Cui Bono?

[Philosophaster]

My personal most direct encounter with what you call 'materialistic culture'? My family pushing me to get a PhD. Not to earn $$$, but to get a higher degree, even though PhD is actually associated with a drop in earning capacity vs. Master's degree.

Do you have a link for that? Everything I had seen suggested the opposite.

[Unidian]

have you considered that jewish culture is not a materialistic culture but an achievement culture? Financial success is a form of achievement, but so is scientific or artistic attainment, humanitarian endeavors, etc. Jews become businessmen and lawyers and doctors, but also scientists and artists, writers and activists.

Yeah, I've considered it previously and I'm willing to entertain the idea. It really doesn't make a tremendous difference for me, as I see "achievement culture" as only marginally less toxic than materialistic culture. Either way, one is forever running after something. It's antithetical to my own value system, which is similar to that of Mr. Rogers - who right-wingers recently accused of ruining America - "you're special just the way you are." In other words, I think that Western culture in general, which has been obsessed with chasing after both achievement and materialism, could stand to benefit considerably from the opposite perspective, the one that says there's nothing that needs to be done.

Incidentally, Japanese culture, despite being the long-time home of Zen, has gotten horrible about this as well. I mention this just to be clear that I'm not singling out the Jews. I could mention others as well.

My personal most direct encounter with what you call 'materialistic culture'? My family pushing mer to get a PhD. Not to earn $$$, but to get a higher degree, even though PhD is actually associated with a drop] in earning capacity vs. Master's degree.

Is it? How odd. Must be some kind of anti-intellectualism going on there, or maybe it's just the old "overqualified" conundrum.

[Philosophaster]

It really doesn't make a tremendous difference for me, as I see "achievement culture" as only marginally less toxic than materialistic culture. Either way, one is forever running after something.

Hmm, I think we may be different on this score. I like the idea of people feeling tremendously driven to achieve something, as long as that thing is actually worthwhile (e.g. finding cures for diseases, or working on AI or nanotech, or finding more efficient ways to grow and harvest food -- or doing philosophy, for that matter).

On the other hand, I never look down on people who feel no particular "drive" to achieve, either. So I agree with the "Mr. Rogers" message as well. I guess this depends on what you mean by "achievement culture." If you mean one that looks down on anybody without a "work ethic," then I oppose that.

[daybrown]

I dont see that anyone has any reason to care whether I am an asshole or a saint. They mite, if they are rational enuf, be able to consider what I post, and determine if that is of any use.

Judaism has always been life in this world, and Christianity about the next. Since I care more about this world, I tend to prefer the Jews. Greedy Jews are not hypocrites. Islam is the religion that was spread most widely by the sword. Their problem is that Christianity did even better with firearms.

But in general, I prefer a religion that actually delivered peace rather than preaching about it from pulpits. Nevertheless, my heart goes out to the Jews, who will be slandered for generations to come when the truth of the rich Jews on Wall Street and those in Mossad comes out about their involvement in 911. Its ironic that those who care so much more about this world were so blind to the future.

Their commercial enterprises look kinda shakey right now. The Jewish elite made a deal with the devil, the Christian fanatics, thinking to secure their future, but now that demagoguery is leading to the disempowerment of their Christian friends in power. It has not proved that useful against Islamic fanatacism either. Machiavelli warned about reliance on mercenaries, and nobody is as hypocritically mercenary as Christian leaders.

[Jamesh]

achievement and materialism

Trouble is that it will take achievement to get over materialism, just not of the 15 minutes of fame variety.

[Shahrazad]

Victor said,

Blacks/arabs? i haven't seen much bigotry against either one of those groups here.

There's been plenty of threads here about blacks having a lower IQ, where they go into all the reasons that is. I confess I don't read them any more, as I have always found white supremacists quite disgusting.

.

[Katy]

My personal most direct encounter with what you call 'materialistic culture'? My family pushing me to get a PhD. Not to earn $$$, but to get a higher degree, even though PhD is actually associated with a drop in earning capacity vs. Master's degree.

Do you have a link for that? Everything I had seen suggested the opposite.

