This is part twenty-nine of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.
If you’re not involved in academic life or the Holocaust museum industrial complex you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel.
Since contemporary Jewish life revolves around the Holocaust and Israel the Jewish export portfolio makes perfect sense. Specialization and niche markets are the rage.
The weapons industry – no explanation necessary. Like other major industrial countries, Israel’s weapons’ industry is part of its cash flow and global cache. The Holocaust industry is less obvious, at least in its export capacity. But if you think conceptually of the “Holocaust for others” you’ll see how we have, for example, exported the Holocaust to Christians in America and Europe for decades. The Holocaust functions as a global discourse as well. We have marketed the Holocaust around the world.
Only a small portion of Holocaust trading is conducted in cash. Rather a global Holocaust bank account has been established where the Jewish establishment in America and Israel trades the Holocaust (thus Jewish suffering and a need for empowerment) for political and military support. There are also highly trained cadres of Jewish academicians who trade the Holocaust for a livelihood. This includes teaching in universities but, as well, advising genocide museums and the like around the world.
The Holocaust/weapons industry export scenario is relatively new. It’s more or less fifty years since these they came into being, a short time in the history of an ancient people. Yet brevity in time is made up by depth of commitment.
As Jews, we are deeply invested, perhaps dependent, on these exports. Our place in the world, our self-esteem is involved. Without the Holocaust/weapons industry, we would feel adrift.
Without the Holocaust for others we fear that our time of respect on the world stage is numbered. Without a weapons’ industry, we fear Israel’s global reach will diminish. Without that global reach can Israel survive?
The Holocaust for others. Weapons for others. Seemingly self-assured, we have become a needy people. Without others, we are less. So involved with the Holocaust and weapons sales we have forgotten how previously we had a corner on other exports, primarily critical thought and ethics. Various forms of artistic endeavors as well. And, let’s not forget science, when scientific thinking rather than lab experimentation was crucial to breakthroughs in science.
In many fields of endeavors we were paradigm shifters. Breakthrough types. The prophetic was thinly disguised. It was dressed as it was in secular garb. Still it had its time on the world stage.
The secular garb was a ruse. The thin disguise masked Jewishness raging in the world. Unannounced, it was still easily noticed. When queried about it, most Jews took to their closets. Like Freud, a proud Jew, who tried to hand over psychoanalysis to Jung. The reason: Freud didn’t want his “science” to be mistaken for “Jewish.” Which it was, of course, quite Jewish, with little bits of science sprinkled in. What a Jewish science it was!
The slayers of Moses as one writer sees it, each Jewish patriarch slaying the last one to assume his rightful place as the Moses of his generation. Almost all of the great Jewish thinkers of the nineteenth and twentieth century had this sensibility. Of course, most of them didn’t mention Moses, except Freud whose last book was exactly on that subject. And as Freud would have it, the real Biblical Moses was himself slain in the desert. The Israelites wanted none of the discipline Moses dished out. Off with his head! It isn’t a mistake that Freud announced Moses’ execution. After all wasn’t he, Freud, the new and perhaps last Moses?
Have I forgotten war, occupation and terror as high on the list of Jewish exports? Ask the Palestinians, Lebanon, Iran and other countries. I suppose we could place this in the weapons industry folder. Maybe I need a better catch-all term here.
9/11 and the whole security systems industry, heavily Israeli. Another huge Jewish export these days.
No matter what its size, every Sparta needs a “we’ll make you ready for war” industry and “we’ll provide you with the weapons to keep you safe” industry. So war and everything that surrounds war – the umbrella is big and getting bigger. If you don’t provide the full range of exports needed, importers might look elsewhere for what they need. Somewhat like the drug cartels, I guess. Deliver or we’ll find someone else who can.
Suppliers and users. Suppliers try to enlarge the markets for their goods. Users ply the world for supplies that are cheap, reliable and perform. Yes, another similarity to the drug cartel, since there are direct causalities, those who fight in the wars, and collateral damage, regrettable but also part and parcel of war itself.
Balance of trade is crucial for nations. You don’t want to import more than you export. As well, the market is always changing and some products may compete internally with other products. On the Jewish front Holocaust exports are being compromised by Israel’s export of war. For this and other reasons, including the passage of years since the Holocaust, we should expect the Holocaust export business to diminish over time.
Now it might just be an image problem, so Israel and some Jews in America think, hence the Brand Israel campaign. However, the globally circulated photographic images of occupation and invasion are hard to brush out. “Just do it” is all over the Israeli can-do attitudes. It may be that bombing Iran will enhance Israel’s image in some quarters but overall it seems downhill for the Holocaust. My advice: Don’t invest in Holocaust stock right now.
In financial newsletter lingo place the Holocaust in the sell category. Unload it as quickly as you can.
Suggestions for investing in other Jewish causes? Not sure. Though the Israeli economy is doing fairly well, there are all sorts of negatives embedded in the Israeli way of life. If you take one brick out of the Israeli edifice the whole Jewish state might come tumbling down. My advice: Sell at your convenience, at least hedge your bets.
Other possibilities? With the Holocaust and Israel on the skids other Jewish causes may also suffer. They’ve been in the shadow of the Holocaust and Israel for a very long time and fed off their success. I’d place other areas of Jewish life under a caution flag. Wait and see what happens to the Holocaust/Israel complex before increasing your investment.
Where to invest? The ever-pressing question for the 1%. If you’re leaving the Jewish stock scene, you might want to check out the China wage slavery scene. Untold ecological damage might be a warning, though. Industrialization and modernization are never pretty. Millions, in this case hundreds of millions or more, sacrificed for a future that will never arrive for the many.
Apple, though, seems good as a buy option. They are taking advantage of China’s “development” but don’t have corporate headquarters there. My advice: If you don’t care about the Chinese people, invest.
The Holocaust for others. Weapons for others. Jewish heritage on the world market. Up for sale. To the highest bidder.
Another tendentious piece of nonsense. It is in no sense true that contemporary Jewish life “revolves around the Holocaust.”
What Universe do you live in Hopi.
Without the Holocaust, the UN would have never voted for Apartheid Israel in 47.
Without the Holocaust, the majority of jews would never defend an Apartheid Israel.
Without the Holocaust, the MSM would never look the other way when it comes to Apartheid Israel’s war crimes.
Without the Holocaust, you would not have a purpose to exist to be on this blog, to defend Apartheid Israel.
What is the MSM excuse for looking the other way in regards to Arab crimes through the Arab Spring? Major war crimes have been committed and continue to be committed, instead of belittle the death of 6 millions Jews, why not start looking in the mirror?
LOL. Have a tissue.
One has nothing to do with the other. No one is fooled by your and the rest of your apartheid excuse makers diversionary tactics.
FOR THE RECORD.
My uncle, Master Sergeant Abdelsalaam Sarsour, United States Army. Born in Palestine, took part in the Normandy invasion, served with distinction in the battle of the Bulge, and his unit was one of the first to enter the Dachau Concentration camp.
In 1979, when he passed away in Hayward California, my aunt tried to return his body to be buried in our home town of Al-Bireh Palestine and the Israeli’s refused, forcing her to return the body to the United States (and in typically fashion the American Consulate in East Jerusalem refused to help). They refused the last request of an American Hero, simply because he was born a Palestinian.
@ Merk
Basic Hasbara 101 alert! Why’s everybody always pickin’ on me! Charlie Brown diversionary tactic.
