patrick.net

AmericanKulak says

And tend to be outspoken leftists, like Anita SarkeesIAN and Ana KasparIAN and Cherilyn SarkisIAN ("Cher"), "degenerates" like KardashIAN or Christy CanYON (real name: Melissa BardizbanIAN)

Add to this list Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley from KISS (I don't know their real "secret names").

RWSGFY says

Again, why?

It's fundamental human psychology.

Maybe you don't care if you're excluded from some club, but what if that club were 2% of the population but owned 30% of the wealth? Even then, that's not necessarily a reason for hatred. The Parsis of India are a much smaller and even more exclusive minority with a similar sized stake in the Indian economy, yet they are not hated. I think that's because Parsis go out of their way to get along and be liked. There are supposedly many Indian charities and hospitals funded by Parsis.

But Judaism is tuned in the opposite direction, with active dislike for the majority culture. People are people so it's not a hard and fast rule, but because I look very goyish and yet have some Jewish background, I'm tuned to notice that dislike and I do see it.

So there's a kind of ping-pong effect between anti-Semitism and anti-goyism, which are mirror images of each other in a way, and amplify each other. But I think it all starts from the carefully tended separation between Jews and non-Jews which is the core religious principle of Judaism.

Maybe it's just evolution. The Jews that are fans of the majority culture don't remain Jews very long, as their children and grandchildren intermarry.

stereotomy says

Add to this list Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley from KISS (I don't know their real "secret names").

Gene is Chaim Weitz (not sure of the last name). Stanley, similar.

Throw in Neil Diamond or Issur Danielovitch or Jeffrey Hyman... and a thousand other examples

Another point of similarity for a small ethnic group that punches way above it's weight and has it's own religion/denomination.

Patrick says

Maybe it's just evolution. The Jews that are fans of the majority culture don't remain Jews very long, as their children and grandchildren intermarry.

Oops.

Right, I think there are huge economic benefits to being part of a very tight and very closed ethnic group which is inclined toward commerce.

I actually got this idea from Thomas Sowell many years ago while leafing through one of his books in a bookstore. He pointed out that the same pattern happens over and over:

- the Chinese in SE Asia dominate commerce there and periodically get massacred
- the Indians in Uganda dominated commerce there until they were kicked out
- the Igbo in Nigeria dominated commerce there and were massacred during the Biafran War in the 1960's

Patrick says

I think that's because Parsis go out of their way to get along and be liked. There are supposedly many Indian charities and hospitals funded by Parsis.

I dunno on this one, there are a shitton of hospitals, museums, charities opened by Jews, from the Arsht Arts Center in Miami to YMCAs all over the country (thanks to Julius Rosenwald of Sears who matched donations) despite not being Christian himself. That was back in the day when the Y wasn't woke like today.

EDIT: Although almost all charities are woke today. This is because letting kids get radicalized and adopt Internalized Leftism in College produces a generation that when it enters an institution, transforms it.

Patrick says

- the Indians in Uganda dominated commerce there until they were kicked out

Indians are regretting their support of ANC in South Africa now for this very reason.

Patrick says

Right, I think there are huge economic benefits to being part of a very tight and very closed ethnic group which is inclined toward commerce.

Obligatory:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CHYD83-sogE&pp=ygUUZG91ZyB0aGUgaGVhZCBqZXdpc2g%3D

PS. So you do want to convert? 🙃

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/yiddish-ashkenazi-woodworth

Weinreich’s first innovation in the History was to argue, against apparent common sense and abundant personal experience, that Yiddish was formed not through isolation but through constant interaction combined with a chosen separateness. The walled-off ghettos of 18th-century European cities, although they preserved Yiddish, were not the environment that gave it life. Weinreich’s innovation was to argue that “Jewish otherness”—and the language that goes with it—“cannot be the result of ‘exclusion’; it is not even the result of exile.”

