/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

There were no revolutionaries in the 20th century. It was a big nothing. History stands frozen.

>>2925776
Nah, I'm not a nationalist

>>2925855
It dismantles his retarded assertion that the Hall of Cost was responsible for Israel's establishment, which only lends credence to Zionist mythological narratives. Those colonialist Jews in Palestine were always going to eliminate the indigenous Arabs one way or another regardless of who Germany's chancellor was.
All WW2 did was exhaust Britain's resources and imperial strength, which is why they withdrew as early as they did after the Jews started launching terrorist attacks against British interests.

Israel isn't the last boss of capitalism lmao

>>2925997 (me)
Also, the "sympathy" angle is overstated. The US and the Western Bloc administered an arms embargo on Israel. The major supporters of Israel in 1947-1948 was Stalin's bitch ass using Czechoslovakia as a proxy to funnel weapons.

>>2925997 (me again)
>>2926009
Moreover, nobody really gave a shit about the Holocaust back then either. People only became obsessed with the Holocaust around the 1960s because of Jewish-Zionist psyops.

>>2926015
>nobody really gave a shit about the Holocaust back then either. People only became obsessed with the Holocaust around the 1960s because of Jewish-Zionist psyops.
this is in direct contradiction to the book you have posted a picture of but which you have evidently not read, written by a jew btw. Norman Finklestein notes how deep into the Russian and Belarussian psyche the holocaust has sunk, because "the holocaust" by any reasonable definition includes not only the jews targeted by Hitler, but slavic "untermenschen" and Communists targeted also.

>>2925997
>It dismantles his [sabocat's] retarded assertion that the Hall of Cost was responsible for Israel's establishment,
that wasn't sabocat's argument; i would have nevertheless worded some things differently than sabocat, but let's scroll back up and double check what that sabocat said:
<He created millions of them and then millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe.
He said this in response to another anon who said (regarding Hitler)
<well he removed far more zionist settlers than he helped
This is insane because Hitler did not "remove" (anon means kill) a single "Zionist settler." Hitler's regime killed European Jews, Slavic people, Communists, Social Democrats, Liberals, Anarchists, basically everyone conceivably at odds with the nazi regime. This is what resulted in a United Front. What's very odd about this curious (nazi revisionist) line of praise for Hitler is that it implicitly admits that every Jew "removed" (killed) by Hitler would have potentially migrated to Israel.

Now… with that out of the way, you stated, correctly:
>The Zionist movement already held significant stakes in Mandatory Palestine prior to WW2.
This is true. However nobody asserted that what you refer to mockingly as the "Hall of Cost" (the Nazi regime's genocidal campaign which targeted far more than just Jews according to just about everyone except nazis and zionists) resulted in Israel's creation. What sabocat was implying was that the antisemitic (in its original intended sense from the 19th century, used in deliberate self-description by German gentiles who disliked Jews) notion that Jews were corrupting Europe and needed to leave was a big driving force behind the rising popularity of zionism. This is something which was attested to as early as Herzl but only became more true with the rise of the Nazi regime, a self-described antisemitic regime whose goal was, among other things, to purge Evropa of Jewry, Communists, and so forth, which for them was synonymous.