@ Abuadam
Sorry. You just met Sheldon Adelson’s America. It’s understandable you can’t distinguish it from Bibi’s Israel. Hint: The “rag man” of the Battle of the Bulge is now the entire US military combat force, and it’s commander in chief is our POTUS, a minor staff member of Bibi’s entourage. Can you say, “USS Liberty”?
“What is the MSM excuse for looking the other way in regards to Arab crimes through the Arab Spring? Major war crimes have been committed and continue to be committed,”
The Syrian civil war has received extremely heavy coverage, as it should. What planet do you live on?
HOPHMI- “Yeshayahu Leibowitz, an observant Jew, said years ago that the Jewish religion had practically died 200 years ago, and that the only thing that unites all Jews now is the Holocaust.” (Uri Avnery) link to counterpunch.org
“The Holocaust for others. Weapons for others. Jewish heritage on the world market. Up for sale. To the highest bidder.”
I don’t know about this. As far as I know, the Zionists bought it all, lock stock and barrel, at fire-sale prices. There may be a few scattered pieces left here and there, but I thought the market was pretty much cornered.
They’ve done a heck of a job with share value, too. People very often think I’m better, smarter or more talented than I am, until they find out I’m not a Zionist.
>> People very often think I’m better, smarter or more talented than I am, until they find out I’m not a Zionist.
But I bet what really disappoints them is finding out that there’s no “magic” in your underwear… ;-)
“But I bet what really disappoints them is finding out that there’s no “magic” in your underwear… ;-)”
Nope, no magic whatsoever. Nothing but sheer, unadulterated actions and consequences, all quite rational.
@ eljay
If you cut a line around a potato, boil it for 15 minutes, and then dump it into a pot of cold ice water, when you take it out, the whole skin will peel off instantly. Beats the old army KP way anytime.
>> If you cut a line around a potato, boil it for 15 minutes, and then dump it into a pot of cold ice water, when you take it out, the whole skin will peel off instantly.
This isn’t a cryptic allusion to circumcision, is it? ;-)
Now get this, and get it straight. I am not putting a potato in my underwear. Neither hot, cold, boiled, french-fried or otherwise prepared.
Unadulterated actions in your underwear Mooser? Brings a whole new dimension to the net crush I’ve been fostering for a while now.
“It is in no sense true that contemporary Jewish life “revolves around the Holocaust.”….hoppie
Maybe not in the everyday sense for the average Jew (outside of Israel that is).
But for 90% of the so called Jewish community spokespeople—after you defeat their illogic and their lies and their black is white hasbara….they ALL fall back on the “Holocaust!” as their one banner to wave.
Look a what happens here and elsewhere—- every time the zios are caught out in a lie or myth or illogical…they try to use the holocaust as a trump card for the argument.
It’s sickening really.
And it’s really sickening all the litle zio bots and others who use it as “borrowed victimhood” when they were never within a 10000 miles of a holocaust or any oppression. If I were a holocuast surivior I would want to punch you in the face for using what happened to me as a way to excuse yourselves.
A short digression into hophmi’s commenter files, searching for the word “Holocaust”. One hundred and seventy one comments, not counting the one above.
Some highlights:
I’d argue at a minimum that if we’re going to experiment with putting two ethnicities of people together who dislike each other, something that has led to massive bloodshed around the world, we try it someplace other than a state borne in part from the ashes of the Holocaust.
******
Christian identity led to the persecution of Jews and others for millenia and culminated in the Holocaust.
*****
Whatever admiration they have, it did not stop them from colonizing Africa and Asia, warring with each other for centuries, and persecuting minorities, culminating in the Holocaust.
*****
You’re a sick person. There are 14 million Jews in the world and 1.5 billion Christians. There are many reasons for that, but two of the biggest are the missionary activities of the Church, which included several eras where the Church forced people to convert and others where conversion was necessary to enter high society, and the persecution of Jews by Christians; had the Holocaust never happened, there would be four or five times as many Jews as there are today.
******
I still don’t understand your point, Phil. I mean, you grew up right after the Holocaust. Do you think that maybe Jews were not feeling so wonderful about the Gentiles at that point history? Most of us in America have roots in a Europe where we were regularly accused of deicide and blood libels, expelled from every European country, and then slaughtered and buried in mass graves.
*******
Yes, Germany is a good friend. Unlike the rest of Europe, which achieved wealth and homogeneity through mercantilism, murder, and discrimination, Germany recognizes that given its history, it has no right to deny Jews the right to self-determination or criticize its record, which is much better than Europe’s in terms of how many people died to establish the country.
*********
I don’t like your tone, Eva. No one community has done anywhere near the work on Holocaust remembrance that the Jewish community has, largely because we were disproportionately its victims, and neither I nor anyone else needs to apologize for it.
******
The history of the Jews, particularly in Europe, in the thousand or so years before 1948, is one punctuated by expulsion after expulsion, periodic massacres, and after the Enlightenment and Emancipation, the worst massacre of all. That’s key. The Holocaust came AFTER the Jews were emancipated and given equal rights in Europe. That is why, no matter how successful Jews are in America, no matter how much wealth individual Jews may accumulate, no matter how esteemed Jews are, it is not security, and the equal rights rhetoric of the one-staters is unconvincing.
******
Most of world stood silent when 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, so I don’t really give much weight to world opinion.
*****
You keep glossing over the fact that whether this letter was written or not (and again, we’re not even sure it was actually sent), Israel had no restriction on immigration; under the Law of Return, any Jew in Poland could have emigrated. Whatever Meir’s letter meant (it talks of a proposal in a committee to restrict Aliyah to able-bodied people), Israel’s Law of Return was not changed, and certainly plenty of older people and Holocaust survivors emigrated.
********
Jews celebrate that redemption, not the killing. Do some draw parallels to suggest that Jews should stand up for themselves when threatened today? Sure. We are two generations removed from the Holocaust, a period of time where six million Jews were killed, many of whom went quietly to the grave.
******
Yeah, once again Woody, the word Holocaust was used in the parody, not the original. And if you can’t understand why people with the history of the Jewish people might see an international campaign to boycott them, particularly one driven by interests who have long hated them, in the guise of history, then you’re callous or dense.
*******
For a persecuted people given power, the Jews have been about the most benign group in human history.
*************
Those boxes represent the building of a state for refugees post-Holocaust.
******
Nonsense. Nowhere does Meotti use the analogy to imply that Palestinians are like Nazis. He suggests that the first step of the Nazi Holocaust was boycotting Jews economically and academically and all of his examples are of Europeans who are boycotting Israel, not the Palestinians.
****
“The colonial project known as Zionism only began to pick up steam post WWII less than 70 years ago. ”
Oh gee. I wonder what happened during WWII that would have caused that to happen.
*****
“I could hardly agree more, and for precisely the reason that Sand seems not to himself embrace: namely that the legitimacy of Israel both within and without the country depends not on some spurious notion of religious much less racial purity, but on the case made by a community of suffering, not just during the Holocaust but over centuries of expulsions and persecutions. Unlike the Roman deportations, these were not mythical.”
******
The one state solution required the Jews to live at the mercy of their Arab neighbors, which in addition to being unrealistic under the circumstances was a negation of Zionism’s main goal of securing a sovereign state where Jews were no longer at the mercy of others, a real concern today, and obviously a huge concern in the aftermath of the Holocaust.
