3 ms·

...but rather that racism requires structural and systemic bias against an ethnic, racial, religious, etc. subgroup of the population who do not have political

by Tade0 6y ago

...but rather that racism requires structural and systemic bias against an ethnic, racial, religious, etc. subgroup of the population who do not have political power. Why should it, though? Nazi Germany racism was infamously based on the notion that it's the Jews who are in power and favour their own. The very concept of ant-zionism today puts the people it's racist towards as the oppressors with political power.

eesmith 6y ago
Telling lies about who is in power doesn't mean those people actually have power. It's a common technique - hype people who don't have much power into some sort of super-villain, unite the rest of the population against them, and leverage that into political power. Nazi Germany racism was also based on US racism, including its treatment of Native Americans. See https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691172422/hitlers-american-model https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691172422/hi... with PDF at https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/Hitler%27s%20American%20Model%20for%20NYU.pdf https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents... .
- Tade0 6y ago
  Telling lies about who is in power doesn't mean those people actually have power. My fossilized-antisemitist relative once told me that the reason there existed people in my country (Poland) who would help nazis was that, and I quote, "before the war everyone owed the Jews some money". Also a large part of islamic antisemitism stems from wars lost to the Israelis. Basically there are instances in history where whole ethnic groups are hated because they are dominant.
  - eesmith 6y ago
    That hatred wasn't meaningfully due to Jewish political power. Banking was almost literally the only field where Christian law in the Middle Ages - in this case prohibitions against usury - discriminated against Christians in favor of Jews. The section at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Judaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Judaism gives more context: > As the Jews were ostracized from most professions by local rulers during the Middle Ages, the Western churches and the guilds,[30] they were pushed into marginal occupations considered socially inferior, such as tax and rent collecting and moneylending. Natural tensions between creditors and debtors were added to social, political, religious, and economic strains.[31] > ...financial oppression of Jews tended to occur in areas where they were most disliked, and if Jews reacted by concentrating on moneylending to non-Jews, the unpopularity—and so, of course, the pressure—would increase. Thus the Jews became an element in a vicious circle. The Christians, on the basis of the Biblical rulings, condemned interest-taking absolutely, and from 1179 those who practiced it were excommunicated. Catholic autocrats frequently imposed the harshest financial burdens on the Jews. The Jews reacted by engaging in the one business where Christian laws actually discriminated in their favor, and became identified with the hated trade of moneylending. I surely agree with the other statements you made. (As another example, apartheid South Africa's and the unrecognised state of Rhodesia's minority white population were far from loved by the rest of the population.) I don't, however, understand the relevance.

by Tade0 6y ago

eesmith 6y ago

Telling lies about who is in power doesn't mean those people actually have power. It's a common technique - hype people who don't have much power into some sort of super-villain, unite the rest of the population against them, and leverage that into political power. Nazi Germany racism was also based on US racism, including its treatment of Native Americans. See https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691172422/hitlers-american-model https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691172422/hi... with PDF at https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/Hitler%27s%20American%20Model%20for%20NYU.pdf https://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents... .

Tade0 6y ago
Telling lies about who is in power doesn't mean those people actually have power. My fossilized-antisemitist relative once told me that the reason there existed people in my country (Poland) who would help nazis was that, and I quote, "before the war everyone owed the Jews some money". Also a large part of islamic antisemitism stems from wars lost to the Israelis. Basically there are instances in history where whole ethnic groups are hated because they are dominant.
- eesmith 6y ago
  That hatred wasn't meaningfully due to Jewish political power. Banking was almost literally the only field where Christian law in the Middle Ages - in this case prohibitions against usury - discriminated against Christians in favor of Jews. The section at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Judaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Judaism gives more context: > As the Jews were ostracized from most professions by local rulers during the Middle Ages, the Western churches and the guilds,[30] they were pushed into marginal occupations considered socially inferior, such as tax and rent collecting and moneylending. Natural tensions between creditors and debtors were added to social, political, religious, and economic strains.[31] > ...financial oppression of Jews tended to occur in areas where they were most disliked, and if Jews reacted by concentrating on moneylending to non-Jews, the unpopularity—and so, of course, the pressure—would increase. Thus the Jews became an element in a vicious circle. The Christians, on the basis of the Biblical rulings, condemned interest-taking absolutely, and from 1179 those who practiced it were excommunicated. Catholic autocrats frequently imposed the harshest financial burdens on the Jews. The Jews reacted by engaging in the one business where Christian laws actually discriminated in their favor, and became identified with the hated trade of moneylending. I surely agree with the other statements you made. (As another example, apartheid South Africa's and the unrecognised state of Rhodesia's minority white population were far from loved by the rest of the population.) I don't, however, understand the relevance.