>>2924947
>Was Bordiga right
he certainly wasn't left

>>2926267
>this is in direct contradiction to the book you have posted a picture of but which you have evidently not read, written by a jew btw.
No, it isn't in contradiction you dumb faggot. Norm writes about this at the very beginning of Chapter 1 in the Holocaust Industry (I have the second edition). Don't comment on things you know nothing about. Here's what Norm writes:
<Until fairly recently, however, the Nazi holocaust barely figured in American life. Between the end of World War II and the late 1960s, only a handful of books and films touched on the subject. There was only one university course offering in the United States on the topic.2 When Hannah Arendt published Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1963, she could draw on only two scholarly studies in the English language – Gerald Reitlinger’s The Final Solution and Raul Hilberg’s The Destruction of the European Jews.3 Hilberg’s masterpiece itself just managed to see the light of day. His thesis advisor at Columbia University, the German-Jewish social theorist Franz Neumann, strongly discouraged him from writing on the topic (“It’s your funeral”), and no university or mainstream publisher would touch the completed manuscript. When it was finally published, The Destruction of the European Jews received only a few, mostly critical, notices.4
<Not only Americans in general but also American Jews, including Jewish intellectuals, paid the Nazi holocaust little heed. In an authoritative 1957 survey, sociologist Nathan Glazer reported that the Nazi Final Solution (as well as Israel) “had remarkably slight effects on the inner life of American Jewry.” In a 1961 Commentary symposium on “Jewishness and the Younger Intellectuals,” only two of thirty-one contributors stressed its impact. Likewise, a 1961roundtable convened by the journal Judaism of twenty-one observant American Jews on “My Jewish Affirmation” almost completely ignored the subject.5 No monuments or tributes marked the Nazi holocaust in the United States. To the contrary, major Jewish organizations opposed such memorialization. The question is, Why?
<The standard explanation is that Jews were traumatized by the Nazi holocaust and therefore repressed the memory of it. In fact, there is no evidence to support this conclusion. No doubt some survivors did not then or, for that matter, in later years want to speak about what had happened. Many others, however, very much wanted to speak and, once the occasion availed itself, wouldn’t stop speaking.6 The problem was that Americans didn’t want to listen. The real reason for public silence on the Nazi extermination was the conformist policies of the American Jewish leadership and the political climate of postwar America. In both domestic and international affairs American Jewish elites7 hewed closely to official US policy. Doing so in effect facilitated the traditional goals of assimilation and access to power. With the inception of the Cold War, mainstream Jewish organizations jumped into the fray. American Jewish elites“forgot” the Nazi holocaust because Germany – West Germany by 1949 – became a crucial postwar American ally in the US confrontation with the Soviet Union. Dredging up the past served no useful purpose; in fact it complicated matters.
Literally no one in power gave a shit about the Holocaust, including organized Western Jewry, until around the 1960s (specifically after the Israel launched the Six Day War).
>>2926267
What are you, president of this faggot's fan club? Anyways, he's wrong because the Holocaust did not generate sympathy for the Jews, as Norm documents. Literally nobody gave a fuck about the fate of the Jews in Europe when Israel declared independence. The rest of your post is a bunch of rambling, irrelevant nonsense.

>>2926276
I assume you meant to respond to >>2926260 and not just >>2926267 twice. Anyway … I made both replies, full disclosure, so it does not matter.

In any case, your quote from Norm's book says very specifically:

<Until fairly recently, however, the Nazi holocaust barely figured in American life. Between the end of World War II and the late 1960s, only a handful of books and films touched on the subject.

Norm is commenting on American attitudes. I'm sure I don't have to tell you this again, America isn't the entire world.

You said, unlike Norm:

>Moreover, nobody really gave a shit about the Holocaust back then either. People only became obsessed with the Holocaust around the 1960s

I promise you, the Holocaust is seen differently in Belarus and Russia than it is in America, this is why Norm specifically limited his statement to America, while you failed to. Norm has actually commented on the Russian and Belarussian attitudes towards the Holocaust in various interviews, and how it animates in particular their bellicose attitude towards the US government funding neo nazi battalions in Ukraine during the present war… I suggest listening to 14 minutes onwards from this interview for more insight on that if you are interested.

>What are you, president of this faggot's fan club?

No, in fact I have argued with him on several occasions recently on other subject matters I disagree with him on, namely religion, which I think he is too soft towards. I merely jumped in because I thought you were misrepresenting what he said, and you did so in a way that would be difficult for people just jumping into the thread and reading your post first to notice if they do not scroll up and read his post in its original context, which you neglected to quote while misrepresenting what it said. I properly represented both what you and he said in my reply, which is why I quoted you both directly, and in context.

>Anyways, he's wrong because the Holocaust did not generate sympathy for the Jews, as Norm documents.