********
It should be no surprise that an organization dedicated to achieving a state promised to them would reject a binational scheme that left their rights, and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Holocaust refugees, contingent on the grace of the Arabs.
*****
No one has indicated here what a discussion of Jewish tax farmers and Ukranian peasants has to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It appears that the sole purpose is to suggest that hatred of Jews pre-war was less than Jews claim it was. This seems only possible in a time when Holocaust survivors are dying off and memory of the Holocaust is receding. But that makes it no less hateful, and frankly, no less irrelevant.
These are not all his comments containing the word “Holocaust”. They are simply a representative sample showing how hophmi’s comments here, and his defense of Israel, regardless of what it does, revolves around the Holocaust.
How many times have I warned Hophmi that a comment file is not subject to Ziocaine amnesia? That it just sits there, and can be accessed by clicking his name? But would he listen? Nooooo…
Thanks for taking the time to do this, tree. It shows, once again, the lengths people in the BDS cult will go to attempt to intimidate those here who don’t subscribe to the orthodoxy rather than respond to actual arguments. This is just another example. I am gratified that you think I am so important that you’ve gone and done this textual analysis of my comments and excerpted my arguments.
It is, as usual, highly disingenuous of you, considering that many of these comments come from discussions relating to the Holocaust that I did not start. I’ve made 3,763 comments here, so 171 would be about 4.5%. You have made 2934 comments; 91 of them have mentioned the Holocaust. That’s about 3%. About the same percentage of your comments have mentioned Nazis.
Anyway, it is baffling that you would do so, since I am not hiding the fact that I believe the Holocaust is relevant in discussions of the right to Jewish self-determination.
Regardless, it does not begin to make the case that contemporary Jewish life revolves around the Holocaust. Anyone who suggests that it does simply isn’t taking part in contemporary Jewish life. I do; it is not at all accurate, not even remotely. Professor Ellis has been criticized for not spending a great deal of time in the Jewish community he so harshly criticizes, so maybe that is why his POV is so misinformed.
what is your definition of ‘relating to the holocaust?’ some hasbarists specialize is dragging the holocaust into any and every conversation and can ‘relate’ it endlessly. and when you say ‘that i did not start’ what do you mean? do you mean you didn’t start the conversation or you didn’t introduce the holocaust into the conversation?
From the gas chambers of Europe and from discrimination in the Arab world….
face it, the holocaust is humped like a cat in heat, insatiability abounds.
“what is your definition of ‘relating to the holocaust?’”
I mean others bring it up before me.
“face it, the holocaust is humped like a cat in heat, insatiability abounds.”
Maybe you’re humped like a cat in heat. You have some disgusting views, and unfortunately, you hurt the Palestinian cause by perpetuating.
@ hophmi
RE your: “I mean others bring it up before me.”
Where’s your proof, evidence?
And RE your: “I believe the Holocaust is relevant in discussions of the right to Jewish self-determination.”
What does what happened to the Jews in Europe have to do with the right of Palestinians to self-determination? Is it the gas for the Caterpillar bulldozers that crush native homes, prepare the way for more Jewish Israeli lebansraum? And, surely you agree the Nakba is much more directly relevant to the Palestinian right to self-determination, yes? Which brings up by great contrast, the question: Since when did two wrongs make such a right? Please explain. BTW, Antarctica still remains a place which is virtually a “land without people, for a people without land.”
Ahh.. at least he cares about the Palestinians. That has to count for something.
“since I am not hiding the fact that I believe the Holocaust is relevant in discussions of the right to Jewish self-determination.”
Oh my. What a sad existence, I mean I’m starting to really see the tragic dimension of it now. Making a life, possibly a living, out of manipulating the memory and trauma of the greatest tragedy in Jewish history. Good Lord, what that must do to a guy!
And BTW Hophmi, sure there can be an emotional connection between the Holocaust and Zionism if a person is manipulated properly. But logically, and historically, ethically and morally, there’s no connection at all. The idea that Zionism, and Israel will somehow answer the questions posed by the Holocaust is arrant nonsense. What Zionism does is help Jews (and all people) avoid the questions posed by the Holocaust.
“lengths the BDS cult will go to attempt to intimidate those here who don’t subscribe to the orthodoxy”
You mean looking at your comment file? Hardly much of a length, wouldn’t you say? One click does it, every time.
Great work!!
Prof. Ellis.
It makes sense when you write: “if you think conceptually of the “Holocaust for others” you’ll see how we have, for example, exported the Holocaust to Christians in America and Europe for decades.” I highly doubt the “exporting” of awareness of the Holocaust itself is necessarily bad [and I don't think you are portraying it as necessarily bad], although I would agree that bad things could be exchanged for it in return.
By “Holocaust for others” it seems you mean presenting the Holocaust’s story to others, since you speak of arms exports as “Weapons for others.” And by “we”, it seems you mean the Jewish community collectively since you’re Jewish.
Personally, I might try to avoid describing an entire nationality as acting collectively, since it suggests an absolute quality when in fact there are individuals who don’t act. But anyway, it seems the Jewish community does teach about and raise awareness of the Holocaust, using for example museums, teachers, and organizations. And actually I think that raising awareness of a genocide and rejecting it from a universal human rights perspective is a positive thing. Global society in general should know about the problem of genocide in the modern era, and the Holocaust is a major example.
Peace.
“it seems the Jewish community does teach”
I do beleive that if you stopped judging by ostentations and looked, you would find these are all private organisations of one type or another (foundations, corporations, non-profits and other types) and may use the word “Jewish” in their title. But they are not “Jewish”. And the “Jewish community” (that poor overworked thing) did not make them, private individuals or groups started them.
I don’t believe there is any mechanism to prevent anybody from using the word “Jewish” for any purpose. Nobody checks, to make sure it is, in fact Jewish. In fact, a post like Mr. Ellis’s (and others like it) is the only line of defense we have in the matter.
It sounds like you disagree that the community teaches about the Holocaust. Would you like to explain more how you disagree about this?
For example, do you mean most of the people don’t actually care about it being taught?
It sounds like you can’t read, but I already knew that, twenty nine times better than I should have. Nothing I will ever say will convince you there are Jews, and no the Jews. Which in my book, is two strikes. BTW, WJones, did you just describe Jews as “a nationality”? Full count.
I ask you again, find me the proclamation, charter, decision, declaration, whatever, which makes these organisations Jewish.
Well, I doubt I can read this:
“there are Jews, and no the Jews.”
Either I can’t read it, or I can read it fine and it does not make sense. :)
Be good, Mooser. :)
Both Mooser and W. Jones should read this, a response to the question, “Why are there so many Holocaust museums around the world?” link to aish.com
I urged readers here to also read it, and I thank both Mooser and W.Jones in advance for doing so, and responding to us on MW.
PS: Partial list of Holocaust museums in world: link to science.co.il
“you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust ”
If you live in a cave in Antarctica, that is.
Otherwise you will not have been able to avoid the constant stream of Holocaust books, films, TV shows, stories, articles, etc., etc., etc.
