>Be nazis
>See nearly 100 year old lynching of a Jew
>Attempt to convince the internet that he was guilty
>This was obviously false considering all the evidence leads to the factory's janitor being guilty
>Still succeed because people are stupid
Has this ever happened before?
>>2439896many people now believe that israel controls the US and that eliminating jews from power would bring world peace. its just repackaged nazism, like how henry ford thought industrial capitalism was great, but its just these meddling jews that ruin a perfect system. lenin explains here how antisemitism is a trap.
>>2439888marx's point is that christians are sublime jews, so antisemitism stems from hypocrisy.
>>2439870It's immature but it's hard to feel any sympathy given how strongly false antisemitism accusations were weaponised in the past. When you call Jeremy Corbyn an antisemite - when you occasionally venture into saying that Keir Starmer and Joe Biden are Hamas - you inherently render the term meaningless. If the left learns to completely ignore the accusation the result is sub-par compared to everyone having a perfect nuanced understanding, but better than the status-quo ante where accusations were taken seriously despite having no merit.
I don't wish to be immature, but: Modern antisemitism is a marginal problem that gets disproportionate attention. As bigotries go, it ranks somewhere below Glaswegian football sectarianism. Nazis saying mean things, mostly online, is something you can ignore and get on with your life. A few stupid stereotypes by well-meaning-but-dumb normies is not being made to sit at the back of the bus.
Yet it's the only bigotry that mainstream politicians care about. Why? Not because of Jewish plots, but because it's a good smokescreen to attack the alternatives - whether that's the social democratic left, or the openly Nazi right. (Unfortunately for everyone, the general balance of forces - and the false equivalences - mean that power's probably going to go to the latter…)
>>2439921"Football rivalries" is much more dismissive of Glaswegian sectarianism (you could've googled!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism_in_Glasgow ) than I have been of antisemitism. Your dismissive attitude makes my point: What reason do you have to care about Glasgow's sectarian problems? Pubs have been bombed, people have been murdered, there's been a lot of violence, active employment discrimination, and plenty more where that came from. At every turn it meets or exceeds the seriousness of modern-day antisemitism. (The vast bulk of which is "idiot says something stupid")
Why, then, are you clueless about it? Why are you so alarmed that the left can be so ignorant about antisemitic tropes, yet you're posting on a website that used to have a right-old laugh about how the ((Irish)) run the world - just like an Orange Order marcher. Is there an anti-Catholicism problem on the left?
>>2439956Let me give you a hint: if you want to string me along, you've got to pretend to engage with my point.
If you can't answer "What are the practical consequences?" it's clear that you're acting in bad faith.
>>2439958in your perspective, antisemitism is literally harmless so shouldnt even be talked about. i literally cant engage with you because your framework is so skewed.
>>2439957again, to you, antisemitism doesnt exist, and if it does, its harmless. i cant talk with you.
>>2439969well exactly, to you, antisemitism doesnt exist and if it does, its harmless. weird how i figured out your own line of reasoning before you did.
>>2439972my point is that antisemitism is a terrible thing, and you disagree, so there is no common ground. asking "why is antisemitism bad?" gives the game away and im not going to play.
>>2439976weird how you only ask for a definition at the hour of decision to formally declare antisemitism harmless, while already having called antisemitism a non-issue, without prior definition. very honest.
>>2439982>complaining about antisemitism causes antisemitismjust like how the "woke left" creates racists, eh?
>>2439983>weird how you only ask for a definition at the hour of decision to formally declare antisemitism harmless, Wouldn't you need a definition to decide that? But that's besides the point. I simply asked you for your definition of it.
>while already having called antisemitism a non-issue, without prior definition. very honest.You know there are multiple people named anonymous here, including yourself.
>>2439962So detail the harms.
>>2439968Why would I say that? Lots of trivial things are harmful. Deltarune has harmed at least one person. Is Antisemitism more harmful than Deltarune? Hard to say, since you're afraid to name any meaningful harms, let alone risk entering your preferred hypersensitive white-passing identity category into the oppression Olympics.
>>2439973Why is it terrible?
What terrors does it cause in the modern world?
