Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

Racism

13»

Comments

  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Oh. And I forgot the obvious one:

    Communism STRONGLY oppose any form of Religion. At all.

    Now tell me it's a Jewish plot.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Now tell me it's a Jewish plot.
    ok, it's a jewish plot. lol
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    I've heard this idea of Communism being a Jew controlled thing before and I think it's balls...if Jews are so concerned about their religion and the preservation of their people, why buy into an ideology that rejects those principles?
    Is that your way of sending me off on yet another tangent? Why not get to the bottom of an issue, that issue is currently Bolshevism, once you all agree that i am right i'll be happy to move on because now i would like your collective insults about my intelligence and knowledge to rebound back at you, beacuse it is you who have been led astray, not me, you are the fools here im afraid, if its any compensation, i used to be one of you.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lawrence wrote:
    Lol!

    Why do you think Orwell wrote animal farm and fell out with the British lunatic left? It was down to his experience with the reds in Spain, Orwell saw the light thanks to his short encounter with those "democrats" as you call the international Bolshevik horde of 1930's Spain.
    To be honest, reading 1984 I wouldn't call Orwell left wing... he doesn't really paint a very rosey view of proles.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be honest, reading 1984 I wouldn't call Orwell left wing... he doesn't really paint a very rosey view of proles.
    he was a socialist (I might be wrong though) that makes him pretty left wing.

    Course the proles in the book are in much better shape than the party members.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lawrence wrote:
    Most notably Jacob Schiff of the New York banking house Kuhn Loeb and son, it is well documented, it sounds crazy i know, but go and search this all out for yourself, the Capitalists were actually behind the Communists!

    Churchill wrote an article that appeared in the illustrated sunday Herald, Feb 8th 1920 titled "Zionism versus Bolshevism: A struggle for the soul of the Jewish people". in it he says,
    There is no need to exaggarate the part played in the creation of bolshevism and in the acyual bringing about of the Russian revolution by these international and for the most part Atheistical Jews.."
    Ariticle in full - ajedrez_democratico.tripod.com/Zionism-versus-Bolshevism.htm
    - this backs up an American army intelligence report from Russia during the revolution in which Captain Schuyler stated
    "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the United States, but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning, guided and controlled by russian Jews of the [...]type"
    and it also backs up the Director of British intelligence in 1918 when he stated to the US secretary in a report that
    "There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international movement controlled by Jews"
    The American ambassador to Moscow, David francis stated in a 1918 cable to the US government that "The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 per cent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a world wide social revolution"

    All official documents still in existence today!

    Actually shows nothing more than that many Brits harboured anti-semitic feelings. With the benefit of nearly ninety years of research we can see that these statements are complete and utter bollocks.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    With the benefit of nearly ninety years of research we can see that these statements are complete and utter bollocks.

    In keeping with valid debate practices then, NQA, do be so kind as to validate your assertion of fact with some of this "research" debunking these claims. Your mere say so doesnt carry much authority I'm afraid.

    Not surprising, though, to see you play the "anti-semitism" card once again. It is after all such a popular means of avoiding any serious examination of the historic machinations of Zionist ideologues.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh god ... and I suppose the Montgomery bus boycott and the start of the civil rights was as a result of jewish-socialist agitators as well was it?

    Fine ....

    "The Bolshevics have never been funded by Jewish organisations. There is no conspiracy! Honest!"
    Leading Bolshevic, 1928

    The guy who was quoted before me is right ... there's no Jewish conspiracy!
    Other leading Bolshevic from his book 'There was no Jewish Conspiracy by Leading Bolshevic' (1930 Penguin Press)

    I was sadly mistaken about the whole Jewish conspiracy thing. Sorry.
    Winston Churchill

    There you are, its about as well backed up as your's and just as meaningfull!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nice strawman argumentation.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't think Jon UK is trying to support the idea of a jewish conspiracy - so in what way do you think this is a straw man arguement? Actually might be helpful if you wanted to explain what you think a straw man arguement is.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I understand perfectly well that Jon UK is attempting to ridicule the point made by Lawrence, Jim. The wholly non-relevant quip about zionist involvement in the civil rights movement is indeed a strawman argument, that shouldnt require explaining.

    Strawman: A weak or sham argument posited to be easily refuted and thus derail legitimate discussion of a subject.

    I am also a bit surprised at you Jim for apparently catering to the all too popular bandwagon notion that discussion of the historic complicities of Zionists (adherents to a political ideology) equates to "Jewish" conspiracy. Many Jews oppose Zionism and Zionists for the actual 19th century colonialist, racist and apartheid ideologues they are.

    Given that the founders and most ardent perpetuators of the ideology were and are predominantly atheists and secularists, the attempts to equate all criticism thereof with religious persecution is the height of intellectual dishonesty.

    You might as well argue that all criticism of Nazism is hatred toward all Germans or that similar criticism of Apartheid is an attack on all caucasians. Just doesnt wash I'm afraid.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    He means that I've ignored Lawrence's argument and my little quoting impression was distorting Lawrence's point.

    Regardless of his point simply quoting people of the time is only evidence of what they believe not what actually happened. That gives no factual basis to any Jewish conspiracy.

