Why do people hate Jews?

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by crazyfacedjenkins

I had to sign up because I couldn't help comment on this. I really don't understand when people debate that the Nazis didn't want to exterminate the Jews. My grandfather fought for Germany in WWII and let me tell you, they wanted ALL of them dead. Everyone knew it, and most of that generation still to this day really hate Jews.

If you will re-read my posts, you will understand that I am not arguing against the policy of extermination.

My contention was that the NAZIs did not endeavor to commit any particular genocide, but rather exterminate all undesirables (threats) from their territories.

People are taught to anthropomorphize the NAZI regime, but it was a corporation/government, and therefore incapable of emotions. It was a brutal and calculating enterprise. When you ascribe irrational hatred to it as a motivation, you are completely missing the lessons of history.

The NAZI regime targeted for extermination all Jews, Communists, Catholics, Poles, Serbs, Bosniaks and others within the NAZI sphere of influence. About 12million dead when they were finally stopped. They were a very EQUAL OPPORTUNITY organization in that way. This was not done to rid the Earth of these people, it was to get them out of the way of the NAZIs to make (living space).

The 'evil' of the NAZIs was not "hatred", it was the cold, methodical execution of the calculated plans of this radical Socialist regime. It was never about hate, it was about the purely amoral end-justifies-the-means policies of a radical socialist regime.

When you assign emotion to it, and put blinders on to focus on one SPECIAL INTEREST group, you completely obscure the real villain, RADICAL SOCIALISM. A society based on the pure principles of collectivism and central planning with absolute disregard for the individual. Socialism, as you may have heard, is responsible for the deaths of 100,000,000 people in the 20th Century.

So complete is our moderate-Socialist indoctrination in this country that the moment you try to delve into the role of radical Socialism in the murder of 12 million innocent people in WWII, the wailing of sorrow and pity for the Jewish people drowns out all rational discourse.

Jewish lives ARE NOT WORTH A CENT MORE than any other lives that were destroyed. To concentrate exclusively on the Jewish people is a great disrespect to the MAJORITY of people the NAZIs murdered who were NOT JEWISH.

You shouldn't give a damn that the NAZIs killed Jewish people, you should care that they killed PEOPLE.

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by JaJae

It seems fairly obvious, especially given all the first hand testimonials. It's a shame they are so quickly ignored.

"The 'Final Solution' to the Jewish question" should really answer anyone's doubts or questions as to what the Nazis were trying to do. It was government funded, promoted and executed. They made their intentions clear and had no qualms about it.

The NAZIs wanted to exterminate the Poles, Serbs, Roma, Jews, etc. etc. They wanted to sterilize them, send them to work camps to die, and sent death squads after them. The NAZIs were not obsessed with the Jews, they were obsessed with 'living space' within their domain. They were equal opportunity killers. They even executed The White Rose, a group of German (Aryan) teenagers who spread flyers opposing the NAZIs.

[7960]

^

No, I'm not going back to your earlier posts to prove this, but I can say without a doubt that the opinions you're posting on these last few pages are not the same ones you posted earlier when you doubted nazis even targeted jews.

[Linzyhop]

why is this thread not locked yet?

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by 7960

^

No, I'm not going back to your earlier posts to prove this, but I can say without a doubt that the opinions you're posting on these last few pages are not the same ones you posted earlier when you doubted nazis even targeted jews.

I never said that weren't targeted! I said that the NAZIs had NO PLANS TO EXTINCT them, or any other peoples. They did not target people outside of their territories.

What you guys have balked at is my contention that the NAZI machine was not racist and was not capable of hate. The NAZI machine was cold and pragmatic and attacked all people that got in their way with equal efficiency. Sterilization, transport, death squads.

[7960]

Originally Posted by RockPusher

I never said that weren't targeted! I said that the NAZIs had NO PLANS TO EXTINCT them, or any other peoples. They did not target people outside of their territories.

exactly how would one target a group outside of the territory where you are?

What matters is they *DID* target jews in every area they entered.