Where others had persistently told the story of confinement, prejudice, and persecution, Weinreich spoke of independence, self-government, selfassertion, and community building. It was undeniable that “without communal separateness there is no separate language,” and so the separateness of the Ashkenazi community was necessary for Yiddish to arise. But the modern explanation for that separateness, according to Weinreich, got the story exactly backward. Nineteenth-century Jewish activists, demanding rights of citizenship, created the story that the Jews had been locked in ghettos since the Middle Ages, “and thus excluded from society at large and its intellectual development; in this forced isolation”—an influential Jewish assimilationist argued—“both their mode of life in general and their language in particular became corrupted.” ...

For Weinreich, based on both the linguistic and historical evidence, there could be no doubt that up until the 18th century “the Jews wanted to be by themselves. … Separate residence (strange as this may appear in the light of present Jewish and general conceptions of rights) was part of the privileges granted the Jews at their own request” so they could worship together; provide for their own slaughterhouse, bathhouse, cemetery, and social halls; study together; run their own rabbinic courts; supervise tax collection; and when necessary, protect themselves from attacks.

Archeology supports this part of Weinreich’s argument. Befuddled tour guides in Prague struggle to explain why, given the expectation of exclusion of Jews, the city’s famous Jewish quarter, Josefov, is so central to the old town. (One misguided explanation is that the Jews were given land near the river that was too marshy for the other city inhabitants, prone to flooding and disease-bearing miasmas.) But Prague’s Josefov is not an isolated case—it is typical. Weinreich’s point is that exclusion could also be exclusivity; restrictions also came with designated privileges. In Trier, Mainz, Aachen, Cologne, Worms, and more than 100 medieval towns in Central Europe, the Jewish district was both a central and a prime location, close to the economic heart of the city. The German Bishop Rüdiger, granting a charter of the city of Speyer in 1084 wrote, “I thought that I would increase the glory of our city a thousandfold if I were to include Jews.”

Voltaire, in his Dictionary, wrote:

The Jews are an ignorant and barbarous people, who have long united the most sordid avarice with the most detestable superstition and the most invincible hatred for every people by whom they are tolerated and enriched.

Let's see. Objectively speaking, it doesn't make any sense to call Jews ignorant or barbarous.

Sordid avarice? Well, Sam Bankman-Fried is just one of a very long line of Jews doing similar things. There does seem to be a pattern there, though it's not unique to Jews. There is even a saying in Yiddish, "Don't waste your time suspecting a Jew. He is certainly a thief."

Superstition? No more than other religions.

Hatred for other peoples? I do think dislike for and separation from outsiders is the core of Judaism as well as of Islam. But the Muslims get angry and want to kill you for not joining them, while the Jews just never invite you to join. In any case, all minority ethnic religions have to encourage a dislike of outsiders or they will rapidly be assimilated and cease to exist as a distinct group. It's a kind of evolutionary selection.

Patrick says

In any case, all minority ethnic religions have to encourage a dislike of outsiders or they will rapidly be assimilated and cease to exist as a distinct group. It's a kind of evolutionary selection.

Bad excuse though. I'm me. Fuck with me and you'll feel some wrath. I'm a huge minority if we're talking religion. Any of them. I have no affiliation outside of my direct family. I have friends and they know my take. So we're good.

Fact is as long as you're polite with me you won't get the shit treatment. You talk about your religion I'm out. We're animals. We're no different than the squirrel that you just ran over. We just have language which ultimately is just used to fuck with dumb people is my take. No problem with people believing in fiction novels, just don't push a bad book on me.

As comic illustrations of how the core of Judaism is opposition to the majority, consider:

- Christians write from left to right, so Jews write in the other direction, even though it's less efficient because then your right hand covers and maybe smears what you just wrote.

- Christians have to take their hats of in church, but Jews require hats on in the synagogue.

- Christians call their house of worship a "church" from κῡριακός (kūriakós). Literally, "the Lord's House", but Jews require everyone to use a different Greek term, σῠνᾰγωγή (sŭnăgōgḗ) meaning “assembly, gathering”.