Again, Norm is discussing the United States. And specifically the United States between 1945 and the 1960s, not the United States I grew up in, in the 1990s, which was having me read Anne Frank in middle school… let alone the countries targeted by Hitler's genocidal regime, namely the Soviet countries of Belarus and Russia. A more careful reading on your part both of our posts, and his book, would have yielded some fruit on this matter. My suspicion however is you will double down, deploy a few more angry slurs, and be done with it. Have a nice evening. Get some sleep if you have work tomorrow.
> The rest of your post is a bunch of rambling, irrelevant nonsense.
That's a very cheap way to avoid having to respond to it while simultaneously discouraging others from reading it. Very cowardly.

>>2926276
>Literally no one in power gave a shit about the Holocaust, including organized Western Jewry, until around the 1960s (specifically after the Israel launched the Six Day War).
Hey your quote is saying that people did care about it they just shut up about it because it was inconvenient and suicidal to bring up during the early cold war in the United States. Also the conversation wasn't originally about the USA, but about attitudes in the entire world, which includes Europe, namely the countries most affected by WW2. The original conversation was about whether WW2 resulted in more Zionist settlers leaving Europe for Israel, not about America's attitudes towards Jews after WW2. That is a new topic you have introduced. Also Norm Finklestein says nowhere in your quoted text that "the Holocaust did not generate sympathy for the Jews" he is not mentioning sympathy so much as the political atmosphere of early Postwar America. The sympathy bit is just a stretched reading on your part, and in any case not really the topic at hand. It's actually difficult to enumerate the ways in which you're jerking the conversation around without making a longer post than you. Nice job.

>>2926282
>I'm sure I don't have to tell you this again, America isn't the entire world.
In the context of the Cold War's dynamics, the Western Bloc absolutely matters. The Eastern Bloc didn't really care about the Holocaust either FYI, and you have supplied no evidence that they did.
>I promise you, the Holocaust is seen differently in Belarus and Russia than it is in America
Not really. The USSR never really played on the anti-Jewishness of the Holocaust; for one, I know Stalin banned Ilya Ehrenburg's "Black Book of Soviet Jewry" which talked about anti-Jewish war crimes committed by the Germans. If anything, the West is nowadays more obsessed with the Holocaust than the East. It doesn't really matter anyways, as the USSR's support for Israel in 1947-1948 was purely driven by a desire to undermine the British; Stalin certainly did not give a fuck about the Jews either. So even if the East was hypothetically more "sympathetic" to Jewry, it had no effect on the East's actual policy.
>I suggest listening to 14 minutes onwards from this interview for more insight on that if you are interested.
Skimmed through it. No support to your claims.
>I merely jumped in because I thought you were misrepresenting what he said
He's been represented perfectly. The idea that the Holocaust generated sympathy for Israel on the international stage is a crock of shit that lends credence to Jewish ethnocentric narratives.
>That's a very cheap way to avoid having to respond to it while simultaneously discouraging others from reading it. Very cowardly.
I'm cheap then. Next time don't ramble about irrelevant shit.

>>2926285
>I'm cheap then. Next time don't ramble about irrelevant shit.
it was relevant because the original context of the conversation was an anon saying Hitler "removed Zionist settlers." this is what sabocat responded to, and then you responded to that. I don't know if that anon was you but that established the entire context of the conversation. When I tried to recall that context you called it incoherent and rambling. I think it's telling that you find remembering context for more than a few posts "icoherent and rambling" almost as if you are angry with me for noticing the tonal shifts in the conversation, the moving goalposts. As you move the goalposts to new topics such as whether anyone "gave a shit about the holocaust" (in general) and then to whether Americans gave a shit about the holocaust, I have to keep track of these moving goalposts and not simply respond to you on your own terms as you try to dictate what the conversation is about by changing it to new subjects while calling me incoherent and rambling for remembering the original subject.