What you guys have balked at is my contention that the NAZI machine was not racist and was not capable of hate. The NAZI machine was cold and pragmatic and attacked all people that got in their way with equal efficiency. Sterilization, transport, death squads.

-you basically said they did not target jews, they did.
-you said the jews were allowed to escape, they weren't.
-you said the trains carried jews away, that's wrong.
-you ignored it when I said germans chased jews to capture them.
-you ignored that if jews were "allowed" to escape why were they rounded up door-to-door and sent to prison camps?
-you deny that even 3M jews were cremated
-you refer to the holocaust as an "invention"
-you talk about the holocaust teachings being "exclusive" but I'm not sure you know what that word means


-and you think "they did it to more than just the jews" somehow makes it not so bad, or that jews should shut up because "stalin was worse"

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by 7960

What matters is they *DID* target jews in every area they entered.

No... they targeted the enemies of the state in every area they entered. To single out one set of this group is to set them apart; to make the statement exclusive. To say they targeted Jews in every area they entered is a distortion because it implies that the Nazis were singularly minded, which they were not.

It would be like watching a gardener methodically weed out all of the various invasive plants in the garden, but you report that the gardener set to the task of plucking dandelion.

It's not that you are wrong, your statement is incomplete and presents a skewed version of the events.

-you said the jews were allowed to escape, they weren't.

That statement is not consistent with the fact that many Jews did indeed flee when the government sanctions began. Many left by train. Many by sea.

[/qote]-you ignored it when I said germans chased jews to capture them.[/quote]

Did the Germans go outside of their occupied territories to hunt Jewish people down and bring them back into Germany? Cuz thats what you seem to be implying.

-you ignored that if jews were "allowed" to escape why were they rounded up door-to-door and sent to prison camps?

You are not being accurate. I did not deny that they were eventually rounded up as were the other enemies of the state.

You ignored the progressive nature of the NAZI regime. It did not happen over night.

You may recall this poem:

"First they came…" is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.


When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

-you deny that even 3M jews were cremated

The cremetoria existed, to be sure, but I have not seen an explaination of how this many people could have been cremated in a short period of time in one facility with limited resources (fuel).

-you refer to the holocaust as an "invention"

I referred to the term being an invention, which it certainly was. Find any reference to the term prior to the 1970s please. I would truly like to know if you succeed.

The term is used to describe the Jewish persecution as a unique and exclusive event. As such, the Holocaust is an invention because the Nazis did not target them exclusively.


-you talk about the holocaust teachings being "exclusive" but I'm not sure you know what that word means

The distorted lesson of a single minded persecution of one group when many were targeted is to elevate that one group while not respecting others.


-and you think "they did it to more than just the jews" somehow makes it not so bad, or that jews should shut up because "stalin was worse"[/quote]


That is not my thinking. I think that because 'they did it to more than just the Jews' it makes it far worse. I think that all peoples should remember their dead, but all individuals should remember all of the individuals who were slaughtered.

It is important to understand history, so we should all strive to have a more complete understanding of it.

[hereticzero]

The Jews in Europe stayed mostly to themselves and in doing so, they established a commerce through which many accumulated wealth when others who were not Jews, did not prosper. This was viewed with jealousy and envy which resulted in the demise of many in WWII. Jews are mistrusted still by many nations because they stay mostly to themselves.

[Grouch]

I hate JEW because they make shitty music.

[mijo33]

i think the hating of jews started in egypt. egyptians saw jews as easy work slaves. afterwards as far back as i can remember. the plauge came. the christians needed some to blame. y not the defencless jews who could easily be conquerd? afterwards in WW2 hitler needed some1 to blame for thier losses. y not greedy once slaves plauge causing self reliant jews? then in middle of WW2 a ship was suppose to carry jews. the americans decided they didnt want them. the ship went to france. who sent them to russia. who sent them to south america then canada then britian. afterwards america withheld from sending agents to help free jews who would be possible troops unfortunantly by then the jew name was ruined. basicly it was blaming untill finaly we saw them as bad. im not a jew a jew hater or racist. this is pretty much fact. if any1 could fill in the blanks in the jew history i know i missed atleast 5 other times they were blamed.