>>2439986>Antisemitism, according to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), is defined as hostility to, prejudice towards, or discrimination against Jewish peopleIs this harmful? Sure. Do I think the average Jewish person experiences more "hostility, prejudice, or discrimination" than the average Glaswegian? No, frankly, I do not.
>>2439870>It has nothing to do with Israel or the Gaza genocideThat's the problem. Those are the most relevant and urgent issues facing the world right now. Not antisemitism. It's not 1922. In 1922 The New York Times was writing articles saying Hitler was merely a clever politician and that his antisemitism wasn't sincere. After the Beer Hall Putsch the New York Times wrote an article that said Hitler was "tamed by prison" and was going to act like a normal politician now. So you can see how when antisemitism was urgent and genocide against the Jews was actually brewing, the bourgeoisie constantly tried to downplay it. Now we have a supremacist self described "Jewish State" committing genocide. What does the New York Times do? Attack their critics as antisemitic.
So yes, the dialectics have completely flipped. Jewish supremacists have gained the upper hand and are committing open genocide with the full support of capitalists while antisemitic extremists are either politically irrelevant or critically support zionism because they hate Middle Eastern brown Muslims more than European white Jews.
Got it?
>>2440000>>2439999Quads of truth
>>2439997MLs sacrificed their lives to defeat Nazism actually and you are a concern trolling /pol/yp or Mossad agent, but what's the difference at this point.
>>2440111you probably deny the holocaust so a poor example
>>2440120>>2440112its because of trotsky, of course.
>>2440119whiteness and jewishness are entirely different concepts. you become "white" by excelling, you become "jewish" by persecution.
>>2440129just read this in his wikipedia:
>"Commodity fetishism" is not a misrepresentation, nor an exaggerated adoration, of goods. The "fetish" instead is to be referred to the structure of the commodity. The subjects are not humans, but it is rather their objectified relationships that are at the heart of socialization under capitalism.>The self-moving subject, Geist, is misrecognized in Hegel. It is described by Marx as Capital and its self-valorization. It is not, Postone suggested, similar to György Lukács's use of Hegel, wherein the proletariat are identified as Geist, for the spirit would be labour not emancipation.which entirely resonates with my own reading of capital, so i will read his work. i also agree with this:
>What is said about modern antisemitism may also describe a trend of vulgar anti-capitalism that seeks the personification of the elements of capitalism that are so hated. Postone showed that modern antisemitism is very different from most forms of racism and Christian antisemitism because it casts a huge global invisible power of international Jewry, the idea of a global conspiracy that is intrinsic to modern antisemitism.>It is true, Postone argued, that Nazism claimed to defend the peasantry and craftsmanship, but it also valued modern technological and industrial production. Nazism was rather a vulgar form of anti-capitalism. The rejection of the bourgeoisie and its values is present in Nazism, but Postone saw Nazi ideology as the affirmation of the concrete dimension of capitalism – which includes technology and industrial production, as well as the peasantry and manual labour – as the heart of a healthy, organic social life. This stood in contrast with the abstract dimension represented by finance capital. The abstract is instead rejected, and it is personified by the Jews.where "jew" is the substitutory signifier, or metaphor, for "capital", yet as far as capital cannot be directly annunciated, it fails to be abridged into a critical analysis, since it evades what is truly signified - like how when many conservatives criticise communism, they are really criticising capitalism to a necessary extent.
>>2440145>its called material analysisLMAO I can never tell if you guys are trolling.
Hey smart guy, regurgitating the same tired meme arguments that anticommunist push on reddit every day is not analyzing anything retard, let alone material analysis. Maybe you'd have more fun on r/tankiejerk, you'd probably be more welcomed there
>>2439897humankind must emancipate itself from judaism.
>>2439901christians are jews.
>>2439815>carpetbaggingremember the south was not only butthurt about losing the civil war, but also about bourgoisie developing the south out of its semi-feudal agrarian economy because right after slavery ended they tried to force ex-slaves into an eternal state of sharecropping which is basically neo-serfdom, and here come the "carpetbagging" bourgeoisie from the North to proletarianize everyone with the rapid development of industry… nooooo!!! not like this!!! We must not be proletarianized, then we'll be forced to work along side the b-b-b-blacks!!!
