. The Jews also sold to other Jews for profit, just as Christians sell to each other for profit. That is the definition of retail business.
To say that Christianity is ascetic and anti-materialistic is laughable, at least in reality. It may have been taught that way, but is certainly not practiced as such. One only has to look at Congress, the heads of most corporations (most of whom are Christian), the "old money" families who are in control behind the scenes, and the young tech wizards, and one sees Christians wealthy beyond imagination.
Go read Karl Marx, On the Jewish Question. He discusses all of this in that essay. Although the essay can be best summarized with this line...
"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."
The Christians have become Jews. Look around you. The Evangelicals are Jews. The Mormons are Jews. All Jews except in name. It's why they worship Jews, believe themselves the heirs of Jews, believe god blesses those who support the Jews, etc.
It's all prosperity-gospel bull****. Which essentially promises wealth through faith. It is everything Jesus preached against and has nothing to do with actual Christianity. A total corruption by degenerate materialistic capitalists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