Israel wanted the Olympic committee to include a memorial to the Israelis’ killed in the ’72 games. London wouldn’t do it but did include a memorial to the victims of the 7/7 London attacks, which was preempted on NBC. I doth smell retribution
This is wrong. There was a minute silence during the Opening ceremony which was dedicated to ALL who could not be at the Games. It specifically was NOT only about the victims of 7/7 – didn’t even mention them – did you see the photomontage? Those victims were included, but so were many, many others. NBC simply did not show this part at all. That omission can be used to lead people to believe there was no memorial. And who’s agenda does that work for?
I only know what I read, it wasn’t shown here. The excuse I read from NBC was that the American audience wasn’t interested in memorials, or some such tripe. As far as I’m concerned it was a deliberate snub. It doesn’t make sense that American’s wouldn’t be interested because America loves memorials. Holocaust memorials, 9/11 memorials, white bike memorials, white crosses on the side of the road, memorials to memorials. The only reason NBC didn’t show the money shot has to be ideological, and whose agenda is that? Speculation? You betcha.
The memorial was dominated not so much by silence as by a rendition by the Scottish singer Emili Sande of the Reverend HF Lyte’s 1850-ish hymn ‘Abide with me’, rather a beautiful rendition to my mind, but then I’m a Church of England member listening to one of the best and most emotionally vibrant products of ‘our’ poetic tradition. This hymn has a status within English sporting tradition, since it’s been performed at every FA Cup Final since ?1927 – strange considering that its tone is so sad and that modern Cup Final audiences rarely darken the doors of a church.
The photomontage did draw attention to the 7/7 victims but there was no exclusive reference to them. The next day a BBC reporter was interviewing members of the public, one of whom (a woman) said that ‘it was putting up two fingers to the terrorists’, at which words the reporter seemed to panic and started offering apologies. So the 7/7 allusion was not missed. But there are great difficulties in finding symbols of mourning that are genuinely inclusive and not provocative to anyone.
There was no attempt to modify the deeply Christian words of Abide with me. Difficult for Jewish or Muslim listeners, perhaps.
“The next day a BBC reporter was interviewing members of the public, one of whom (a woman) said that ‘it was putting up two fingers to the terrorists’, at which words the reporter seemed to panic and started offering apologies.”
And the Americans among us (read: me) are saying “putting up two fingers”? What in the hell does that mean?
Ah, we Brits use two where you Yanks use just the middle one. That sort of meaning.
My google search found this:
I understand that in the UK putting the index finger up along with its neighbour (I don’t know how you call it) is offensive.
I was wondering what’s the origin of that, and hoping someone could confirm the story below.
I’ve been told that this is offensive because the english used to cut off these two fingers from french archers, and then show them their own, making fun of them.
During the Hundred Years War, the Welsh and English longbowmen were the battle-winning super weapon. The story I know is that the French threatened to cut off those fingers from longbowmen , if they could ever catch them.
Thus, at the start of a battle, the longbowmen would hold up the two fingers and yell “Come and get ‘em, Froggie bastards!” and similar pleasantries.
Please note that the insult is made with the back of the hand to the insultee.
Thanks for the explanation. That does explain why Churchill always did the”V for Victory” backside-out. Giving it to Jerry.
@ Woody Tanaka
Not really; the V for victory sign was used all over the allied world at the time, especially in the USA where it even was used to sell bread, not merely government bonds. Just a patriotic symbol to enhance any governmental and/or commercial agenda back then.
It shows the great american ingenuity, why waste an extra finger when you can say the same with just one!!
“Israel wanted the Olympic committee to include a memorial to the Israelis’ killed in the ’72 games. London wouldn’t do it…”
Good for London. It’s no place for political statements like that, especially considering that the conflict of which that attack was a part is still raging, and especially since the Palestinians have just recently been able to field a team and considering that the israeli team is as “Jew only” as the occupier-roads in the West Bank. (Imagine if the American team had no African Americans on it. We wouldn’t stand for it. But if israel is so racist, no one says a word.)
” It’s no place for political statements like that”
But apparently, it’s perfectly OK for the Lebanon team (and other Middle Eastern states) to do things like this:
link to telegraph.co.uk
>> But apparently, it’s perfectly OK for the Lebanon team (and other Middle Eastern states) to do things like this …
I don’t think that it’s “perfectly OK”.
“I don’t think that it’s “perfectly OK””
Maybe to you but it’s PERFECTLY ok to me! Lebanon hasn’t escaped Israel’s mad dog policy in the past decades. We will never forget! I’d rather have my hand cut than shake the hand of an Israeli who either participated in, condoned or sheered for, the destruction of my country of origin on multiple occasions..
“But apparently, it’s perfectly OK for the Lebanon team (and other Middle Eastern states) to do things like this:”
Well, hoppy, you might say that it is OK, but I don’t.
I don’t think it’s okay to put up curtains ANYWHERE to segregate people apart, for any reason, based on things like nationality. Or gender.
Hophmi, I clicked your link and saw the headline. What happened, were the Israeli athletes yelling pejoratives, throwing stuff, and making gestures at the team from Lebanon again? I mean, “psyching out” your opponent has always been part of sport, but there is a limit.
Like Freud, a proud Jew, who tried to hand over psychoanalysis to Jung. The reason: Freud didn’t want his “science” to be mistaken for “Jewish.” Which it was, of course, quite Jewish, with little bits of science sprinkled in. What a Jewish science it was!
The slayers of Moses as one writer sees it, each Jewish patriarch slaying the last one to assume his rightful place as the Moses of his generation. Almost all of the great Jewish thinkers of the nineteenth and twentieth century had this sensibility. Of course, most of them didn’t mention Moses, except Freud whose last book was exactly on that subject. And as Freud would have it, the real Biblical Moses was himself slain in the desert. The Israelites wanted none of the discipline Moses dished out. Off with his head! It isn’t a mistake that Freud announced Moses’ execution. After all wasn’t he, Freud, the new and perhaps last Moses?
i’d like to hear more about this, then. an interesting scene from ‘a dangerous method’ has jung, still the ‘student’ in the freud/jung hierarchy, nonchalantly contradicting freud’s historically inaccurate analysis (i don’t recall if the correction dealt directly with freud’s still developing silly psycho-’history’ of moses), leaving freud to literally collapse under the psychic weight of this affront to his authority. or was it a heart attack?
PS as far as i can tell, freud’s psychology is strictly a psychology of his time and place and personal circumstances, circumstances shared with only a few others in fact. in other words, his analysis doesn’t necessarily tell us anything generally about human psychology, any more than rats navigating a maze tell us about rats generally. or rats vigorously pumping a lever dispensing cocaine, to the exclusion of other, healthier ‘rat’ activities. (just ask freud and his ‘patients’ about the cocaine bit. quite a cure, eh herr doktor?) although freud’s theories can seemingly be ‘reverse engineered’ in a way, to induce similar pathologies in others for commercial benefit. see e.g. the turd bernays.
@ marc b
I look at Freud’s motive for putting up with , and enticing Jung, as similar to the Jewish Establishment in America’s mid-1960′s catering to Teddy Kennedy to be the acceptable goy spokesman for the changes in the USA immigration Act. And for the same reason, to wit: selling a notion sans revelation just how narrowly Jewish in concerns and motivation it really is. Of course, Teddy Kennedy was not of superior quality like his brothers, as the fish on his dashboard pointed out, the better to be a useful idiot to change US immigration law so that the US would be flooded with non-white immigrants to assure the USA would never be effectively subject to majority white racism, hence anti-Semitic. In ’64-’65, Teddy was the key spokesman for the idea that anchor babies and chain migration would never dilute the ethnic makeup of the USA in any substantial way. Now contenders for POTUS cater to non-white voters, especially Mexicans.