It's good that it happened. The bourgeoisie do have a historical purpose in a context like that.
>>2440137>>2443569impressive
very nice
now let's hear your opinion on whether the holocaust was unique in history
>>2443563people get accused of stuff they didn't do all the time, the Dreyfus affair generated an international ruckus, so it's kind of a self-own if you think it's a good example of Jews never having high leverage on western society.
>>2443565>they determined it to be their own interests to sign off a part of the world to a Jewish stateweird how that never happened with any other ethnicity. As I know it the Anglos were in the habit of doing the colonizing themselves.
>>2443667first i get an anon trying to prove I'm "jewish" with loaded questions:
>>2443615then I get an anon trying to prove I'm "antisemitic" with loaded questions:
>>2443666I don't care about your burger-nazteca e-celeb. pic related is the essence of Fuentista ideology. nazis and zionazis both get the bullet. as do their burger imperialist sponsors and bribe takers.
>>2443461modern antisemitism = someone from /pol/ called you a slur on twitter, you think the guy at the country club gave you a weird look when you applied because you've got a jewish name,
*philosemites come up and tell you how much they love Israel on the assumption you're a zionist and will make them an honorary Jew.*
*which is antisemitic, but nobody ever gets too worked up about it.*, someone broke your shop window in a high-crime area and you're sure it's because you were a jew, oh, and nick fuentes doesn't like you. can't forget that.
(a range of things from "mildly unpleasant" to "high-neuroticism", but basically nothing compared to what any other minority faces, and that's purposefully excluding vexatious shit like "saw a free palestine sticker" or "Jeremy Corbyn wouldn't give me a cabinet post because I'm pro-war-crimes")
1930s antisemitism = nuremberg laws, banned from working in german civil service, law, health, agriculture, stripping of citizenship, the paramilitary wing of the governing party actively smashed up your store, when you tried to seek refuge in a boat a string of countries told you to fuck off until you went back to germany to face the early stages of an industrialized death machine. (e.g. real and serious discrimination, sufficiently serious that people desperately want you to think that's what's happening today when they cry that Jeremy Corbyn is an antisemite.)
>>2443647okay, fine.
>>2443744This isn't true. the problem in the west isn't Jews, it's philosemites. In the UK Labour "antisemitism" scandal, for example, a huge chunk of the most nonsensical complaints (stuff like "party member mocking the president of the US [trump]") were made by "David Gordstein", a pseudonym of the very-much-not-Jewish Euan Phillips, who despite not being Jewish was the chair of "Labour Against Antisemitism".
A huge chunk of America's support for Israel comes not from Jewish people, but from deranged Christians who need Israel to control the holy land so that Jesus can get Armageddon going. You're not getting rid of that level of derangement just by getting rid of a group they're using instrumentally.
>>2439902>Yet it's the only bigotry that mainstream politicians care about. Why? Not because of Jewish plots, but because it's a good smokescreen to attack the alternatives - whether that's the social democratic left, or the openly Nazi right. (Unfortunately for everyone, the general balance of forces - and the false equivalences - mean that power's probably going to go to the latter…)That is a problem. It's true that the Israeli government uses the charge of antisemitism as a shield, but I think it can also be more helpful to think of antisemitism as not necessarily "wrong" (although I think it's incorrect) or a matter of "false consciousness," but that it's just inadequate. I believe it's usually bound up in frustration, impotence, a feeling of powerlessness. When I see people on the left who start getting into it, it's usually a sign to me that something is going awry, that something they're doing isn't working.