Just read a great line in Livy:

Shared danger is the strongest of bonds; it will keep men united in spite of mutual dislike and suspicion.

Patrick says

all minority ethnic religions have to encourage a dislike of outsiders or they will rapidly be assimilated and cease to exist as a distinct group.

Autocelphalous Churches ... "Are you Serbian? Why are you here if you're not even married to a Romanian? Great Commission? Father Seraphim never told me about no Commission, what are we, Protestants?"

There's an old joke that the last time Greek Orthodox tried converting anybody was St. Cyril.

Interestingly, the most evangelical are the Russians... because of their yuge expansion over Eurasia beginning in the 1600s.

Yes, and this tends to get them massacred rather like the Jews, the Armenians being the most obvious example. The Greeks and Syrian Orthodox were also massacred by the Turks.

Patrick says

Yes, and this tends to get them massacred rather like the Jews, the Armenians being the most obvious example. The Greeks and Syrian Orthodox were also massacred by the Turks.

Yes, and also interestingly... disliked by the Spaniards in the 1500-1600s when Spain ran parts of Sicily, Italy, Malta, etc.

Their "dual allegiance" because a large number of Greeks came to several Med Islands from the Ottoman Empire, were mostly involved in trade from the Ottoman Empire, and practiced a very different looking and sounding form of religion.

A conversation I had on https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-jfk-et-al/comments

patrick.net/memes

In case you want the real explanation for antisemitism: it's an inevitable result of the Jewish conception of what it
means to be holy, ie to be a "people set apart":

https://patrick.net/post/1381234/2024-04-26-the-hebrew-idea-of-holiness-is

Unfortunately, that's the very core of the religion, so mutual mistrust is inevitable.

PN Schwartz

This analysis is entirely wrong. In ancient Roman times, Jews were a proseletyzing people and oppressed people, slaves,
and even some elites joined the Jewish nation--because it is about the law of the liberated slaves, the law that
prevents lifetimes of servitude and misery. No big shock that the Roman nazi leaders spent hundreds of years trying to
wipe out the Jews, forcing Jews to stay quieter, but it was not always the case. This is all backed up by writings of
ancient Roman historians. Every fascist empire in history despises the Jews and loves the antithesis--clerical fascism
(often islam).

patrick.net/memes

There were a lot of converts to Judaism in the Roman Empire, but very little active proselytizing. The Jewish religion
and ethnic group essentially sees itself as a biological family, the literal descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
so it doesn't make sense to go out and look for converts.

The Romans found the Jews difficult to assimilate and a threat to the unity of the Empire, so this caused some tension.
The Romans would pick up foreign gods like Isis, and conquered groups would adopt Roman gods, but the Jews were quite
strict about not worshipping any foreign gods, only their own single God.

Christians also refused to adopt foreign gods, but were very aggressive about proselytizing, so one can see
Christianity as the solution to that tension - a highly modified form of Judaism that is not a particular ethnic group
or family, and so it spread much more quickly, eventually displacing the Roman religion entirely.

So I still maintain that it is exactly the deliberate separation that is central to Judaism which creates antisemitism.

PN Schwartz

there are texts that say otherwise. Tell us why Hitler did not have any Jewish SS units. He had Muslim units of course,
so he was willing to 'play ball' with anyone with the right characteristics.

patrick.net/memes

I don't know of any ancient texts talking about significant Jewish proselytizing. Do you have a name or a book?

Lol, you're seriously asking why Hitler didn't have any Jewish SS units?

I've heard he liked Muslims because they themselves were not fond of the Jews as a rule, though there's a long history
oscillating between good and bad relations between Muslims and Jews.

PN Schwartz

Muslims and clerical fascist Christians (rabid Catholics) will do any kind of evil to obtain their glorious afterlife.
Jews have none of this concept. It is not possible to get any remotely observant Jew to destroy this world based on
belief of a glorious afterlife. So Hitler loved the ones that believed this bs, and despised the resistance.

patrick.net/memes

I do agree that Judaism was at first entirely about this life. Basically "if you will diligently obey my commandments...
I will give grass in your fields for your cattle, and you will eat and be sated." Nothing about heaven.