From what I can tell, Victor's got some stuff mixed up here. phDs still have a higher earning potential. The problem (according to the graduate faculty here) is that many employers won't hire you if you have a phd unless one is specifically required for the job, because they assume you'll leave as soon as you find a job that does (the overqualified worker problem). Since these jobs are not easy to come by, you wind up with a lot of phds unemployed.

[Unidian]

Hmm, I think we may be different on this score. I like the idea of people feeling tremendously driven to achieve something, as long as that thing is actually worthwhile (e.g. finding cures for diseases, or working on AI or nanotech, or finding more efficient ways to grow and harvest food -- or doing philosophy, for that matter).

Well, having a certain number of such people around is certainly a good thing. My objection occurs when people are pressured (coerced) to experience this drive due to various cultural factors. There are people who are naturally achievement-oriented, and I have no problem with them pursuing that inclination. In fact, it would be ideal for them to do so, because we do need to get things done. My objection applies to those who may not be achievement-oriented by genetics and/or temperament, but who are pressured by cultural forces to fit that mold anyway.

On the other hand, I never look down on people who feel no particular "drive" to achieve, either. So I agree with the "Mr. Rogers" message as well. I guess this depends on what you mean by "achievement culture." If you mean one that looks down on anybody without a "work ethic," then I oppose that.

Yeah, you have the idea. It's just my usual approach in a somewhat different context. I hate to spoil the excitement of our once-per-decade disagreement, but I think it was a false alarm. ;)

[Philosophaster]

LOL. Attack of the clones!

[Dan Rowden]

See, people who disagree with your interpretation of events are also liars.

What fucking interpretation? Go back in this thread and find me calling Diebert an anti-semite for disagreeing with me about history. For example, find any place where i called him an anti-semite for disagreeing with me about the time when jews appeared in israel, sicne that was a major point in the argument.

You still know how to read, right?

Yes, bubbellah, I know how to read. I read this twaddle, didn't I? I can read and count! Yeah for me! Emmes! Must make me a Jew, an Ashkenazi even, if I only I could be a kuni leml like you. I can read well enough to know you have used the term "anti-semitism" in an accusatory fashion a minimum of 28 times since entering this thread. Methinks you protesteth too much, and are overly full of tzheppah. I was going to do a search for how many times you called people a shmeggegie but we already know your vocabulary is limited. You need some baleboosteh to encourage you to greater heights of achievement there, so they can kvell their way thorough their challah.

Inshallah (oops, wrong Semites).

[vicdan]

My personal most direct encounter with what you call 'materialistic culture'? My family pushing me to get a PhD. Not to earn $$$, but to get a higher degree, even though PhD is actually associated with a drop in earning capacity vs. Master's degree.

Do you have a link for that? Everything I had seen suggested the opposite.

No, I don't have a link for that; but i remember, back when I was going to grad school over a decade ago, seeing a study which showed that average salary keeps increasing up through master's, and then decreases slightly for PhD. The explanation was that PhDs largely work for academia, and industry pays more.

This may have changed since then, but at the time, if you wanted to make $$, you bailed out with MS.

[vicdan]

P.S. I just looked -- and yeah, it looks like things have changed, and PhDs earn more than Masters' holders; though I am not sure this would justify the extra years of grad school from the financial POV.

Back when I was going to grad school, MS was definitely a better-earning degree.

[Leyla Shen]

My aim is to combat anti-semitism -- such as leyla and others so blatantly exhibited, and such as you are exhibiting in a more subtle form.

[laughs!] Yeah, well, apart from as far as your brainless arse licking lackies go on the matter, you’re doing a REALLY bad job of it. You are the anti-Semite, Victor!

Not to me; but to you it should -- it you had any brains, you would have noticed that obviously being a jew is not defined as a function of one's religion. Youy could have also noticed that the Law of Return does not rely on halachic law to determine who has a right to aliyah and instant citizenship.

only if I want to be a jew in the eyes of adherents of judaism. Fortunately, Israel will permit aliyah equally to a halachic jew or to a patrilineal grandson of a jew.

erm... HUH? Why would i be defending religious view of jewishness? it is only definitive if you are an idiot (which you are) who assumes from the get-go that being a jew is a purely religious thing, and not an ethnic one at all (which you do).