“…we have forgotten how previously we had a corner on other exports, primarily critical thought and ethics…”
Jews had a corner on critical thought and ethics? Precisely when was that?
“…we have forgotten how previously we had a corner on other exports, primarily critical thought and ethics…”
Jews had a corner on critical thought and ethics? Precisely when was that?
don’t you remember, colin? i have a clear memory of that date as if it were yesterday: April 12, 1963. yup, that is the day on which ‘they’ ‘ had a corner on other exports, primarily critical thought and ethics.’ after that, bored by how easy critical thought and ethics came to ‘them’, ‘they’ quickly moved on to writing TV sitcoms, off track betting, and pediatric dentistry. but, really, what a day that was!
Lol.
“Jews had a corner on critical thought and ethics? Precisely when was that?”
Don’t get upset, Colin. I’m sure he just overlooked the obligatory “til Colin Wright broke their fraudulent stranglehold on critical thought and ethics” in his haste to get the article submitted. Anyway, I’m sure a little enhanced argument will change his mind, no? As the German clock repairman said: “We haff vays off makink them tock!”
‘ “Don’t get upset, Colin. I’m sure he just overlooked the obligatory “til Colin Wright broke their fraudulent stranglehold on critical thought and ethics” in his haste to get the article submitted…”
Okay Mooser. I’ll concede the point. Jews did have a corner on critical thought and ethics. Until we met Jews, there were no examples of either critical thought or ethics anywhere in gentile culture. In fact, I’m not sure we should apply the term ‘culture’ to gentile activities at all.
Are you happy now? Is that sufficient, or is it going to turn out you need more still?
you’d think, colin, that when making broad, superficial pronouncements like that, ellis might have at least offered some historical context. even if he could narrow ‘the jews monopoly on critical thought and ethics’ to half a century or. but, alas, i’m sure i couldn’t wrap my pin head around the details anyway.
@ Colin Wright and @ Mooser
OK, all right already, we get it, the cuckoo clock is not helpful, no matter which side of its mouth it sounds from, the secular goy’s or the secular jew’s.
Jeez, I guess, beyond religious and enthnocratic versions of reality on both sides, nothing is useful towards the truth, not that anyone practical would ever pursue such an agenda? “You can’t handle the truth?” Of course, Jack N was acting.
I actually think it was just an example of the rhetorical…sloppiness…I noted the first time I pointed this exaggeration out.
There’s a kind of convention that either in criticizing or justifying Israel, Jewish achievement in general is lauded beyond all reason. This exaggeration can serve to inoculate the critic of Israel from charges of anti-semitism, or on the contrary it can serve as a (completely spurious) justification for Israel’s actions.
Either way, though, it remains an exaggeration (and a fairly offensive exaggeration) and I find it exasperating.
Suppose I wrote that ‘the white race had a corner on critical thought and ethics.’ I’d say the racism would be pretty blatant, wouldn’t you? Yet logically, Mooser would leap to my defense and vociferously attack any who dared to criticize my remark.
What would be classic is if I am attacked for this remark. I even kind of hope it happens. Nothing quite like watching people skewer themselves on their own hypocrisy.
“…even if he could narrow ‘the jews monopoly on critical thought and ethics’ to half a century or…”
Such a qualification would only make matters worse. As it is, Ellis is only definitely guilty of a thoughtless use of a rather irritating rhetorical convention — the progressive equivalent of saying ‘that was real white of you.’
Had he actually asserted that there was a half-century interval where Jews (approximately 0.2% of the human race) ‘had a monopoly on critical thought and ethics,’ it could only have been construed as a remarkable display of ignorance fueled by ethnic arrogance.
“Are you happy now? Is that sufficient, or is it going to turn out you need more still?”
Colin, I’m easy to please. Four gormet meals a day, supercales and goose-down to sleep on, and a show with music once in a while, and I’m satisfied.
“If you’re not involved in academic life or the Holocaust museum industrial complex you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel.”
Hateful nonsense.
I agree Izik, the export of the Holocaust as an ideological weapon to galvanize/fear-monger/guilt-trip/etc. the masses (NON-JEWS MOSTLY) /political opponents/family/friends/etc. towards Zionist interests IS hateful nonsense.
Shame on Zionism for co-opting the monumental suffering and near-total destruction of world Jewry during WW2 for their political agenda.
Absolutely DISGUSTING.
It’s like those ads we saw awhile back where Israeli Jews in America who were married to Goyim, were encouraged to return to Israel and remarry Israeli Jews to prolong their ‘line,’ lest they ‘vanish’. These ads were in commercials and even fake missing persons posters.
I’m glad you agree with how revolting Zionists are. It’s similar to the tactics they used to coax Iraqi Jews to flee to Israel following the Declaration of Independence and the post-Nakba period, as well as the Lavon Affair. All under-handed, immoral and distinctly ZIONIST – not Jewish.
“I’m glad you agree with how revolting Zionists are.”
So all Zionists are “revolting”, are they?
You’re nothing but a racist yourself.
““I’m glad you agree with how revolting Zionists are.”
So all Zionists are “revolting”, are they?
You’re nothing but a racist yourself.”
Logically, it could only be true that the poster is a racist if Zionists are a race.
They’re obviously not. Would it be ‘racist’ to state that all Republicans are revolting (after all, they’re overwhelmingly White and gentile)? How about all Nazis?
Are the Palestinians a race then Colin? you can call Romney a racist for talking about Palestinian culture, but when talking about Zionists, you can’t be racist when you clump them all together as a single hating entity like Cliff did?
I think I am catching on to how this works.
merk, zionism is a political construct. if someone says ‘communists are bla bla bla’..they are making a political value judgement, that is not racist.
whereas criticizing an entire ethnicity is, by definition, racist.
not complicated.
Not actually a very good definition, Annie. “Racial” usually suggests a biological connection. Culture is not biological. It is learned.
If I criticise Welsh culture, I am not suggesting that there is something inherently wrong with Welsh people. I am suggesting that they learn bad habits. Now, since there are Welsh people of many “races”, you might not want to call that criticising an “ethnicity”.
However, if I criticise a culture which is confined to a single “ethnicity”, am I doing anything different from criticising Welsh culture? Again, I am not suggesting that there is something inherently wrong with people of that ethnicity. I am suggesting that they learn bad habits.
If we slap the pejorative “racist” label on criticisms of cultures, we are, in effect, trying to forbid such criticisms. But then no culture can be criticised. Do we want to take that line?
“Are the Palestinians a race then Colin? you can call Romney a racist for talking about Palestinian culture, but when talking about Zionists, you can’t be racist when you clump them all together as a single hating entity like Cliff did?”
You’re kidding, right? You really don’t see the distinction between a political movement and an ethnic group? You would seriously bar criticism of Zionists on the grounds that such criticism is racist?
Culture is cultivated. A tendency to believe a carefully cultivated set of myths is culture.
“Culture is not biological. It is learned”….RoHa
Exactly right.
When people get into all these endless discussions on ethnics and Jews they need to remember ‘culture is what is learned’ —-as separate from any kind of hereditary or inborn traits.
““Racial” usually suggests a biological connection.”