>>2440129>so what do ya'll think of Moshe Postone?>>2440138>resonates with my own reading of capital, so i will read his work.<What is said about modern antisemitism may also describe a trend of vulgar anti-capitalism that seeks the personification of the elements of capitalism that are so hated. I'm somewhat familiar with Postone. I think he viewed himself as a 19th-century Orthodox Marxist of sorts. His view was (roughly, and I'm also paraphrasing some summaries and texts) that capitalism has a fundamentally different relationship to labor than other modes of production. For example, if you have peasant-based agricultural society, it's possible to imagine getting rid of the aristocrats and you can still have peasants owning their own plots of land and living off them. However, if you get rid of capitalists,
you're not getting rid of capital, so social domination will still exist until the structures that constitute capital are gotten rid of. The proletariat isn't "outside" the system but part of it – and as it relates to his critique of Lukacs – a skepticism that you can have the proletariat doing proletarian labor and also living in a free society at the same time. He's wary of the idea that the proletariat is the revolutionary subject (in the Hegelian sense of constituting history and realizing itself in socialism). On the contrary, overcoming capitalism necessarily involves also overcoming proletarian labor as a material condition. The victory of the proletariat also involves the self-annihilation of the proletariat.
This is related to antisemitism being a kind of "socialism of fools" or Jews being the personification of capitalists. Remember, for Postone, the bourgeoisie does not take priority over the
impersonal logic of capital. The capitalists are merely "character masks" for capital, and are subjects to its control just as much as workers are (despite enjoying a greater share of the wealth). There are also (historically contingent) reasons Jews have fulfilled a logically necessary function of capitalism (working as merchants and moneylenders), so what antisemitism has in common with a vulgar anti-capitalism is that it boils down to a critique of who makes up the management of the social structure, at best, basically the mode of management. As a side note: the logic here is similar to liberal identity politics. Like, the problem isn't so much an impersonal capitalist social order that operates much like an alien force or machine that has enslaved humanity, but a few bad apples or white men who are CEOs. It's easier to stick with this idea than it is to tear down the ideological fabric of everything that surrounds us. Antisemitism therefore is a potential danger for the left in Postone's view because it has an apparent emancipatory dimension to it. That's false, but people buy into it as an emancipatory "idea."
At any rate, I think Postone would've been really skeptical of this idea that anyone who listens to Nick Fuentes or Alex Jones (I guess he's a neocon now or something, whatever) is just an inch away from "getting it." Like seeing the Illuminati (or some other personification) behind everything is the first step on the road to some comprehensive critique of capitalism. He was also very critical of vulgar anti-Americanism, anti-imperialism that /USApol/ wars about on this website every day. Like "the world would be a wonderful place if it weren't for the United States." That functions as a fetish. He didn't think that would lead anywhere and compared it to reactionary German anti-capitalist rightists who saw the main problem in the world as being Britain and the Jews. He also didn't like Cold War campism, but he went easier on the New Left because he thought, well, they sharply criticize the U.S. because it's the U.S. and a great power, but also because it's hindering the emergence of a more progressive social order (or at least it seemed like that at the time). But he didn't regard anything resisting the U.S. to be a default positive. He thought that notion was extremely questionable. It can be reactionary pig and leftists will put progressive lipstick on it.
>>2443744as an empirical proof, make a list of those in power in the west and tick off who is jewish. im sure you will be surprised that its not as you think it is. here's a start:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_members_of_the_United_States_Congressaccording to google, 6% of members are jewish. get rid of the 6% and congress is clean? but post results.
>>2443756>the proletariat is not the revolutionary subject because proletarianship is constitutive of capital.yes; this is why i have previously defined fascism as the political identity of proletarian labour, as opposed to its abolition (which capital as the geist, can at least aspire toward, whilst always falling back on wage labour ultimately - which is perhaps why liberalism appears both hypercapitalist and progressive, since it is capital trying to overcome its own condition, while 20th century totalitarian regimes depend upon the capitalist condition to forge an identity for themselves).
>capitalists are not capital as suchi agree, which is why objectifying capital in persons always becomes reactionary, like how luigi mangione represents a new brand of vigilante justice as opposed to systematic critique. even if you killed jeff bezos, he will be replaced. the right contains an immanent critique of capital which is particularist; "woke capital", "jewish capital", "finance capital", etc. but what if forwarded is just "white capital" or "national capital" in its place. when people praise china's state capitalism, its part of the same illusion (geopolitically, in this case).
>Like seeing the Illuminati (or some other personification) behind everything is the first step on the road to some comprehensive critique of capitalism. its no coincidence that so many conspiracy theorists are libertarians
>Like "the world would be a wonderful place if it weren't for the United States." That functions as a fetish.of course; which is why it leads to reactionary third-worldism. but notice how its always those most insulated by the country which criticise it most harshly (the archetypal middle class college student).