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by hereticzero

The Jews in Europe stayed mostly to themselves and in doing so, they established a commerce through which many accumulated wealth when others who were not Jews, did not prosper. This was viewed with jealousy and envy which resulted in the demise of many in WWII. Jews are mistrusted still by many nations because they stay mostly to themselves.

Partly because no Christian could profit from lending and the Jews were there to provide that financial product. They were hated for their success as well as their conduct of sinful business....

But mostly because they do not assimilate wherever they go. They have remained a nation onto themselves, and do not give fealty to their countrymen over their tribe. This causes mistrust and dislike. They in turn use this dislike to justify their protective, self interested identity as necessary to protect them from outsiders who dislike them.

It is like a feedback loop.

You will find the same dynamic wherever there is an insular society within a society. Whether it be an Irish neighborhood in New York, or a Pakistani neighborhood in London.

It is not nearly as bad in the US because Jewish people have to a large degree assimilated into society and dont think of themselves as Jewish first, American second.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by RockPusher

I referred to the term being an invention, which it certainly was. Find any reference to the term prior to the 1970s please. I would truly like to know if you succeed.

The term is used to describe the Jewish persecution as a unique and exclusive event. As such, the Holocaust is an invention because the Nazis did not target them exclusively.

The term has been around a while according to the Oxford English Dictionary:

Holocaust:

1. A sacrifice wholly consumed by fire; a whole burnt offering.

c1250 Gen. & Ex. 1326 Ysaac was leid at auter on, So men sulden holocaust don. 1526 TINDALE Mark xii. 33 A greater thynge then all holocaustes and sacrifises. 1680 H. MORE Apocal. Apoc. 101 In the latter part thereof stands the altar of Holocausts. 1732 BERKELEY Alciphr. v. §3 Those Druids would have sacrificed many a holocaust of free-thinkers. 1847 GROTE Greece II. xxxii. (1862) III. 162 A holocaust of the most munificent character.

2. transf. and fig. a. A complete sacrifice or offering. b. A sacrifice on a large scale.

1497 BP. ALCOCK Mons Perfect. Ciija, Very true obedyence is an holocauste of martyrdom made to Cryste. 1648 J. BEAUMONT Psyche XXIV. cxciv. (R.), The perfect holocaust of generous love. 1688 in Lond. Gaz. No. 2401/1 We..humbly offer our Lives and Fortunes..which is that true Holocaust which all true honest-hearted Scotsmen will give to so good..a Prince. a1711 KEN Anodynes Poet. Wks. 1721 III. 477 While I thy Holocaust remain. 1868 M. PATTISON Academ. Org. v. 139 By another grand holocaust of fellowships we might perhaps purchase another respite.

c. Complete consumption by fire, or that which is so consumed; complete destruction, esp. of a large number of persons; a great slaughter or massacre.

1671 MILTON Samson 1702 Like that self-begotten bird In the Arabian woods embost, That no second knows nor third, And lay erewhile a Holocaust. a1711 KEN Christophil Poet. Wks. 1721 I. 442 Shou'd gen'ral Flame this World consume.. An Holocaust for Fontal Sin. 1833 L. RITCHIE Wand. by Loire 104 Louis VII..once made a holocaust of thirteen hundred persons in a church. 1883 B. M. CROKER Pretty Miss Neville III. 124 When Major Percival has made a holocaust of your letters. 1940 Hansard Commons 6 Mar. 416 The general holocaust of civilised standards. 1944 H. F. RUBINSTEIN Hated Servants 167 The siege will take a heavy toll, and few who live to the end of it will survive the holocaust that must follow. 1987 Sunday Tel. 23 Nov. 15 (heading) Aids: the new holocaust.

d. the Holocaust: the mass murder of the Jews by the Nazis in the war of 1939-1945. Also used transf., of the similar fate of other groups; and attrib.

