November 29, 2006

NATIONALISM CAN ALWAYS MAKE ROOM FOR NEW GROUPS TO HATE (via Bryan Francoeur):

Racism on the rise in Europe, new study says (Lucia Kubosova, 11/28/06, EUOBSERVER)

Although there is a lack of objective data on discrimination and racist violence in several EU member states, a new study suggests that racism has increased in Europe, particularly towards the Roma community, Muslims, Jews and immigrants. [...]

"Roma are a particular target for racist violence and crime, both at the hands of the general public and public officials. Members of the Jewish community continue to experience anti-Semitic incidents. Rising Islamophobia is an issue of particular concern," noted Anastasia Crickley, chair of the EUMC management board.

"In effect, in spite of some heartening examples of good practice, I stand here today unable to say that there has been a substantial improvement with regard to racism and xenophobia in the EU member states," she added.

Within the countries that have filed data on the issue, eight countries - Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Poland, Slovakia and UK - have recorded a rise in racist crimes or violence.


Now, quick, everyone pretend the new Islamophobia is qualitatively different than the old hatreds....

Posted by Orrin Judd at November 29, 2006 2:40 PM
Comments

Quite true OJ. So many people tend to forget the Jews setting bombs on trains, airplanes and buses. Burning cars. The dramatic hostage taking at the Olympics events. Think you for reminding us.

Posted by: h-man at November 29, 2006 3:00 PM

What, no using Christian babies for motzahs?

Posted by: oj at November 29, 2006 4:04 PM

OJ,

The fact is that Muslims are putting bombs on trains and burning busses with people in them.

Last time I checked, the Jews haven't put Christian babies in motzahs.

Fear of Muslims is reasonable, fear of Jews is not. (for the most part)

If your main point is that Europeans are generally racist, sure, we buy that.

Posted by: Bruno at November 29, 2006 4:25 PM

Right, Bruno, and the fact that the IRA bombed trains and busses and bars shows that the Left is correct in trying to remove Catholics from the public square. And of course, the Jews did take up arms againest their rightfull goverment in the Warsaw ghetto. And the Oranges, bombing innocent people in Belfast. Never mind the Muslims, it's Monothesists we need to ban!

Posted by: Robert Mitchell Jr. at November 29, 2006 5:21 PM

Jews were central to the rise of Communism, a genuine threat to Europe, unlike Islamicism and its minimal number of adherents. But a justifiable hatred of Communism didn't justify hatred of Jews, anymore than the justifiable hatred of Islamicism justifies hatred of Muslims.

The hate's the same, just the scapegoats change.

Posted by: oj at November 29, 2006 5:49 PM

Wait a sec--since when has oj thought that Communism was "a genuine threat"? I thought it was No Big Deal and The Cold War Was A Mistake, etc.

In the long run, Communism was no threat because it was a failure on its own terms. It claimed to be able to improve the material lives of the people, and of course as a totalitarian philosophy it was incapable of doing so. And since it didn't aim to address the spiritual needs of the people (in fact, assaulted the entities that did so), it left the people both spiritually and materially impoverished.

Islamicism explicitly addresses spiritual needs (at least of its Sunni adherents). It is also totalitarian in nature, and so will not be able to meet the material needs of the people (at least not by our standards--a HUGE caveat). But at least it's got communism beat, in that it can at least plausibly accomplish what it claims to, and will result in only material impoverishment.

Of course, Americanism leads to both spiritual AND material wealth, as long as we can keep the baby boom generation from screwing anything else up too badly until they recede into their dotage.

Posted by: b at November 29, 2006 6:27 PM

It was no threat to us. We're also not nationalists.

Posted by: oj at November 29, 2006 6:31 PM

Bruno properly understood my sarcasm.

OJ, Jews looked favorably on Communism/socialism, but for the most part (unless there is some obscure factoid, I'm not familiar with) did not resort to terrorism.

Robert good one. The Warsaw Ghetto analogy falls flat though, because the German public new precisely what the resistence was about.

Posted by: h-man at November 29, 2006 6:50 PM

Communists weren't terrorists? Boy, you really do have it bad.

Posted by: oj at November 29, 2006 7:34 PM

Now, now, OJ. Play nice. When has the MSM ever covered the Communists harder then they have the Republicans? Compare and contrast the fall of Vietnam and the bombing of abortion clinics by one man......

Posted by: Robert Mitchell Jr. at November 29, 2006 7:43 PM

OJ

Got an example of Jewish terrorism, you would care to share with me. Something later than Samson wielding the jaw-bone of an ass. (i have noticed you use the same weapon)

Posted by: h-man at November 29, 2006 7:54 PM

OJ is wrong in so many ways here I'm not sure I can list them all.

1) To restate what others have said: being afraid of Jews because they make Christian babies into matzo or because of the International Zionist Conspiracy is a phobia (an irrational fear) because that which is feared does not exist. On the other hand, it is fair to say that an international Muslim conspiracy exists, one that manifests itself in the terror groups and terror attacks we all know. Even if all or most Muslims don't hold those beliefs, "Islamophobia" is a misnomer because the fear of actual groups exporting terror and Sharia is not per se irrational.

2) The Jews/Communism-Islamicist/Islam analogy is off the mark, because although some Jews were Communists, there is little to no connection between Judaism and Communism. Nobody reads the Jewish scriptures and interprets them as requiring Communism. The two belief systems are nearly entirely antithetical. On the other hand, Islamicism is easily derived from Islam, as demonstrated by the tens of millions who have done so. It's just the Islam knob turned up to 10 (or, one might say, to 11). Islamicists don't see themselves as rejecting Islam the way Jewish Communists rejected Judaism, they see themselves as the only true Muslims.