>Not really. The USSR never really played on the anti-Jewishness of the Holocaust

1. I never said they did
   
2. that wasn't the topic, this is yet another topic you have moved to
   
3. "the holocaust" refers to the nazi genocides against slavic peoples as well as jews, not just the genocide against the jews. the only two groups who seem to disagree with this fact are nazis and zionists who both revise history on this matter, though for different reasons. For what it's worth the USSR was very proud of liberating the concentration camps in Germany, and made propaganda posters about it, if you are going to force me to play this game of moving to a new topic.

>>2926285
>He's been represented perfectly. The idea that the Holocaust generated sympathy for Israel
He never said that. You are again lying and pretending he said the holocaust generated sympathy for Israel. this is the lie you keep repeating in this conversation, then you confidently refute words he never said and expect us to not notice. What he suggested was that the nazi regime's actions led to an increase in Jews leaving Europe for Israel. Which it did, both voluntarily, and in terms of Hitler's deportations of Jews to Palestine, which include both the abovementioned Haavara agreement, as well as several rounds of deportations that occured after the Haavara agreement, even continuing after 1938.

>>2926288
>it was relevant because the original context of the conversation was an anon saying Hitler "removed Zionist settlers."
That anon wasn't me, so you're still rambling about irrelevant shit.
>the moving goalposts
>move the goalposts to new topics
>I have to keep track of these moving goalposts
The goalposts haven't been moved. Sympathy to the Jews had no bearing on Israel's establishment because literally no one in power gave a shit about what had happened to the Jews during WW2.
>I never said they did
Exactly! The USSR didn't care about the plight of Jews either when they decided to back Israel in 1947-1948.
>that wasn't the topic, this is yet another topic you have moved to
You made a point about how I was focused on the United States, when the Soviet regime didn't really care either, lol.
>"the holocaust" refers to the nazi genocides against slavic peoples as well as jews, not just the genocide against the jews.
Wrong. The Jews are always the center of the Holocaust narrative.
>>2926290
>He never said that.
He clearly did: >>2925759
<millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe.

>>2926285
(you will call these direct quotations "incoherent rambling" but let's try again)

>>2924961
Anon A:
<He (Hitler) removed far more zionist settlers than he helped

(Anon is suggesting that the Haavara agreement doesn't matter because Hitler killing European Jews who lived in Germany killed far more zionist settlers, even though this anon has no evidence those Jews would have necessarily become Zionist Settlers)

Sabocat:
<He (Hitler) created millions of them (zionist settlers) and then millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe.

Your interpretation of sabocat's words:
<He's been represented perfectly. The idea that the Holocaust generated sympathy for Israel on the international stage is a crock of shit that lends credence to Jewish ethnocentric narratives.

Where are you getting "sympathy for Israel" out of his post? and why do you keep confusing that particular interpretation with completely separate topics you have introduced like

<did anyone have sympathy with Jews after WW2
<did anyone give a shit about the holocaust
<did Americans give a shit about the holocaust before 1965
<did the Soviets care about the anti-Jewishness of the holcoaust

>>2926292
me:
>"the holocaust" refers to the nazi genocides against slavic peoples as well as jews, not just the genocide against the jews.

your reply:
<Wrong. The Jews are always the center of the Holocaust narrative.

1. I did not dispute that the jews are "at the center of the holocaust narrative" this is a new topic you have introduced, yet another goalpost. is this all you are capable of doing? I disputed that the jews were the only victims of the holocaust, not that they are at the center of narratives about it.
   
   

2 the part of my quote you deliberatelyleft out:
> the only two groups who seem to disagree with this fact are nazis and zionists who both revise history on this matter, though for different reasons.