Racial suggests a perceived biological connection. It tells you more about the person who is using the term than it does about the people he (or she) is describing. Once you understand that, the term is useful.
“Racial suggests a perceived biological connection. ”
Good point. If I suggest that the flaws of Welsh culture (assuming there are any) are a result of the genetic make-up of the Welsh, then I am making a racist comment. (The comment might still be true, of course. “Racist” does not equal “false”. )
Cliff, if you are going to comment on the Holocaust, at least have clue what you are talking about.
near-total destruction of world Jewry during WW2
Not all Jews lived in Europe during the Holocaust.
LOL@Murk.
What percentage of world Jewry lived in Europe?
Case closed. No shit, not ‘all’ Jews lived in Europe. My point still stands – that being, that the Holocaust was pure, industrial-systematic genocide of a population/destruction.
And your cult co-opts it and degrades it to make war on Israel’s political opponents. Ditto that for 9/11 and our country, in spite of our murderous history and short-term memory.
Merk says:
August 5, 2012 at 1:12 am
Cliff, if you are going to comment on the Holocaust, at least have clue what you are talking about.
near-total destruction of world Jewry during WW2′
>>>>>>>>
You mean…….
“Near total destruction of Europe.”
WWII wasn’t about the Jews.
WWII just presented an opportunistic cover for Hitler and the Aryan purist to get rid of the Jews.
And speaking of that. Last night I flicked thru a movie on TV that evidently was about WWII, I didn’t linger on it. But the scene I hit on was some sergeant talking to his recruits in which he was pumping up his men to go get the “Jew killers”.
Just another Hollywood little dropping of propaganda. Snowballs chance in hell some lowly sergeant knew a damn thing about the Jewish exterminations in 1941.
Very gratifying for me to see this Cliff. I thought I was the only person who felt that way about the use of the Holocaust in Judaism. But what a great trick it is. The tragic immensity of the Holocaust nicely covers that long leap to “Zionism and Israel is the answer”.
“…And speaking of that. Last night I flicked thru a movie on TV that evidently was about WWII, I didn’t linger on it. But the scene I hit on was some sergeant talking to his recruits in which he was pumping up his men to go get the “Jew killers”.
Just another Hollywood little dropping of propaganda. Snowballs chance in hell some lowly sergeant knew a damn thing about the Jewish exterminations in 1941…”
That’s kind of interesting from a clinical point of view. I’m reminded of the scene in Gettysburg where Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain rallies a regiment by telling them all about how ‘we are fighting to set other men free.’
We rewrite the past to make it conform to our current ideology. In Kingdom of Heaven, a twelfth century French noblewoman has an affair with a village blacksmith. Sure.
Everyone in the past turns out to have been 2012 Americans dressed in funny clothes.
@ Colin Wright
Did you chance upon this movie yet? –It sounds awfully similar to the one you described:
link to huffingtonpost.com
Of course Brad plays a lowly lieutenant here, not a more lowly sergeant… And Chamberlain was real: link to civilwarhome.com
Did you ever read the book based on a version of him, The Killer Angels?
“Hateful nonsense.”
LOL. Here’s a tissue.
“Hateful nonsense.”
I’m sorry, the part of your comment which shows these things not to be true, which shows that the “Holocaust museum industrial complex” did not come from America, and that Israel does not export considerable quantities of weapons, was unaccountably lost in transmission. Can you re-submit it, so your logic and proof will devastate Mr. Ellis’ “hateful nonsense”? Oh, that’s all right, I’ll wait….
I wouldn’t describe it as hateful nonsense. I’d describe it as the misinformation of polemic activist who simply knows little about a community where he hasn’t spent very much time.
The notion of a Holocaust museum industrial complex is funny; yes, the Jewish community spends a lot of time educating on the Holocaust; we are the main source of Holocaust education generally, and the reason people remember it today. Peter Beinart pointed out that proportionally we spend too much time worrying about Holocaust memorials and not enough worrying about Jewish education.
But we don’t “export the Holocaust.” We teach others about it. The Holocaust Museum in Washington is an institution that tells the story from many angles; anyone who has been there knows it encompasses much more than the Jewish part of the story.
The disproportionate number of Jewish activists in the human rights community is in part a testament to our communal activism on human rights. The lack of Holocaust education on the left (indeed, in places like the Soviet Union and East Germany, there was less than none), and the historical silence of the left on many human rights abuses, ranging from those in the former Soviet Union to today’s abuses in Cuba and Venezuela, indicates to me that radical activists generally do not put their money where their mouths are on human rights abuses, and that generally, their activism is more political than moral.
The list of the biggest arms exporters is here:
link to en.wikipedia.org
Israel was number 10 in 2010, and everybody is dwarfed by the first six countries on the list, the US, Russia, Germany, France, the UK, and China. And who are the US’s biggest customers? Countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
Israel exports a lot of things, like technology to help paralyzed people walk.
link to argomedtec.com
Israel also specializes in selling weapons and training to genocidal Latin American dictatorships when the United States cannot congressionally/’legally’ do so. Israel was a dear friend to such stellar beacons of human rights like Efrain Rios’s Guatemala and also the Nicaraguan dictatorship.
Israel also supported Apartheid with a capital A, South Africa because, well, Israel was and is an Apartheid (again with a capital A) state too.
Those arms deals are built into the system of keeping soft Arab dictatorships in power, hoppy. You are such a liar and effortlessly dishonest troll that you sincerely think you can slither by me and the rest of MW with this poo-poo attempt at Rebranding Israel.
LOL
Arms sales to Egypt are the same as they were before. Egypt is not a dictatorship.
No one’s trying to get anything past you, Cliffy. I’m just reminding you that all of this nonsense is doing nothing to solve the conflict.
“Arms sales to Egypt are the same as they were before. Egypt is not a dictatorship. “
That — to put it mildly — is somewhat optimistic. The man on the spot — Morsi — seems to be decidedly cautious in exploring just to what extent it isn’t.
You may have decided there’re no snakes left in the cave. He’s in the cave, and judging by his behavior, he seems to feel differently.
@hophmi
And what have you learn from it ?
He has learned that Jewish lives are more important than non-Jews, except when those Jews are anti-Zionist Jews who believe in a 1SS or equality for Palestinians.
He is a Zionist first and foremost, and his values contort to fit Israel’s ‘needs’ for a Jewish ethno-religious majority/superiority vis a vis population, voting rights, institutional discrimination, class division, etc. etc. versus the Arabs.
In this country, he has no problem being a ‘liberal’ and so he parades himself as a ‘liberal Zionist’ even though no such thing has ever existed. Just as liberal White nationalist has never existed.
“I’d describe it as the misinformation of polemic activist who simply knows little about a community where he hasn’t spent very much time.”
Gee, now I gotta ask myself: “When a guy says something like that, is he more likely to describe this person he doesn’t know, or is he more likely to describe the guy who is right there at the keyboard with him. Hmmm, which would it more likely be…..”
Ah, that Hophmi, put him in a dark room and he can always light up one wall, anyway.
‘ “If you’re not involved in academic life or the Holocaust museum industrial complex you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel.”
Hateful nonsense.’ “
I find Ellis’ formulation a little strange myself, but I suspect that if you asked most people what two things they associated most with Jews, it would now be (a) the Holocaust, and (b) Israel and the virtually perpetual violence associated with it. Tevye and Albert Einstein have been replaced by Anne Frank and settlements.