3) It's one thing to do what Russia and Germany and France and other countries have done at times: to suddenly see a small indigenous minority of Jews who have lived in their country for generations as a threat. That is irrational prejudice, as stated in #1. But when your country imports a huge number of very foreign citizens, so many that the demographics of the country shifts within a generation, that's another thing entirely. If your country suddenly has a minority shoot up to 10% of the population, and a mere 10% of those are revolutionary radicals, then you've got 1% of your population who actively desire to destroy your society, which is a heck of a social problem. 1% is a negligible amount in normal democratic politics, but it's a much larger amount in terms of revolutions: numerous revolutions have been engineered by such tiny percentages. Fear of such a situation is not racism, prejudice, hatred, or a phobia. It's common sense.

Posted by: PapayaSF at November 29, 2006 8:19 PM

OJ
Going out to dinner so I won't pursue this thread any longer, sorry for the smart alecky remark you can delete if you want to. I'm sure the issue of phobia will be address in the future.

Posted by: h-man at November 29, 2006 8:28 PM

The people who came up with "Islamophobia" were just expressing their envy for the homosexuals who'd managed to label those who find homosexual habits and behaviors distasteful as the perverts. No surprise the Islamophiles have had the same sort of post-modern success in labeling those who find their medieval practices and beliefs to be the bigots and intolerant.

The two groups (Islamophiles and Homosexualists) deserve each other.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at November 29, 2006 9:56 PM

Statistically speaking, a person in the United States, Europe, or the Middle East, is much more likely to die as the result of a state-sanctioned act of violence than from an act of terrorism. Isaelis kill far more Palestinians than vice versa(yes, its true, you can look it up); the bombs that come off stealth bombers usually have had, historically speaking, more innocent victims than those made with C4, duct tape, and an alarm clock.
The rest of the world (Judeo-Christian and Asian) is concentrating itself on imperializing the Middle East, not vice versa.
Though it might seem more comforting for some to view the bad guy(s) as foaming Arabs, realistically I recommend that those folks pay more attention to men in uniform.
And if not, lets just sit around and think of ever more ingenious ways to (re)present the Middle-Eastern muslim as an immediate, global, deadly threat to all humanity.

Posted by: Prudhomme at November 29, 2006 9:59 PM

While I tend to agree with OJ that hatred is hatred, Papaya's point about the Jews and communism is spot on. Marxism wasn't founded, energized, and advanced by Jews who followed the Torah.

But there is at least one qualitative difference between anti-Semitism (Jew-hatred) and Islamophobia: hating Jews has nothing to do with what they do or don't do.

Posted by: jim hamlen at November 29, 2006 11:04 PM

You need to read one of those grammar books. "Different" should be followed by "from" rather than "than."

Posted by: GER at November 30, 2006 1:15 AM

Orrin:

Jews were central to the rise of Communism.

I must protest. Want to reconsider that "central"?

Posted by: Peter B at November 30, 2006 6:18 AM

No.

Posted by: oj at November 30, 2006 8:05 AM

I think we can safely blame "Jews" for messianism of any type.

You know, for things like Christianity, Islam, Protestantism, Communism, Liberalism, any kind of "chosen people" type imperialism (e.g., English or Wilsonian Americanism); for Freudianism, Zionism, Big-Businessism, Little-Businessism, you name it. And of course there's always the self-help crowd to self-actualization-ism. And "Jewish science" and all that---let's call it nuclearism.

And it's all the Jews fault (OK Christianity too, but Jews---see above---are responsible for that), when you get down to it, that so many of us have successfully killed our inner pagan (in spite of occasional resurgences).

And it's really a perfect set up when you think about it. We just love to blame 'em and those Jews, they just love to take the blame.

Posted by: Barry Meislin at November 30, 2006 8:27 AM

Sunni Islam, Communism and Nazism aren't messianic--that's why they don't work. They're heresies.

Posted by: oj at November 30, 2006 8:42 AM

jim:

"who followed the Torah" cedes the argument.

Posted by: oj at November 30, 2006 8:44 AM

Communsim and Nazism are about as messianic as you can get.

Pure. Unadulterated. 200 proof.

Posted by: Barry Meislin at November 30, 2006 8:47 AM

Hardly, which is why they proceed, like Islam, from the premise that mere mortals can perfect society. That's the fatal rationalist conceit.

Posted by: oj at November 30, 2006 8:53 AM

Communism has as much to do with Jewish inspiration as Nazism does with the New Testament.

The religious patina you pronounce is a thin film, a very thin film. Marx hated God and almost everything else, and while his psychology was certainly impacted by his Jewish heritage (and his father's rejection of it), I doubt if his politics were derived from anything in the Bible.

If anything, communism is a reaction to "God" and the culture of the time. But that doesn't make it any more Jewish than the Tower of Babel.

Posted by: jim hamlen at November 30, 2006 9:02 AM

jim:

Yes, the fact that they are mere reactions to Judeo-Christianity obviously means that they are products of Judeo-Christianity. Neither would exist in a vacuum.

Both are rationalist arguments that Man need not await the Messiah in order to perfect society but can do it ourselves.

Posted by: oj at November 30, 2006 9:07 AM
« NOR DID HE RENOUNCE CHRIST: | Main | BECAUSE SOME THINGS ARE JUST UNPUTUPWITHABLE (via Gene Brown): »