The specific application was introduced by historians during the 1950s, probably as an equivalent to Heb. urban and shoah ‘catastrophe’ (used in the same sense); but it had been foreshadowed by contemporary references to the Nazi atrocities as a ‘holocaust’ (sense 2 c): see quots. 1942-49. The term is in common use among Jews, but seems to be otherwise relatively rare except among specialists.

[1942 News Chron. 5 Dec. 2/2 Holocaust...Nothing else in Hitler's record is comparable to his treatment of the Jews...The word has gone forth that..the Jewish peoples are to be exterminated...The conscience of humanity stands aghast. 1943 Hansard Lords 23 Mar. 826 The Nazis go on killing..If this rule could be relaxed, some hundreds, and possibly a few thousands, might be enabled to escape from this holocaust. 1945 M. R. COHEN in S. Goldschmidt Legal Claims against Germany p.vi, Millions of surviving victims of the Nazi holocaust, Jews and non-Jews, will stand before us in the years to come. 1949 Proc. Amer. Acad. for Jewish Research XVIII. 193 Problems of Jewish Hurban research.] 1957 Yad Washem Bull. Apr. 35/2 (heading) Research on the Holocaust Period. 1958 Ibid. July 2/2 The catastrophe which overtook us...The Inquisition..is not the same as the Holocaust. 1962 B. GLANVILLE Diamond xviii. 296 The holocaust..was the inevitable end, the logical conclusion of the pogroms, the Mosley marches, the hatred. 1965 A. DONAT (title) The holocaust kingdom. 1967 N. COHN Warrant for Genocide ix. 208 By the autumn of 1944 the holocaust was nearing its conclusion. 1968 Manch. Guardian Weekly 25 Apr. 10/4 There is now within modern history a compartment of ‘holocaust studies’dealing with the wholesale destruction by the Nazis of European Jewry. 1972 F. FORSYTH Odessa File 306 The mausoleum of Yad Vashem,..the shrine to six million of his fellow Jews who died in the holocaust. 1980 Jewish Chron. 18 Apr. 9/3 A memorial service..to mark Holocaust Day.
transf. 1973 T. BIELECZKI & L. SZYMANSKI Warsaw Aflame 5 Genocide against the Polish as well as the Jewish sections of the population...Warsaw Aflame was..written by men who lived through the holocaust. 1981 N. DAVIES God's Playground II. xx. 454 From 1941, Poland became the home of humanity's Holocaust. 1981 F. RECTOR Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals vi. 115 The number of gay Holocaust victims is substantial. Ibid. 116 At least 500,000 gays died in the Holocaust. 1985 A. RAMATI And Violins stopped playing (1986) 7 The Germans don't even admit that there was a Gypsy holocaust..there are memorials in Auschwitz for all the nations whose people died there, except for the Gypsies!
Hence holocaust v. trans., to offer as a holocaust. holocaustal, holocaustic adjs., belonging to or of the nature of a holocaust.

1651 CLEVELAND Poems 52 Where you might have seen His conscience holocausted to his spleen. 1828 Blackw. Mag. XXIV. 350 The retainers, ruggin' and rivin' at holocaustal sheep. 1871 R. B. VAUGHAN St. Thomas of Aquin II. 920 The first principles of holocaustic sacrifice.


So, the term used against the atrocoties of WWII started in the 1940s, but the world has been around alot longer than that.

It was even good enough for Little John Milton to use.....so I don't think Jews "invented" it. Or that it was "invented" at that time.

[Linzyhop]

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

The term has been around a while according to the Oxford English Dictionary:

Oh good gosh, I ASSUMED that everyone understood where the term originated.

It was the practice of old Canaanite religions, the 'old god' abomination that Solomon built the temple to. It was a ritual to honor Moloch.

Like when Japeth sacrificed his daughter to Moloch to repay his blessings in allowing Japeth to defeat the (I believe it was the Amonites).

Its literal meaning is to pass through the fire.