The Law of Return 5710 (1950)*

Right of aliyah**
1. Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh**.

Oleh's visa
2. (a) Aliyah shall be by oleh's visa. (b) An oleh's visa shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the applicant (1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or (2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State.

Oleh's certificate
3. (a) A Jew who has come to Israel and subsequent to his arrival has expressed his desire to settle in Israel may, while still in Israel, receive an oleh's certificate. (b) The restrictions specified in section 2(b) shall apply also to the grant of an oleh's certificate, but a person shall not be regarded as endangering public health on account of an illness contracted after his arrival in Israel.

Residents and persons born in this country
4. Every Jew who has immigrated into this country before the coming into force of this Law, and every Jew who was born in this country, whether before or after the coming into force of this Law, shall be deemed to be a person who has come to this country as an oleh under this Law.

Implementation and regulations
5. The Minister of Immigration is charged with the implementation of this Law and may make regulations as to any matter relating to such implementation and also as to the grant of oleh's visas and oleh's certificates to minors up to the age of 18 years.[/quote]

Addition of sections 4A and 4B

1. In the Law of Return, 5710-1950**, the following sections shall be inserted after section 4:

Rights of members of family
4A. (a) The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of an oleh under the Nationality Law, 5712-1952***, as well as the rights of an oleh under any other enactment, are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew, except for a person who has been a Jew (ethnic? oh, yeah) and has voluntarily changed his religion.

(b) It shall be immaterial whether or not a Jew by whose right a right under subsection (a) is claimed is still alive and whether or not he has immigrated to Israel.

(c) The restrictions and conditions prescribed in respect of a Jew or an oleh by or under this Law or by the enactments referred to in subsection (a) shall also apply to a person who claims a right under subsection (a).

Definition
4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."

Amendment of the Population Registry Law, 5725-1965 3. In the Population Registry Law, 5725-1965****, the following section shall be inserted after section 3:

Power of registration and definition
3A. (a) A person shall not be registered as a Jew by ethnic affiliation or religion if a notification under this Law or another entry in the Registry or a public document indicates that he is not a Jew (refer defn. above), so long as the said notification, entry or document has not been controverted to the satisfaction of the Chief Registration Officer or so long as declaratory judgment of a competent court or tribunal has not otherwise determined.

(b) For the purposes of this Law and of any registration or document thereunder, "Jew" has the same meaning as in section 4B of the Law of Return, 5710-1950.

(c) This section shall not derogate from a registration effected before its coming into force.".

GOLDA MEIR
Prime Minister
Acting Minister of the Interior
SHNEUR ZALMAN SHAZAR
President of the State

* Passed by the Knesset on 2nd Adar Bet, 5730 (10th March, 1970) and published in Sefer Ha-Chukkim No. 586 of the 11th Adar Bet, 5730 (19th March, 1970), p. 34; the Bill and an Explanatory Note were published in Hatza'ot Chok No. 866 of 5730, p. 36.
** Sefer Ha-Chukkim of 5710 p. 159 - LSI vol. IV, p. 114; Sefer Ha-Chukkim No. 5714, p. 174 - LSI vol. VIII, p. 144.
*** Sefer Ha-Chukkim of 5712, p. 146 ; LSI vol. VI, p. 50.
**** Sefer Ha-Chukkim of 5725, p. 270 ; LSI vol. XIX, p. 288.

So, try again, cocksucker.

[Alex Jacob]

Anti-semitism (as I have been repeating and repeating) seems to me to stem from psychological roots, and is a form of demonology. At one time, this was literally true: the Jew was the literal agent of Satan within Christiandom, and everything about the Jew---Hebrew language, clothing, customs, difference of religion---only increased the core suspicion, that was originally inculcated by priests for didactic and evangelical purposes. It stems from a medieval mental platform, or a medieval mental sub-platform, and the only way to get at it, the only way to recognize it, is to go into that territory, and nullify that root.

I really don't know if there is a way around any of this, since helping someone to 'get their head in order' about certain facts (that is, their mental, conscious ordering) doesn't really have a great deal of effect on the popular idea of what a Jew is and what role he serves in history. The core story is located in the Gospels, IMO.

