4 ms·
Yep, people surviving gulags (where btw. lot of jewish people died as well), need to be called names, because they them selves were not saints and said stupid t
by nec4b 8y ago
Yep, people surviving gulags (where btw. lot of jewish people died as well), need to be called names, because they them selves were not saints and said stupid things sometimes.
- kome 8y agoIf he is an anti-Semite, it's not being called names, he is just an anti-Semite. And a Russian nationalist. A sad but prescient hint of what Russia would have become after the soviet era.
- effry-much 8y agoHe is not an anti-semite. He is an anti-marxist-semite. Which means he likes Jews except for this group that was exploited by marxist ideologues to spread marxist-comunism in Russia. And rightly so!
- kome 8y agoAnti-marxist-semite is still anti-semite in my book.
- effry-much 8y agoThat is one very interesting book you have. Please recall subset theory from mathematics. If someone doesn't like Jews that helped Nazis to kill other Jews ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Ghetto_Police https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Ghetto_Police ), does that make him anti-semite? Because in my book it means he might like Jews in general with this small exception for criminals, murderers, and Marxist ideologues.
- connorelsea 8y agoLmao then why not just say you don't like criminals, murderers, and Marxists. The focus on their Jewishness is suspect at the very least...
- varjag 8y agoWhen a public figure you used to support disappoints you in some substantial way, it's best to change your views rather than paint yourself in the corner by rationalizing their abhorrence. All humans are fallible. There have been some regrettable Nobel Peace Prizes out there, and Amnesty International had to call off some of their awards.
- nec4b 8y agoI don't know who he disappointed, but he didn't disappoint me. His analysis of murderous regime is spot on, and there is no discussion about that. There are only character assassinations and name callings for totally unrelated things from his opponents. First discreditation, then disqualification and lastly liquidation.
- varjag 8y agoThere have been a number of notable Soviet dissidents who were no less apt in their criticism of the regime yet did not descend to imperialism or anti-Semitism.
- nec4b 8y agoHow does the existence of more notable dissidents make his critique of the regime invalid or less true? If you found out that Newton was a thief, would that invalidate his laws of physics for you?
- varjag 8y agoDon't ascribe me your ideas please. Did I say anywhere that his critique of regime wasn't true?
- andrepd 8y agoWhat about the killings and other atrocities committed by Putin's oligarchy? What about the suppression of dissent? What do you think of that, I'm genuinely curious. This is not an attempt to derail, it's that how can "his analysis of murderous regimes be spot on" if he supports Putin?
- andrepd 8y agoThe good old "Jews died in the holocaust, so you can't criticise Israel" argument. As you can see that's not very sound. Plus, nobody was calling then names, so that's another thing: conflating criticism with persecution (a favourite of e.g. Trump). The fact is that his accounts are not factual, but designed to stoke emotions. That is the definition of propaganda, even though people may not like that word. Plus, his personal feelings about matters such as anti-semitism, Russian exceptionalism, and dictators such as Putin, have to be taken into account when reading his texts about such matters.