It was a ritual where you would burn your children alive.

In this sense, the use of the term to describe the Jewish persecution by the NAZIs seems to imply a much different meaning to me.



The most interesting thing that I found in your post was this:


[1942 News Chron. 5 Dec. 2/2 Holocaust...Nothing else in Hitler's record is comparable to his treatment of the Jews...

I would love to have good sourcing for this, as I am not able to find the original article. I am curious about the redactions.

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

So, the term used against the atrocoties of WWII started in the 1940s, but the world has been around alot longer than that.

It was even good enough for Little John Milton to use.....so I don't think Jews "invented" it. Or that it was "invented" at that time.

Just so we are on the same page, please note this from my earlier post:

"The term is used to describe the Jewish persecution as a unique and exclusive event. As such, the Holocaust is an invention because the Nazis did not target them exclusively."


I am going to need more than a poorly sourced and redacted quote to grant you that the word was used to describe the NAZI persecution in the 40's, as I have found no reference to it before the mid seventies. But if you can help me find the primary source, I would greatly appreciate it.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by RockPusher

Oh good gosh, I ASSUMED that everyone understood where the term originated.

It was the practice of old Canaanite religions, the 'old god' abomination that Solomon built the temple to. It was a ritual to honor Moloch.

Like when Japeth sacrificed his daughter to Moloch to repay his blessings in allowing Japeth to defeat the (I believe it was the Amonites).

Its literal meaning is to pass through the fire.

It was a ritual where you would burn your children alive.

In this sense, the use of the term to describe the Jewish persecution by the NAZIs seems to imply a much different meaning to me.



The most interesting thing that I found in your post was this:


[1942 News Chron. 5 Dec. 2/2 Holocaust...Nothing else in Hitler's record is comparable to his treatment of the Jews...

I would love to have good sourcing for this, as I am not able to find the original article. I am curious about the redactions.

Well, I am glad that you now understand its orgins and its modern day use. The citation 1942 News Chron, indicates that the first time this word was used in the frame of reference as the holocaust, was in 1942 in a news piece. This is the first time this word was printed in mass media.

So, if you don't want to "have reference" until the 1970s, that's fine.

But, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, which I can assure you, my source is of high academic standards, that noun, at that time, was when it was referred to as such. But, your reference is false, if the pretense is that the word just "got big" in the 70s by YOUR reference, I will have to trust the OED.

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

Well, I am glad that you now understand its orgins and its modern day use. The citation 1942 News Chron, indicates that the first time this word was used in the frame of reference as the holocaust, was in 1942 in a news piece. This is the first time this word was printed in mass media..

Your snarkyness aside (I CLEARLY have a far better understanding of the origins of the word than your gooogle 'research' can provide), I do appreciate the reference that you have provided.

I had a great laugh last night researching this HEAVILY REDACTED 'citation' from the London News Chronicle.

I will try to find the full text for you today....

This article used the word 'Holocaust' to describe the Nazi persecution of numerous people INCLUDING the Jews. In other words, this article uses the word to define the NAZIs treatment of all people. That is why it is redacted so heavily! In its original context, this article defines the 'Holocaust' to refer to the persecution of Germans, Polish, Czech, etc... AND the Jewish people.



YOU ROCK


I NEVER would have found this nugget without your help!

[Anjin]

I asked you for documentation, you give me wikipedia when I give you physical documents that are verified around the world, by Germans and by Nazis...where was the conference where they decided to sterilize all Germans who had a grandparents who was Romanian (and thus a Slav), no matter how loyal? Thorgrim We Romanians are not Slavs, we are of Latin ancestry, our language is proof. Also I would like to ad that in world war two the German did have some Slavs for allies: The Croats were on their side, and wold commit genocide against the Serbs who fought them all the way. My prejudice against you American people is that if you look on a map you can`t tell where Poland, Romania or former Yugoslavia are, but still debate our history as if your few hours in the study of the subject would mater. I know what "ad persona" means i just did it,but that reference to Romanians was too much.