Later though, Judaism did start to teach the belief in a glorious afterlife.

PN Schwartz

Yes tell us why no Jewish SS units. Should not be hard for you to explain. Regarding the proselytizing Jews, it is
covered in Francisco Gil-White's book Crux, chapter one, https://app.box.com/s/86jltj9p8i Unlike other religions the
Jews welcomed gentiles to see and hear the services, it is commanded to read the law so that all can understand. There
are no great secrets. It was only after the Roman and various European genocides of the anti-fascist Jews that Judaism
turned more inward. So your claim that this inward nature is the reason for Jewhatred is absurd. The reason is fully
contained in the Torah--it is a lot of law that protects people from fascist leaders. Of course nazi type leaders
despise this, to this very day.

patrick.net/memes

OK, Hitler's whole shtick was that Jews were an alien race, separate from the Germans, and abusing and exploiting the
Germans. He saw Jews as genetically alien, therefore impossible to ever be German even if they wanted to be. His SS was
composed of people who felt the same way.

There are lot of PDFs at the link you gave, but they all seem modern. What I'm looking for is some evidence in ancient
writings that Jews were actively proselytizing.

I'm certain that Judaism always had a very strict boundary between Jews and outsiders. There was literally a wall within
the temple in Jerusalem with a warning that non-Jews would be killed if they went over the wall:

"Attached to the Soreg were inscriptions in Greek and Latin warning Gentiles against trespassing under penalty of death.
One such inscription, discovered archaeologically and known as the "Temple Warning Inscription," reads (in translation
from Greek):

No foreigner is to enter within the balustrade around the sanctuary and the enclosure. Whoever is caught will be
responsible for his own death that will follow."

PN Schwartz

It's covered in chapter 1 of Crux. My historians rely on the content of the Torah, where it is commanded for the
services to be open to all, and read aloud, as well as the archaelogical evidence as mentioned. My historians do not
have a pro-nazi bias, which yours do have. It is obviously absurd that a movement of liberated slaves, that by all
estimates was growing greatly in the Roman empire would be 'inward turning'. This only started after genocides by the
fascist elites. Hitler made it clear why he did not like the Jews: Jews do not believe in a glorious afterlife, and thus
cannot be made to slaughter and enslave people as the long tradition of nazi leaders want their minions to do. Muslims
are the best at this of course.

note that I'm fully aware that around 99% of the 'historians' we are exposed to in the West have a pro-nazi, anti-Jew
bias. This is because the romans established a pattern where teaching others to despise the liberated slave movement of
the Jews is the most important fascist trait they must promulgate to their disciples. But there are objective
historians, which is what I use. Francisco used to teach at U Penn until being fired for not following State Department
policy regarding lying about Israel.

patrick.net/memes

The Torah does not encourage gentiles to convert to Judaism though. It stresses the idea of the separation and specialness of the Jews.

Not sure what you mean by "Nazi" in the ancient world. Was Josephus a Nazi?

Those liberated slaves saw themselves as all one biological family, separate from other slaves.

Jews actually do officially believe in a glorious afterlife now.

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4848230/jewish/Heaven-and-the-Afterlife.htm

I think it's an influence from Zoroastrianism during the Persian period. The Zoroastrians had those ideas of heaven, hell, final judgement, and resurrection.

PN Schwartz

The Torah is to be read out loud so that all can hear. It doesn't stress specialness other than that the Jews are chosen
to fullfil the mitzvot. But anyone can join the Jewish nation. But fascist haters will not only choose not to, but
fabricate things that help them feel good about hating those that improve the world. The Jewish belief in eventual
messiah/afterlife is behind the mitzvot--Jews must do good in this world.

patrick.net/memes

So you first claimed that Jews don't believe in an afterlife like "Nazis", and now claim that they do?