The way I see it, this is a list for a sort of middle-class psuedo-intellectualism, a sort of 'undergraduate' level of mental and cultural achievement, but there is a desire to get to the core of things, to the really powerful and revealing texts, and to embody something notable, powerful even, transformative. I think there is a large degree of seemingly unrecognized insecurity in the participants here, and a very obvious lopsidedness to their preparation. A lopsided preparation will always lead to lopsided ideas and attainments, as I see things. Plus there is this neo-Christian idealism of 'the sage', which is to say a sort of apostle, a desert ascetic, someone who has 'left the concerns of the world behind him' and climbs the steep mountain toward union with the godhead. And this ideal significantly runs counter (as I see things) to Jewish ideals and values, Judaism being a focus on the here-below and not the world beyond, and not an escape from the world. On a very real level, it seems to me, Jewsih values are materialistic insofar as they deal with concrete things, with real attainments, with substantials, and not with vague, dreamy, idealisms. Judaism, to speak very generally, similar to early Vedism, places value on roundabout attainment. Not only is it an ideal to be materially comfortable, which is an indication of 'blessing', but it is an ideal to be successful on many different levels, and especially in learning and spiritual knowledge. This value-group is quite confusing to Christian culture generally, because it runs directly counter to Christian ideals. You are supposed to give everything up and ultimately sacrifice yourself to an intangible goal, a supposed-goal, and so the Jew always looks dubious and devious to Christian eyes.

Psychologically, on this list, the Jew has a fetish value, I really think this. This list is so hung up on, and so deeply confused about these essential issues, that the notion of Jewishness will come up again and again and again here.

These 'sages' here are deeply and obviously confused---pathologically confused I submit---about some very core issues that pertain directly to life and the value of life. It is a sort of pit of confusion here, of countervaling strains, of current that run up against each other, of eternal battles and conflicts. These boys have found a way to what IS a sort of forefront of ideation and to the major issues that we all face, but they are almost ridiculously unqualified to investigate these problems, and certainly to offer any advice about them. They seem acutely in the dark and yet preaching about 'the light', as if they have answers.

There is a better way to approach things, I think, and that is as questions. And all these questions are so interesting. For example, the role of Jews in European culture and in the evolution of ideas. The position of women in society. The problem of material wealth and the conflict between material and spiritual aspirations. The 'right way to live'. It is endless.

[vicdan]

So, try again, cocksucker.

man, you are dumb...

See this (emphases mine):

Similar to Italy, Morocco, Germany and few other nations (including some Arab nations), Israel has ethnically preferential immigration laws, that prefer Jews to non-Jews; Zionists argue this is so because Judaism has never been an ethnicity or religion, but rather a "nationality in exile". (Since the 20th century, is often considered by American Jews to be an evolving religious civilization with a national component.) From the Israeli point of view, the Jewish nation has only recently has been to reconstitute itself within its original borders. In contrast, most other Western countries have abolished all ethnic or racial criteria in their immigration laws and treat members of all races and ethnicities equally for immigration purposes.

The Law of Return of 1951 stated, basing on the Rabbinical practice, that:

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism.

In 1970, an amendment was made so that the law read as:

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.

The origins of this amendment lie in the case of Brother Daniel (Daniel Rufeisen), a Polish Jew persecuted by the Nazis and who converted to Catholicism and became a Carmelite monk. Israel's Supreme Court ruled that he was not eligible for citizenship under the Law of Return because he converted to Christianity. The rationale given by the Court was that the Law of Return was intended to sponsor Zionist consolidation of the Jewish nation in Israel; and by converting and choosing a life path outside of this nation, Rufeisen effectively gave up his intention to become a part of the Zionist effort, thus not qualifying for the Law of Return.

The decision aroused a controversy in the Israeli public. The consensus that emerged from the following public debate, was that since Judaism is not seen by Jews exclusively as a religion (see above), once someone rejects one's nationality, one can no longer simultaneously demand membership in it. Moreover, as a member of European clergy, Rufeisen's personal safety from possible persecution by Nazis was guaranteed. Having spent several years in Israel using a temporary permit, Rufeisen was granted citizenship by the Israeli Ministry of Interior, on the basis of the Law of Citizenship.