>>2443794>i agree, which is why objectifying capital in persons always becomes reactionaryI've struggled with the concept of "reification" but Postone also uses this term. Like capital is "reified" into these forms. This is originally a Hegelian term and refers to a twisty relationship between subject and object. (Like how a subject can become an object, or an object can become a subject). In capitalism, this can be like money taking on such importance that it begins to be treated like it has its own subjectivity. Money talks! It's a specific type of alienation / splitting off and is commonly understood to mean a kind of mechanization of human life. There's also a back and forth over a Lukacs essay about reification. I lifted a phrase from Postone earlier.
<PN: Is it possible to struggle to overcome capitalism other than through necessary forms of misrecognition that this organization of social life generates? In other words: If consciousness in capitalist modernity is rooted in phenomenal forms that are the necessary expressions of a deep structure which they simultaneously mask, then how can mass-based Left-wing anti-capitalist politics be founded on anything other than progressive forms of misrecognition, i.e., as opposed to reactionary forms of misrecognition, ranging from populist critiques of finance capital, to chauvinist critiques of globalization, to localist or isolationist critiques of centralized political and economic power?
<MP: That’s a good question. I don’t have an easy answer, so maybe I’ll start by being very modest. It seems to me that the first question isn’t, “what is correct consciousness?”, but, rather, “what is not adequate?” That in itself would help any anti-capitalist movement immeasurably. To the degree to which movements are blind to the larger context of which they are a part, they necessarily are going to generate consequences that are undesirable for them as well.https://www.pamnogales.com/writing/marx-after-marxism-an-interview-with-moishenbsppostone >>2443845marx explicitly writes that the capitalist is the personification of capital here:
>We saw also that capital — and the capitalist is merely capital personified and functions in the process of production solely as the agent of capital [.] Just as products confront the producer as an independent force in capital and capitalists — who actually are but the personification of capital — so land becomes personified in the landlord and likewise gets on its hind legs to demand, as an independent force, its share of the product created with its help.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch48.htmyet it is a conflicting report. capital is the real subject and we are its objects (introduction to grundrisse, fragment on machines and section of capital vol. 1, chapter 1, concerning the fetishism of commodities), yet the capitalist is also capital's agent, to marx. i prefer postone's view that the subjectivity of labour itself must become capital's own abstraction, not merely the capitalist who censors production in the guise of accumulation - accumulation represents a contradiction in the circulation of surplus value, so the capitalist may even work against the system by their own personality, while the workers themselves are who keep the machine moving by being captured within their self-reproduction. so if anyone can be externally representative of capital, it has to be workers themselves (which is also perhaps why all revolutionary thought has stemmed from the petty bourgeois and bourgeois classes, rather than from the proletariat). i would say that correct consciousness can thus only begin where one's identity can transcend labour, since this gives birth to the spectre of value (rather than as marx imagines, it is exchange which produces the value relation; for example, as J.B. Say (1802) and pierre leroux (1834) write, the "logic" of production (which marx signifies by a syllogism, in the introduction to the grundrisse - 1858), is production, distribution and exchange. marx's communism (as described in critique of the gotha program - 1875) maintains the capitalist form of production, but simply transforms distribution, while eliminating exchange. he even comments that this form inevitably represents the capitalist mode of production (with the state simply taking the place of "administration"). jean baudrillard also criticises marx in this respect in his "mirror of value" (1973) and suggests an alternative frame in "symbolic exchange and death" (1976), where instead of abolishing exchange, we should effectively abolish regulatory production and give emphasis to "symbolic" or gift exchange (which cannot reproduce the logic of value since there is reciprocity, but no equality or accumulation; qualitative, not quantitative). the weariness of exchange to marxists shows a lack of imagination, i feel. they are paranoiacs, seeking to abolish the invisible spectre of "value" between persons, while hypocritically maintaining its format in wage labour; the very source of capital.