“Hateful” yes, it is hateful that ” one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel.” It is also true.
In the process of cornering the market on the sufferings of large groups of people, the suffering of two or three entire generation of Americans has been obliterated: the suffering of veterans returning from WWII were swallowed up in the narcissism that saw only jewish suffering as worthy of notice — the holocaust memorial in the US capitol was built before a memorial to veterans of WWII.
” nonsense.” yes, it is nonsensical that “one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America. Another major Jewish export is military weapons – this from Israel.”
Not only nonsense but extremely dangerous nonsense, particularly when a government that finds its ideological blueprint & battle plan in 3000 year old mythologies of conquest and plunder is now armed with the most advanced and destructive weapons mankind has ever known. In 1500 BC, man’s destructive capacity was limited to the strength of his arm and the (poor) quality of metals he was able to produce. Israelis have the same homicidal mentality as Joshua but the killing potential of Einstein.
“the suffering of veterans returning from WWII were swallowed up in the narcissism that saw only jewish suffering as worthy of notice”
You should work more on that angle. I’m sure you can finds tons of stuff to validate your statement. There were a ton of WW2 vet associations and stuff, and somebody musta said something.
fer sure, Mooser. My Dad used to run into all kinds of vets at the VA hospital where he spent so much of his life, after having been injured in WWII.
He was still alive when the WWII Memorial in Washington, DC, was inaugurated, but his poor health made it impossible for him to visit.
Ah well, maybe next war.
Nearly 59 years after the end of World War II, the National World War II Memorial was dedicated in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, May 29, 2004.
Scholarship (and passion) follows fashion as well. THere has been a strain of Holocaust scholarship that claims a sort of Holocaust exceptionalism–the most sensational example being Daniel Goldhagen’s “Hitler’s Willing Exacutioners” in 1996.
Its thesis was that Germans held a unique form of antisemitism– and that the Holocaust could not have happened anywhere else to any other peoples. For those who failed at Holocaust math ( 6 million Jewish sould perished– no matter that other ethnic/social groups were also singled out–and no reference to any other genocide) this book presented a different way to set aside the Holocaust as unique from all other atrocities. While some may claim that this book helped Germany along the path of acknowledgement and memorialisation (which must come before reconciliation)–perhaps the time was right; a full generation had passed, with the younger generation having distanced itself from that past for about 50 years. But, the book was unhelpful to atrocity/genocide scholarship in its denial of any commonality with other past or contemporary/ongoing atrocites. The uniqueness argument, although debated and mostly discredited in the US, has been the core of the instrumentalisation of the Holocaust to shut down discussion of the occupation/siege/oppression of Palestinians, and the authoritarian/militaristic aproach of the state of Israel to just about everything.
It is right to remember and it is right to say “Never Again” –for all people. Marc Ellis should know–he taught Holocaust studies at Baylor for years until he was forced out with the complicity (at least) of Baylor’s recent President Kenneth Starr. Yes, THAT Kenneth Starr.
“…the most sensational example being Daniel Goldhagen’s “Hitler’s Willing Ex[e]cutioners” in 1996…”
I found that book illuminating in three respects.
First, it did admittedly call into question the largely exculpatory formulations for Naziism. Scholars did tend to come up with approaches that more or less absolved the German people from complicit. Goldhagen did serve a purpose there. Although Goldhagen’s thesis doesn’t hold up, it perhaps did serve to advance the cause of seriously analyzing just what the hell did happen to bring about the Holocaust.
Secondly, and on the other hand, first reading the book, being influenced by it, and then reading some of the rebuttals made me aware of how important it is to consider both sides of almost anything. Read in isolation, Goldhagen’s book is quite convincing. Considered alongside a wider spectrum of comment and evidence, much of it is clearly tripe.
Thirdly, and somewhat tangentially, it reinforced my suspicion of political science as an academic discipline. Goldhagen is a political scientist. The practitioners of that discipline seem to take the word ‘science’ in its title bit too seriously — and like actual scientists in the physical sciences, try to formulate sweeping, unqualified statements of theoretical principle. That can work in the physical sciences. It works great in mathematics. It’s a mischievous approach to history. In advancing this, I have in mind not only Goldhagen, but also Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations. These attempts to explain it all for you with one overarching theoretical construct do more harm than good when it comes to achieving a genuine understanding of human affairs.
“These attempts to explain it all for you with one overarching theoretical construct do more harm than good…”
Only to the people who read it Colin, only to the people that read it.
“Only to the people who read it Colin, only to the people that read it.”
A lot of people have comfortably latched onto that ‘clash of civilizations’ stuff to give their incipiently genocidal bigotry some intellectual respectibility — and I suspect a lot of people found Goldstein’s ‘eliminationist anti-semitism’ schtick a convenient way of demonizing Germans, not bothering to think about Naziism further, and not realizing that a repeat remains perfectly possible.
It’ll just be elsewhere, with different perpetrators and different victims.
“It’ll just be elsewhere, with different perpetrators and different victims.”
And approval of torture is the first big step towards genocide, so try not to get impatient. At least we’ll find out where those salmon went!
Religious ideas in secular garb are mentioned. The theological term Holocaust = Sacrifice already puts a deeply religious interpretation on certain secular events. This interpretation calls for and depends for its effect on an even more important act of interpretation, ie the interpretation of the Hebrew (or Hebrew-Greek) Bible. Zionist claims were made in the light of the Bible long before they were strengthened by Holocaust historiography.
The founding fathers of Zionism were secular, non-religious people. Zionist “claims” were made in the light of the failure to assimilate and the need for an independent state, a point made all the more strong by the holocaust.
Zzz. Is it really necessary to point out the ways in which this justification is invalid?
“The founding fathers of Zionism were secular, non-religious people.”
And good, pious, believing, practicing Jews were inveigled into believing and staking their lives on the words of people like that? A shondah! Were they aware of the Zionist founders apostasy?
>> The founding fathers of Zionism were secular, non-religious people.
They were also Jewish supremacist and they coveted Palestine, a land in which – with a pinch of terrorism, a dash of ethnic cleansing and a soupçon of oppression – they could realize their dreams of a supremacist “Jewish State”.
What’s not to admire?
See Avram Burg’s article in the NYT for a superb exposition of the perversion of democracy and Jewish values by Israel’s fundamentalist character:
link to nytimes.com
Its exploitation of the Holocaust and its victims for its own political agenda is disgusting.
‘Judenstaat’ shows a rather odd sort of secularism, since it is envisaged that each group of emigrating Jewish people will be accompanied by a rabbi assigned to it.
The profession, perhaps sincere profession, of atheism is one thing and complete disregard of religious tradition altogether another. There is no disregard of religious tradition in Zionism. If you think that a certain religious tradition embodies a truth which should be so strongly respected that it rearranges the world your moral – even your theological – position is not, in the relevant respect, very different from that of those who are standard religious believers.
Anyone done a count of Holocaust Museums per country? It’s surprising!
The Zionist Federation expressed a desire and started their bid for statehood from the 1890′s. Long before the Holocaust. Various plans were suggested and turned down , long before the Holocaust, none of which stopped the Zionist Federation’s relentless push for a state in Palestine.
The UN Charter, International Law and Conventions were adopted in large part because of the brutalities visited on Jewish folk by the Nazis. Now we see an ungrateful Israel after having been given gratis the territory for a state, breaching the UN Charter, International Law and Conventions protected and sustained only by the US veto vote in the UNSC, while busy complaining about how biased the UN is.