really tiresome shit, brother

>>2926284
>Hey your quote is saying that people did care
<barely figured in American life
<only a handful of books and films touched on the subject
<only two scholarly studies in the English language
<The Destruction of the European Jews received only a few, mostly critical, notices
<major Jewish organizations opposed such memorialization
>attitudes in the entire world, which includes Europe, namely the countries most affected by WW2
They didn't care either. Feel free to show me that they did though!
>The original conversation was about whether WW2 resulted in more Zionist settlers leaving Europe for Israel, not about America's attitudes towards Jews after WW2. That is a new topic you have introduced.
No, it was about whether WW2 convinced "millions more sympathizers" that "the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe" (it didn't). Nobody denied that Jewish emigration after WW2 increased.
>Also Norm Finklestein says nowhere in your quoted text that "the Holocaust did not generate sympathy for the Jews" he is not mentioning sympathy so much as the political atmosphere of early Postwar America.
Yes, and Norm documents that the political atmosphere was a lack of sympathy.
>The sympathy bit is just a stretched reading on your part, and in any case not really the topic at hand. It's actually difficult to enumerate the ways in which you're jerking the conversation around without making a longer post than you. Nice job.
How?

>>2926294
let me ask you two simple questions

1. was the original anon correct in asserting that hitler "removed zionist settlers" by killing european jews? Because this is what sabocat was disagreeing with
   
   
2. or did hitler increase the population of zionist settlers by deporting european jews to israel despite the much larger of european jews he killed, since we cannot know how many of the european jews hitler killed would have eventually become zionist settlers?

>>2926297
>>2926297
>Yes, and Norm documents that the political atmosphere was a lack of sympathy.
he documents that the USA was allies with west germany, absorbed ex-nazis through operation paperclip, and in this red scare environment jewish intellectuals int he USA during the early cold war (a completely separate topic from what we were originally discussing) were hesitant to make a big deal about the holocaust, an event where the soviets were liberators, germany was the aggressor, and the USA was an imperialist opportunist swooping in late to prevent soviets hegemony.

>>2926296
>I did not dispute that the jews are "at the center of the holocaust narrative" this is a new topic you have introduced
Then you've conceded to my point.
>I disputed that the jews were the only victims of the holocaust, not that they are at the center of narratives about it.
Without the Jewish deaths, it wouldn't be the "Holocaust" as we know it. The Gentile deaths are treated as a corollary.
>>2926299
I ultimately don't care how many Jews were killed.
>>2926300
Yes, and that the Holocaust never factored into their decision-making.

>>2926300
>hesitant to make a big deal about the holocaust
Exactly, so the claim that the Holocaust created "millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe" is rather silly. Political sympathy for the Holocaust only really arose because of Jewish-Zionist psyops following Israel's Six Day War against its Arab neighbors in 1967.

>>2926303
>Without the Jewish deaths, it wouldn't be the "Holocaust" as we know it. The Gentile deaths are treated as a corollary.
only two groups look at the holocaust this way: zionists and nazis.

>>2926306
>Political sympathy for the Holocaust only really arose because of Jewish-Zionist psyops following Israel's Six Day War against its Arab neighbors in 1967.
The American film industry was already making revisionist zionist propaganda that pushed a "from holocaust survivor to zionist settler" narrative as early as 1960. Exodus starring Paul Newman for example (which made back its budget and then some, so it wasn't some trite little thing that was ignored.)

>>2926303
>change the topic to a completely different question
>anon answers your question with agreement
<heh then you concede my point
>then proceed to answer anon's questions with "i don't care how many jews were killed" which literally wasn't the point of either question

I assume you know how conversation works and you're just being rude on purpose at this point

>>2926303
>I ultimately don't care how many Jews were killed.

The question wasn't whether you cared, anon. But it is evident that you don't really care about the original topic since you keep changing it any time anyone asks you anything.

<was the original anon correct in asserting that hitler "removed zionist settlers" by killing european jews? Because this is what sabocat was disagreeing with

<or did hitler increase the population of zionist settlers by deporting european jews to israel despite the much larger of european jews he killed, since we cannot know how many of the european jews hitler killed would have eventually become zionist settlers?

Worst thread on /leftypol/ award.

this is a troll thread btw

>>2927835
i knew this one would be a banger from the moment i read the phrase "diddyjew boojcabal"

>>2926015
>nobody really gave a shit about the Holocaust back then either.
yes they did. 100 years from now people like you will be saying nobody gave a shit about palestinian genocide until 2050. but that won't make it true.