>>2439870>because they believe themselves to be superiorThey wrote the bible on how to be a patriotic settler imperialist who enslaves racial subordinates, that's why spiritual parasites like JD Vance are still quoting them:
https://readsettlers.org/>>2440138>as far as capital cannot be directly annunciated, it fails to be abridged into a critical analysis, since it evades what is truly signifiedthing-noticing NPCs: "durrr look at this contradiction caused by class society, it must be those bourgeois Jews who are doing this"
>>2443569>even though it didn't downplay zionist atrocities, just regarded them as historically similar to the half-forgotten genocides of the late victorian age No, it does downplay recent innovations of imperialist genocide.Everyone knows what Zionists do with their AI generated drone holocaust praxis ("Daddy's Home" etc). Smug gamerchair socialists like you would have a scoffed at people drawing attention to IBM's work in innovating computerized German holocaust: "these punchcards using bureaucratic census data is irrelevant to me, you need to be soyfacing at the treaty of Westphalia like my Contrapoints friends". Trying to claim all of history is the same is fake Marxism that only shows how you are a pseud with your head up your ass
>>2440017>"it was a national conflict, not an ideological war as you flimsily imagine">>2440164>"if there was ideological conviction"idealist liberals use the word "ideology" as referring to abstract ideas that randomly float in peoples heads for no discernable reason, VS the Marxist definition of "ideology" as the historical materialist superstructure floating above the economic mode of production that leads people to behave in a certain way to align with the ruling class who controls their State
When working class people try to stop their genocide by white settlers (btw Russia is still being targeted for depopulation and lowered life expectancy by Jeffrey Epstein's friends at Harvard:
https://www.thenation.com/article/world/harvard-boys-do-russia/). that's somehow NOT ideological. Ideology has nothing to do with survival, it has to do with if you watch Contrapoints videos or not
>>2443751>This isn't true. the problem in the west isn't Jews, it's philosemitesYeah, the problem isn't in the west, it's in the middle east you stooge.
>In the UK Labour "antisemitism" scandal, for example, a huge chunk of the most nonsensical complaints (stuff like "party member mocking the president of the US [trump]") were made by "David Gordstein", a pseudonym of the very-much-not-Jewish Euan Phillips, who despite not being Jewish was the chair of "Labour Against Antisemitism".And why do you think so many western politicians worship Jews? Do you think there's no manipulation of any form at play here?
>A huge chunk of America's support for Israel comes not from Jewish people, but from deranged Christians who need Israel to control the holy land so that Jesus can get Armageddon goingThose people are powerless. The parasitizing Israel does on America is from its chokehold on American politicians. Most politicians don't actually think or believe in any of that nonsense, religion and culture are just tools to milk cattle of votes.
In grassroots US even the staunchest, most brainwashed Judeo-Christian worshippers of Israel are wavering these days. And I'm only talking about what's left of a small hardcore minority of boomers, because the right wing block got completely splintered on the matter of Israel a long time ago, and it's being dragged by the congress and Drumpf.
>>2444550why are you talking to me about your dumb religion?
>>2444948so jews dont control the world by governments? then what is the platform.of power? banks? media?
again, make a list and publish it for us so that you can prove your hypothesis.
>>2445909For the MIC, one thing to keep in mind too is that the money for Israel is really a subsidy to American arms manufacturers because the Israelis buy American weapons with the money the U.S. government sends them. It's one of the strings attached to it (or maybe the only string but it's a thing).
But nobody thinks twice about Trump meeting the CEO of Raytheon which makes the Iron Dome with Rafael (Israeli company). Nobody knows who that is. It doesn't really matter who it is though. The issue is not so much the "character masks" of capital but the logic of production.
At any rate, there's just an enormous amount of money in weapons and other military tech. There are factories and engineering firms spread out across congressional districts all over the United States. And they have their own industrial associations. A lot of that pro-military propaganda in American society is proudly brought to you buy [our list of sponsors]. It's also politically a winner because there are jobs involved and if you don't like it you're a pinko.
And a lot of weapons, fighter planes, artillery like HIMARS etc. are engineered and manufactured by multiple companies that make different parts of the machine. So the Israelis will make some of the internal components on a larger thing.
Unique IPs: 59