All this would have been inconceivable without the basic claim to the Holy Land contained in the Bible.
And after Bible was written, they created international laws. Which one we are gonna follow. I choose international law.
“All this would have been inconceivable without the basic claim to the Holy Land contained in the Bible.”
Maybe, but sometimes I get the feeling that if the Bible didn’t exist, the Zionists would have written it. Ever see the description of colonial territories, or the Plains of the US they used to sell people on moving there?
There’s truth in what you say, as usual – but then it’s quite difficult to imagine what the actual divisions of humanity would be if there had been no Bible, no Judaism, no Christianity, no Islam. There would be outrageous claims by some on others, of course.
The Bible can be interpreted in two basic ways, one religious, in which the Holy Land belongs to Jewish people in defiance of normal morality but by the overriding and unique dispensation of God Almighty, who commissioned Joshua the Conqueror. The other way is overtly secular, with the Bible taken as the true historical record of the existence of a Jewish Kingdom and proof that it was Jewish people who were, by normal moral standards, unjustly dispossessed and who can therefore with complete justice claim restoration. These two ways are inconsistent, with the normal prohibition on conquest and dispossession affirmed according to the second yet overridden according to the first. So the secular approach slips constantly back towards the religious one.
“‘If you’re not involved in academic life or the Holocaust museum industrial complex you might not be aware that one of the main Jewish exports of our time is the Holocaust – this from America.”"
Yes indeed it is from America. Two small examples.
H.R.2643
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (Reported in House)
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
holocaust memorial museum
For expenses of the Holocaust Memorial Museum, as authorized by Public Law 106-292 (36 U.S.C. 2301-2310), $44,996,000, of which $515,000 for the equipment replacement program shall remain available until September 30, 2009; and $1,900,000 for the museum’s repair and rehabilitation program and $1,264,000 for the museum’s exhibition design and production program shall remain available until expended.
Adding insult to injury, the U.S. Congress has decided to give 5 MILLION of OUR tax dollars to Poland to help them build a museum dedicated to Poland’s Jews, that will be located in Warsaw, Poland.
110th CONGRESS 1st Session
H. R. 3320
AN ACT
To provide assistance for the Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw, Poland.
SEC. 3. ASSISTANCE FOR THE MUSEUM OF THE HISTORY OF POLISH JEWS.
(a) In General- Assistance provided by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the Department of State shall be made available to assist in the development of the permanent collection of the Museum of the History of Polish Jews.
(b) Authorization for Assistance- To carry out the purposes of subsection (a), the Secretary of State is authorized to provide $5,000,000, which shall remain available until expended, to the Museum for the History of Polish Jews.”
All bills available online at http://www.thomas.gov
The Holocaust Industry is the biggest con job ever pulled on the US and the world.
Collective World guilt claimed for what one group of war mongers and lunatics did.
The US had no guilt, the governments of the allies had no guilt in the holocaust…and those that were guilty are mostly dead and long gone.
Everyone with an I/Q above that of a cabbage knows that the purpose of the Holocaust industry is to politically empower and exceptionalize Jews/zionist/Israel and to funnel money to their agenda.
They haven’t taught anyone a damn thing about genocides except how to use the Jewish one to make money off dead Jews and dead Nazis.
All the same old beats of the world- /genocides/etc. go right on today.
What could be more ironic that the holocaust people’s state refusing to even acknowledge the Geneva Accords?
1. Have you been to the US Holocaust Museum? Yes or no.
“The Holocaust Industry is the biggest con job ever pulled on the US and the world.”
2. Please substantiate. What con? And how is it the “biggest con?” Do you deny the Holocaust? It’s against the comment rules, and you should be banned if that is your POV.
“Collective World guilt claimed for what one group of war mongers and lunatics did.”
3. What does opening a Holocaust Museum have to do with collective guilt?
“The US had no guilt, the governments of the allies had no guilt in the holocaust”
4. Please substantiate. And please let us know what your point is. Does a government have to have actual guilt to open a Holocaust museum?
“Everyone with an I/Q above that of a cabbage knows that the purpose of the Holocaust industry is to politically empower and exceptionalize Jews/zionist/Israel and to funnel money to their agenda.”
5. Please substantiate how “everyone with an IQ” knows this.
“They haven’t taught anyone a damn thing about genocides except how to use the Jewish one to make money off dead Jews and dead Nazis.”
6. Please substantiate. How is the US Holocaust Museum “making money” off dead Jews and dead Nazis? How will the Polish Museum do the same? Isn’t in true that Marc Ellis could be said to making money off dead Jews by this logic since he makes part of his living writing about the Holocaust?
Again, I’m curious as to why the moderator allowed through this obvious violation of the comment rules.
“Again, I’m curious as to why the moderator allowed through this obvious violation of the comment rules”…hoppie
I am sure the moderator knows my opinion on the actual holocaust versus the ‘zionized holocaust ‘industry’.
And I don’t owe you an explanation because you are a shameless ‘borrower’ of the real victims sufferings and fate.
hops, i don’t think the holocaust industry is about “a museum”. i went to the one near the smithsonian. for a list of museums in the US check wiki’s list of Holocaust memorials and museums:
link to en.wikipedia.org
“Again, I’m curious as to why the moderator allowed through this obvious violation of the comment rules.”
Oh criminey! Another “three-martini-lunch” in the Moderation Suite, and now they’re all sleeping it off, instead of moderating, like they’re paid to do. Hophmi, push the “Post Comment” button, and don’t let it up until somebody answers. And when they do, tell them to get back on the job, darn it!
“The US had no guilt”
Today is the 67th anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima that killed 140,000 Japanese civilians.
The United States chose to incinerate civilians rather than engage military-to-military.
Perhaps because the people of the United States have not contemplated the depth of their guilt — for two nuclear bombings as well as for the firebombings that killed additional hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians and 600,000 German civilians — Americans have assumed a false sense of righteousness.
Herodotus thought long and hard about the Persian wars against Greece, and how it came to be that a tiny power like Greece prevailed over the then-most powerful empire in the world. He concluded that the Persians displayed “arrogance and hubris, and failed to handle its earlier victory over Lydia with elegance and grace. ” Due to that hubris, Herodotus concluded, Persia was vanquished, beginning the collapse of its empire.
There’s a lesson in there, for those willing to see.
The head of the US Air Force that did the carpet bombing of civilians said, if the other side had won, he’d have been tried as a war criminal.
The Japanese fought to the bitter end on every piece of land the US took back, and when the GIs saw what the Japanese did to captured GIs they decided to do the equivalent–the Japanese beheaded their POWS and stuffed their genitalia in their mouths, or they worked them to death, etc; the accountants ran the numbers projecting how many American lives it would cost to invade and secure mainland Japan. A lot. And the Americans knew that every single Japanese civilian was being trained to fight the American soldiers, even if only with sharpened sticks.
The carpet bombing of the German civilians, e.g., Dresden, appears to have had a different logic; perhaps the Americans just went along with the Brits, who had been subjected to the bombing of London? In comparison to the treatment of American POWS by the Japanese military, the German treatment was good, at least as generally good as the American treatment of German POWS (until Germany’s surrender, when the American treatment of German POWS was very bad and on purpose–basically, starvation).