>>2927446
>The American film industry was already making revisionist zionist propaganda that pushed a "from holocaust survivor to zionist settler" narrative as early as 1960
Israel was established in 1948, not 1960. There was no political sympathy for the Jews in 1948 and Norm documents this. Indeed, the Western Bloc, including the United States, imposed an arms embargo on Israel during that time; only the USSR was backing Israel as a proxy against the British. Cultural obsession began with Jewish-Zionist psyop offensives in the 1960s, and accelerated around the time of Israel's Six Day War in 1967.
>>2927830
>Retard faggot says he does not dispute X
>X was the thing I've been arguing this whole time
<Oh, so you've conceded?
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Okay.
>>2927833
>The question wasn't whether you cared, anon.
My answer to your question is I don't care because the question has nothing to do with what I've been arguing. Go bother the anon that actually said Hitler "removed zionist settlers," not me.
>>2927952
>yes they did.
No, they didn't, lol.
>100 years from now people like you will be saying nobody gave a shit about palestinian genocide until 2050
There is infinitely more contemporary coverage about the genocide in Gaza than what happened to the Jews during WW2, so this is quite silly.

>>2928014
>Go bother the anon that actually said Hitler "removed zionist settlers," not me.
Not gonna lie I thought you were the same anon since you immediately jumped on sabocat for arguing with that dumbass while seemingly taking no issue with the much more retarded take that came from that anon

>>2928014
>No, they didn't, lol.
the political cartoon anon posted was made in the leadup to America's entry into WW2

>>2928014
>Go bother the anon that actually said Hitler "removed zionist settlers," not me.
it is pretty funny how you won't answer the question of whether you actually agree with that anon while constantly changing the subject away from that in any way you can

>>2928017
Saboretard said that the Holocaust created "millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe"; I was addressing the absurdity of that statement, nothing more.
>>2928018
There isn't any mention of Jews or the Holocaust in that cartoon.
>>2928024
Why should I answer irrelevant questions about someone random poster's argument?

>>2928026
>There isn't any mention of Jews or the Holocaust in that cartoon.
you are once again pretending the holocaust only refers to jews because of the circular logic that jewish supremacists and nazis say so. this was already addressed here:

>>2926296
>>2926945

>>2927835
It's a guilty pleasure

>>2926303
>Without the Jewish deaths, it wouldn't be the "Holocaust" as we know it.
the nazis couldn't tell the difference between jew and gentile because everyone they didn't like was a "judeobolshevik" you sniveling cretin
>The Gentile deaths are treated as a corollary.
millions of mostly gentile soviet citizens were killed in a deliberate genocidal invasion. you're outta your god damn mind.

>>2928589
>you are once again pretending the holocaust only refers to jews because of the circular logic that jewish supremacists and nazis say so.
Raul Hilberg is a Nazi?
>>2928590
The beginning of the conversation for me was this: >>2925779
In response to this: >>2925759
<then millions more sympathizers by convincing the world that Jews weren't safe in Europe
Why should I care about how many Jews died?
>>2928640
>the nazis couldn't tell the difference between jew
Lol, what? They used ancestry and genealogical records.
>millions of mostly gentile soviet citizens were killed in a deliberate genocidal invasion
And the academic consensus on what the Holocaust is treats those deaths as a corollary. What is the nature of your dispute?

>>2924970
Xe is not ready for this one… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rV9WUtITEQ

not to mention Franco NEVER recognising Israel either… Neither the modern Falange de las JONS do.

>>2928689
>not to mention Franco NEVER recognising Israel either
Also refused to participate in the blockade on Cuba.

>>2928692

was just going to mention it. Posting this banger.
Man, this chan is far better than the sharty or 4trans? Can we thirdpositionist theorycels move here? we promise to be cute <3 (But for girls)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fuVKxtuUA4

>>2928696
I don't know, jannies are pretty gay and retarded on here.

>>2924947
bordiga was right wing

>>2925776
>ouyghshells
kek that was good

>>2929685
it wasn't on purpose, the word filter really is that fucking touchy

>>2924948
truke that sent porkies scrambling for cover