Section 4b of the Law of Return argues that being Jewish is both a nationality and a religion. Some could argue, basing on this, that the authors of the Law of Return intended it as a religious measure, thus effectively creating religious discrimination.

note that the Law of Return does not exclude atheist jews, thus clearly not defining being a jew as a religious thing.

And how about this:

Israeli newspapers reported at the end of December 1994 that churches in Nazareth were full to overflowing due to the large influx of olim from the former Soviet Union, many of whom are believing and practicing Christians.
...
It is interesting to note that despite the reports of church attendance, missionary activity and the like, a recent survey shows that fully 90 percent of immigrants from the former Soviet Union firmly believe that they are Jewish.

You take the complex real world, imbecile, and try to stuff it into your anti-semitic preconceptions. The facts clearly indicate that jews are both an ethnicity and a religion, contrary to your moronic claim that it's nothing but a religion -- and that therefore you can be an atheist jew for example, as Feynman was (or a pantheist jew, as Einstein was).

You still haven't answered my question -- if being a jew is only a matter of religion, to which ethnicity would you count an atheist jew?

[Dan Rowden]

So after all that bullshit, cunt face: a Jew=? One sentence please.

[Philosophaster]

I supposedly "look Jewish." So many people have asked me whether I am Jewish or whether I have Jewish ancestry.

:-P

[vicdan]

I find it interesting that when the local geniuses (such as Dan or Leyla) try to insult, their insults tend to be related to sexual taboos and sexually originated curses.

I suspect this has something to do with the pervasive stench of sexual repression here. :D

[Shahrazad]

I suspect this has something to do with the pervasive stench of sexual repression here.

Or, it could just be that they are sexual beings just like the rest of us.

[Dan Rowden]

I find it interesting that when the local geniuses (such as Dan or Leyla) try to insult, their insults tend to be related to sexual taboos and sexually originated curses.

I suspect this has something to do with the pervasive stench of sexual repression here. :D

Jealous?

[vicdan]

of calling people cuntface? No, if I am going to insult someone, I will generaly insult something worth insulting, and worth insulting for -- their intelligence.

So no, I am not jealous; nor surprised, to be honest, though I wish i could say I were.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I'm sure he has his critics and I've read some of the refutations in the past which was certainly not an "exposure".

Showing his highly selective use of primary sources is not an 'exposire'?.. OK...

He's also shown to be way too pro-Israel by others. But I suspect you haven't actually read any of those 'exposures' otherwise you'd know that the criticism is about laying too much blame on the exodus at the feet of Israel instead of more cautiously spreading it between Israeli and Arab/Palestine leadership. As far as I know no scholar of note denies anymore the serious responsibility of Israel for the exodus of the Palestinian people.

Okay, lets go with the first one I find:
http://www.zionismontheweb.org/zionism_definitions.htm

You mean the one which contains the following statements, which you so conveniently ignored?

You are changing the discussion here again. The goal was to show "some mainstream zionist literature or campaign attempting to match some specific ancient boundary", as you requested. The article talks about lots of other aspects of Zionism but then goes again stressing the The foundations of Zionism being linked to a "bond to its historic homeland Eretz Yisrael" as well as a Zionist congress in '68 adopting as main aim "the ingathering of the Jewish People in its historic homeland, Eretz Israel".

Now I also explained how Ereth Israel is completely based on Biblical Israel, the exact dimensions of which , although subject to debate are at least including the ancient united Monarchy. Please note the Zionists called for an influx of immigrant in the whole of Biblical Israel, the religious-historical entity. Why you can't see why a religious idea remains religious, even if uttered by secular nationalists, is beyond me. It questions the secularity of those people and not means that suddenly we're not dealing with religious texts.

Yep, moving in Canaan.

interestingly enough, the quotes you cited say nothing asbout Canaan.

Of course they don't call it Canaan, they call it Eretz Israel but as secular Jew you might be clueless that God promised Canaan to Abraham (Exd 6:4: "And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers." KJV").