Note also that ancient Greek and Roman "Nazi" beliefs about the afterlife did not involve heaven like you claim. Their
beliefs were pretty much identical to ancient Jewish beliefs there until Jews and Christians introduced heaven. Greeks
and Romans and ancient Jews all believed that everyone would go to some moderately unpleasant place. Sheol and Hades are
about the same.

Anyhow, I'm not saying Jews are bad, only that Judaism itself inherently causes antisemitism by its exclusivity.
Semitism creates antisemitism. Antisemitism is then used as justification of the original semitism. Everyone should just
admit that that's how it works and how it always will work.

Boy, that PN Schwarz was going crazy trying to gaslight and misdirect. Of course, the original comment is deleted.

Patrick says

- Christians write from left to right, so Jews write in the other direction, even though it's less efficient because then your right hand covers and maybe smears what you just wrote.

Right to Left is traditional and still widespread in the Middle East:

Nabatean, Arabic, Sumerian, Phoenician, etc. - all originally, or still, written right to left.

Aramaic, the first language of Christians and probably Christ and most of the Apostles themselves, was also written right to left.

Chinese and many other East Asian languages were also traditionally written vertically from right to left until recently. Old Coptic also was written Right-Left until centuries of Ptolemaic Rule switched that preference. Egyptian Hieroglyphs were written in either direction.


The reason is simple: you hold down the clay tablet with your left hand, so you start chiseling from the right side. Most written language began with chiseling on clay or wax.


The reason Europeans write left is because the Greeks were the Freaks decided to write their version of Phoenician characters .... AFTER they switched from chiseling to writing characters. Romans learned writing from the Greeks, and the rest of Europe from the Romans.

Really ancient Greek was Chiseled... Right to Left.

Patrick says

As comic illustrations of how the core of Judaism is opposition to the majority

And they enthusiastically don't hesitate to financially screw over the Gentiles

.

AmericanKulak says

The reason is simple: you hold down the clay tablet with your left hand, so you start chiseling from the right side. Most written language began with chiseling on clay or wax.

The reason Europeans write left is because the Greeks were the Freaks decided to write their version of Phoenician characters .... AFTER they switched from chiseling to writing characters. Romans learned writing from the Greeks, and the rest of Europe from the Romans.

Really ancient Greek was Chiseled... Right to Left.

This needs to go in the TIL or "the more you learn " thread.

AmericanKulak says

The reason is simple: you hold down the clay tablet with your left hand, so you start chiseling from the right side. Most written language began with chiseling on clay or wax.

The reason Europeans write left is because the Greeks were the Freaks decided to write their version of Phoenician characters .... AFTER they switched from chiseling to writing characters. Romans learned writing from the Greeks, and the rest of Europe from the Romans.

Really ancient Greek was Chiseled... Right to Left.

It sounds just as easy to me to write from left to right even while holding a tablet.

The Greeks had a weird intermediate period called boustrophedon, where they wrote one line from right to left, the next from left to right, etc, and even used mirror images of the letters when going the other way. Crazy.

But true, all those ancient alphabets derived from Phoenician went right to left like Hebrew.

AD says

And they enthusiastically don't hesitate to financially screw over the Gentiles

Leviticus 19:18 — King James Version (KJV 1900)

"Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself"

But that applies only to fellow Jews, not outsiders. Jesus' innovation was taking that particular sentiment and making it universal by omitting the "children of thy people" part:

Matthew 22:39

"And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

On the other hand, there is quite a bit in the Old Testament about not oppressing the foreigner who lives among you, for example:

Leviticus 19:33

"And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him."

A Jewish guy I worked with told me he found it a bit offensive that orthodox Jews recite the Birkot Hashachar each morning:

Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has not made me a gentile.
Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has not made me a slave.
Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has not made me a woman.

All this stuff is interesting to me because of family history. I didn't know that my grandfather was Jewish until he died when I was 13 and I went to his funeral. He was a really wonderful guy to us, loved his grandkids deeply.

My parents were from the Hyde Park area of Chicago and grew up just a couple of blocks from each other, but didn't know each other until in their 20's.