So next time you hear Zionists speak about Eretz Israel, please keep in mind that this is not about the desire for a vague undefined homeland somewhere, it's a specific description that links back to Biblical dimensions, the description of borders in the Torah are endless . That they settled for something smaller in 1948 was a trade off, there weren't enough immigrants yet to claim more. Still the terminology remains everywhere and it doesn't become less religious because some secular punks choose to change its meaning.

You don't even understand where I'm coming from and why I used 'Torah' in my sentence, in a conscious and generally (while mostly orthodox) accepted manner to encompass all Jewish religious teachings. It shows not only your lack of experience with the matter but added to that also an unwillingness to look at the context, the bigger picture, before interpreting the use of a word in some technical formulaic manner.

Yeah, sure. Whatever you say, dude.

No, no, I'm not letting you get away this time with denying you made an error. Just admit like a man you're wrong and be done with it.

Apart from WIkipedia which I already linked to, this is another random resource

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... n_Law.html

3. The term "Torah" can mean the entire corpus of Jewish law. This includes the Written and the Oral Law, which includes the Mishna, the Midrash, the Talmud and even later day legal commentaries. This definition of Torah is probably the most common among Orthodox Jews. Usually you can figure out which definition is being used by the context.

Now your remark again: "You don't even know the difference between Torah and Tanakh". As I already said you couldn't figure out what I was talking about because of your lack of in depth knowledge of the subject or a disregards of the larger context.

You were wrong vicdan and it would show some sincerity to just say so.

Having a quarter of my people brutally murdered is quite a bit of 'deepest of suffering'.

You're referring to the Holocaust? But that's five years within thousands of years of Diaspora. But my opinion in this is irrelevant to the discussion as I have no part in it. There are many Jews who prefer this 'horrible' diaspora above the current manifestation of a safe homeland.

Diaspora is no home of ours, and for you to tell me how I, a jew, should see it as the proper home of my people, is, frankly, moronic and anti-semitic. Enslavement, even a cushy one, is not freedom, and a gilded cage is still a cage. In this case, it was a cage with random spikes thrusting up through the floor ever once in a while. No thanks.

I wasn't saying that it should be your home, only that it's part of an identity, it's all over your culture, as reality, not only in religious form.

There are many countries in the world doing things qualitatively beyond anything israel ever dreamed of, but not a single one of them endures the hatred you and your ilk dole out at Israel.

Now don't start exaggerating. First of all it's no hatred I've shown so far, I just disagree with how the country was formed and believe that much of the conflict over it stems from this decision. Molotov cocktail waving Palestinians show hate but that's probably because they lost family over the conflict or stemming from other personal motives, fears or beliefs.

And I think way more hate is directed right now to the USA. And mostly because they too speak of one thing and the reality on the ground opposes their claimed values. Why do you want it to make about ethnicity? The increasing hate toward the US demonstrates, after decades of global admiration and love, how it's linked to policies and politics only. Israel might have been criticized from the beginning, the USA destroyed its good name with its increasingly insane foreign policy starting in the 70's, ending in today where it grew beyond any measure or scale for insanity and descending into evil in terms of unintended consequences.

It's better to be loved than hated & feared, but it's better to be hated & feared than persecuted and abused. Take your xian 'turn the other cheek' claptrap, fold it up until it's all sharp corners, and stuff it where the sun don't shine.

It's a failing strategy. Turning the cheek comes from Judaism by the way, and is about shaming the opponent by such act of inner strength and defiance. It's not about letting others walk over you.

No, wait, i am not sure it's xian. I think what is really going on here is that the anti-semites could not see a greater affront than a strong jew, a jew who stands up for himself and refuses to be a passive victim. What you are suggesting is what we should stop standing up for ourselves, and return to our 'glory days' of passive victimhood -- you seem to find the idea of a jewish nation-state, defending itself and doing so successfully and with panache, an affront to your sensibilities. How dare jews stand up for themselves! Back to diaspora with you! Jews have to beg for protection, not take the matters into their own hands!

That's all based on the perception the current state of Israel is doing it successfully but the reality is increased rejection and having great dependence on the USA for protection, financially, military and to keep the Security Counsel off their back with endless vetoes, for decades!

I find is amusing, though, that you do what you probably wouldn't have done in any other context -- you blame the victim for the problem, you blame Israel for the 'anti-israelism'. Why don't you just cut to the chase, and blame the jews for anti-semitism?

I'd define antisemitism as an extreme form of self-hatred at the deepest level, as I see the Jew as a ultimate and 'tragic' expression of the human being itself. So yeah, it's possible a subset of Jews might be more antisemitic then they'd ever imagine to be. The genius Jew Weininger understood this all too well, I suspect.

Yeah, we should give up on the ability to defend ourselves, and return to galut, to be attacked and betrayed and discriminated against, for our own good. you are suggesting such insane shit our of pure unvarnished concern for the well-being of my people.

Just open up the country for the refugees that were expelled or ran off out of fear, hold elections like was done in South-Africa and move on. Now that would be a start. No need to become defenseless or such nonsense. But it's about giving up of a dream perhaps.

[vicdan]

He's also shown to be way too pro-Israel by others. But I suspect you haven't actually read any of those 'exposures'

I have read three different ones -- and the ones I read, excoriate him for being too anti israel.

You are changing the discussion here again. The goal was to show "some mainstream zionist literature or campaign attempting to match some specific ancient boundary", as you requested. The article talks about lots of other aspects of Zionism but then goes again stressing the The foundations of Zionism being linked to a "bond to its historic homeland Eretz Yisrael" as well as a Zionist congress in '68 adopting as main aim "the ingathering of the Jewish People in its historic homeland, Eretz Israel".

Right. And this historic Eretz Israel has no specific set geographic boundaries. You simply assume that there's a specific border being referred to, instead of the region in a more general sense.

No, no, I'm not letting you get away this time with denying you made an error. Just admit like a man you're wrong and be done with it.

Apart from WIkipedia which I already linked to, this is another random resource

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... n_Law.html

3. The term "Torah" can mean the entire corpus of Jewish law. This includes the Written and the Oral Law, which includes the Mishna, the Midrash, the Talmud and even later day legal commentaries. This definition of Torah is probably the most common among Orthodox Jews. Usually you can figure out which definition is being used by the context.

You are a moron, dude. Torah can mean the jewish law -- not Neviim or Ktuvim, the other two components of Tanakh. When you said that you use 'Torah' to 'encompass all Jewish religious teachings', you were talking out of your ass, trying to exhibit erudition you do not possess.

Maccabees are spoken of in Talmud, but this is certainly no the most direct historical source of the information -- that would be the catholic&orthodox books of Maccabees (which are regarded as being highly historically accurate BTW) and the writings of Josephus. Your claim that we only know about Maccabees from Torah, and your subsequent claim that Torah is the name for all jewish religious teachings, are both laughably ignorant.

Now your remark again: "You don't even know the difference between Torah and Tanakh".

See above. it's very clear that you do not know the difference between torah and tanakh.

Having a quarter of my people brutally murdered is quite a bit of 'deepest of suffering'.

You're referring to the Holocaust? But that's five years within thousands of years of Diaspora. But my opinion in this is irrelevant to the discussion as I have no part in it. There are many Jews who prefer this 'horrible' diaspora above the current manifestation of a safe homeland.

proportionately, they are very few among the jews, and most of them are anti-zionist for religious reasons. You know, the reasons whcih, according to you, define zionism.

From where i stand, they are the idiot fundies fucking it up for the rest of us.

Now don't start exaggerating. First of all it's no hatred I've shown so far

No, not shown. you are more subtle than that. it still comes out though.

It's a failing strategy.

how is it failing? Show me indications of israel failing its mission.

That's all based on the perception the current state of Israel is doing it successfully but the reality is increased rejection and having great dependence on the USA for protection, financially, military and to keep the Security Counsel off their back with endless vetoes, for decades!

You mean the security council where arabs have such a disproportionately high representation, in the UN which at one point had declared xzionism to be racism?..

Nevertheless, Israel has repelled every attack, and flourished on top of it, the wished of people like you notwithstanding.