My Polish grandmother converted to Judaism when she married my Jewish grandfather, so my mother was born and raised Jewish. She thought she was going to marry a guy named Glenn Cohen, but Cohens are not supposed to marry converts, and this guy Glenn took it a step further and broke up with my mother because her mother was a convert. So mom felt rejected.

She converted to Catholicism, her mother's original religion, and met my dad, who was Irish. Then my dad's sister-in-law told him "You can't marry her, she's Jewish." My dad said that she's Catholic now, and my aunt said "No, she's still Jewish." So my mom was getting problems from both sides. But they had a happy marriage anyway, and we kids were raised Catholic.

Every time you get some cocky asshole -the stereotypical New Yawk Jewish Teachah "Oh my gawd, how could you vote for Trump, he's gonna defund Social Security and Kill da Gays!" many cringe.

Just like when a normal Black guy sees some Ghetto Ass Black Woman sqawking at the KFC "Where my food, dammit! My's kids hungry. Why you not take EBT and sheit?"

It's like a customer experience: People remember the Yenta or the Gruff Snobby Orthodox much better than the one acting ordinary. The also pay more attention. The best comparible to Jews is overseas Chinese or Parisees. Especially Parisees due to immense Jewish charity donations - that everybody seems to overlook, from Museums to Schools. Or when the do notice it, they notice it's Woke today (but wasn't in the past), but so is the Ford Foundation these days.

I too am a McBagel (with Kraut, Prussian Protestant, not "Jewish-German", possibly via the great Hugenot exodus), but not at all Polish. Of course I'm a convert to Christianity so who knows.

The first person to point out to me how Colleges transfer money from students and taxpayers to the far left via "Speaking fees" was actually a Gay Jew.

AmericanKulak says

I'm a convert to Christianity

What were you before?

Another tidbit: my dad lived near Jews in Hyde Park, and an old Jewish immigrant woman would hire him as a "shabbos goy" to light her stove on the sabbath. "Come here Tommy, light the fire, I give you a nickel" as he would tell it.

I think the whole shabbos goy thing is pretty offensive in itself (we are holy, you are not, so we'll pay you to do profane things) but my dad admired the Jews, particularly the German Jewish physicists like Einstein. So he was a physics major and took German, and I ended up being a German major myself before the computer thing.

He told me that on their first date, the very first thing my mom said was "My dad's Jewish, is that a problem?" He was surprised, but no problem, actually a plus in his book.

Patrick says

What were you before?

Atheist. I'm sure I have atheist crap on this board back in the day.

Thanks Jordan Petersen for kindling my interest in the deep truths in Genesis and the Bible.

When I was a tiny tot in Hawaii where my father was posted, their best friends were also in the Navy and Jewish. I really liked the father because he talked to me like I was an adult and asked me what I thought of stuff. My parents never did that, even after I went to college.

There are denominations of Christianity which place undue holiness on separation. Anchorites, Stylites, Mt. Athos, etc.

I bet they are resented for it too.

Patrick says

I bet they are resented for it too.

No doubt some of the monastery closings in the West during the Reformation Era (and the slapping around of monks and nuns in the Spanish Civil and French Revolutionary Wars), and the popular dislike for Orthodox Clerics in the East, is related to it.

No joke but in trad times, something the Reax don't engage with, is how the big organized state religions had basically a tax on people getting married, baptisms, etc.

Also I should say in Israel! Between the very Frum Hassidim and others.

I've personally heard several secular or moderately religious Jews express dismay at how the Hasidic behavior makes Jews look. Various scams, public service fraud, etc.

Legalism breeds legalism, so "It's Legal"

AmericanKulak says

Legalism breeds legalism, so "It's Legal"

'Legal' is the self-referral of imposed codes and rules, legal masturbation and legal bureaucracy. It does not mean 'lawful' aka natural law or common law. There are many things in our system that are 'legal' but not 'lawful'. They stand on foundations of fraudulent corporate theater.