I'd define antisemitism as an extreme form of self-hatred at the deepest level, as I see the Jew as a ultimate and 'tragic' expression of the human being itself. So yeah, it's possible a subset of Jews might be more antisemitic then they'd ever imagine to be. The genius Jew Weininger understood this all too well, I suspect.

hahaha. just as i expected. Weininger worship... yeah, you are an anti-semite.

Just open up the country for the refugees that were expelled or ran off out of fear

No.

Jews were expelled from the muslim countries too, and in greater numbers. Israel absorbed them all. Fuck you and the 'right of return'. it doesn't exist.

hold elections like was done in South-Africa and move on. Now that would be a start. No need to become defenseless or such nonsense. But it's about giving up of a dream perhaps.

A dream of a jewish nation-state, a dream of home? No, this dream s not worth giving up on, to appease anti-semitic concern trolls like yourself.

[The Duke of Khal]

daybrown,

Supporting evidence for your hypothesis comes from the advancing age of the Baby Boomer generation, the wealthiest generation in history, and the statistical fact that men die earlier than women. This means that, relatively soon, trillions of dollars of assets are going to be inherited by a generation of middle and upper-class women. These women, we should note, have entered or are entering menopause, the phase in female life when a more sober, wise disposition is acquired free from hormonal cyclings. This creates a generation capable of swinging the battle of history to its liking. Will it suddenly stop on a philosophical dime and oppose the elites, or will it wallow proud in serving and being the elite?

K

[Diebert van Rhijn]

And this historic Eretz Israel has no specific set geographic boundaries. You simply assume that there's a specific border being referred to, instead of the region in a more general sense.

Hmm, yeah the same region that was promised to the Jewish people in their tradition and outlined in their religious documents with great detail. Very general sense there, Victor. You just don't want to accept that phrase was used by Zionism and its implications why they used it.

Torah can mean the jewish law -- not Neviim or Ktuvim, the other two components of Tanakh. When you said that you use 'Torah' to 'encompass all Jewish religious teachings', you were talking out of your ass, trying to exhibit erudition you do not possess.

Hahah! A Jew who doesn't even know what the written Law is!!!

Crash course for Victor the secular Jew: the Written Law consists of the books of the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh. Sometimes this is equaled with Torah (often in Orthodox circles) and is also quite common to use for the whole body of teachings. Of course I know that many Jews prefer to call only the five books of Moses the Torah. I'm not denying that but you're denying my not uncommon usage.

Maccabees are spoken of in Talmud, but this is certainly no the most direct historical source of the information -- that would be the catholic&orthodox books of Maccabees (which are regarded as being highly historically accurate BTW) and the writings of Josephus. Your claim that we only know about Maccabees from Torah, and your subsequent claim that Torah is the name for all jewish religious teachings, are both laughably ignorant.

You probably didn't know that Josephus used those very documents for most of his writings on the topic? I thought so.

how is it failing? Show me indications of israel failing its mission.

This guy sums it up so I don't have to and he's a Canaanite (not that it matters). Although I don't believe in 'packing up' but serious restructuring at least.

That's all based on the perception the current state of Israel is doing it successfully but the reality is increased rejection and having great dependence on the USA for protection, financially, military and to keep the Security Counsel off their back with endless vetoes, for decades!

You mean the security council where arabs have such a disproportionately high representation, in the UN which at one point had declared xzionism to be racism?..

That representation is not important considering the US was often the only state voting against. See: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... etoes.html

I know: they were all Arabs or antisemitic....yeah, that must be it, the Americans were the only sane people who understood us, or at least our politics....

]hahaha. just as i expected. Weininger worship... yeah, you are an anti-semite.

Now why would I worship someone who shot himself in the head? When I'd admire Beethoven for a certain genius in some of his work, I don't necessarily worship him either or every detail of his thought or music. But I forgot, you still have to figure out the title of this forum :) It's a puzzle for the advanced (in the vein of: "a forum for nobody and everyone").

Jews were expelled from the muslim countries too, and in greater numbers. Israel absorbed them all.

I don't know all the details so I'm open to correction here but weren't the greatest frictions in the 20th century in Muslim countries caused by the increasing Jewish immigration into Palestine? It seems to have infuriated the Muslim countries and even peaceful communities became disturbed. I guess they have to thank the militant Zionist types for stirring up the pot.