    I could quote McCarthy endlessly but it wouldn't prove an extensive Red conspiracy operating in North America in the 50s.

    ETA - started my post before your reply was up
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I understand perfectly well that Jon UK is attempting to ridicule the point made by Lawrence, Jim. The wholly non-relevant quip about zionist involvement in the civil rights movement is indeed a strawman argument, that shouldnt require explaining.

    Well if all the factual basis is quoting leading figures of the time and area then its not wholly unrelevant. As far as I can see that's the only evidence he's provided so I don't see how you can claim its so dissimilar to leading white supremacists in Alabama claiming the MIA was having its strings pulled by Jewish socialists from New York?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lawrence wrote:
    You people only focus on the accession to power regarding the Fascist governments of Italy and Spain, i am not denying the fact that the fascist forces like Francos Fallangists didnt act nasty with their enemies but you fail to recognise, due to the fact that the vast majority of literature available on the Spanish civil war is from Left wing/republican sources, that the Fascists/Traditionalists were fighting fire with fire.
    The Bolshevik forces were responsible for the worst atrocities that have ever taken place in Europe in its history, all historians accept this, it is not even a debating point, and in Red Spain Priests were being mass Murdered, nailed to the doors of their churches as they had been in Russia and Hungary some years earlier, this kind of thing is one of the biggest reasons that the ranks of the blackshirts, the fallange and the NSDAP swelled into the millions as they did, not because they were all inherently evil but because they were fighting against the ever rising tide of Bolshevism, a force which they saw quite as the greatest threat to their lives, and of course Bolshevism was also the source of a rising tide of Anti-Semetism as people began to join the dots together with the faces of the international Bolshevik leadership.


    Yes and of course Franco didn't overthrow a democratic government did he? They didn't exaggerate the murder of priests for propaganda purposes did they?

    P.S.
    I'd get a new historian if I were you, yours is fucked.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lawrence wrote:
    Lol!

    Why do you think Orwell wrote animal farm and fell out with the British lunatic left? It was down to his experience with the reds in Spain, Orwell saw the light thanks to his short encounter with those "democrats" as you call the international Bolshevik horde of 1930's Spain.

    Franco overthrew a democratic republic. You're also getting mixed up between Stalinisism and communism.

    Reading some history might help, this is a good one
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0304358401/qid=1132574491/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_11_1/203-1117780-6573511
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not surprising, though, to see you play the "anti-semitism" card once again. It is after all such a popular means of avoiding any serious examination of the historic machinations of Zionist ideologues.

    Well there's certainly people who criticise Israel such FTP and Aladdin who I'm pretty sure are not anti-semites.

    However if you back up your criticisms of Israel with holocaust denial and claims of a zionist conspiracy I don't think its unreasonable for people to suspect you are an anti-semite.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    he was a socialist (I might be wrong though) that makes him pretty left wing.

    Course the proles in the book are in much better shape than the party members.
    I don't believe so personally. If he's any sort of socialist he'd be a democratic one, he certainly doesn't seem a believer in revolution. Personally I do think the ol' Eton boy isn't fond of working classes by what I've read. They were portrayed as dirty and ignorant.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Orwell was certainly disillusioned by USSR style communism and his experiences with the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War. He was very sympathetic to the CNT/FAI and the POUM however, which would lead me to think he was still a socialist. Although I have to admit I haven't read a huge amount of Orwell, only 1984, Animal Farm and Homage to Catalonia.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I defy you to find any instance where I denied the holocaust.

    As for Zionism, it remains a political ideology not a synonym for Judaism and is indeed eschewed by many Jews and Jewish organisations. To thus equate any comment on its pernicious and underhanded complicities in shaping world events (which, due to long running, incremental insinuation of adherents into key positions in international finance, industry and government, it has indeed succeeded in doing over the past century) with "anti-semitism" remains wholly disingenuous.

    Zionism is a secular and wholly evil, racist 19th century colonialist ideology which deserves to be condemned and buried along with its SA Apartheid counterpart in the graveyard of history. Many upstanding Jews concur.
    Well there's certainly people who criticise Israel such FTP and Aladdin who I'm pretty sure are not anti-semites.

    You can add me to that list as well.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I defy you to find any instance where I denied the holocaust.

    My, my aren't we paranoid. I was actually talking about Lawrence, but read his posts and see if you disagree.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not remotely paranoid thanks.

    Actually Ive not seen Lawrence denying the holocaust, just questioning the numbers of victims. Not something I consider to be worth debating. My concern remains the extent to which Zionists carry on the very principles of group superiority and exception from accountability for their actions which made the holocaust itself possible.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    Actually shows nothing more than that many Brits harboured anti-semitic feelings. With the benefit of nearly ninety years of research we can see that these statements are complete and utter bollocks.
    Please do give us the findings then, let me see this research that you claim to know about,
    Does your research refute the claims of respected journalists and intelligence officers both US and Britsh who were actually present during the Russian revolution?
    Does your "revisionist research" now show us that five out of the six most influential leaders of the Bolshevik revolution were not Jewish?
    Or that out of 384 commisars, 300 were not Jewish?

    Here are the six most prominent Bolsheviks of the Russian revolution -

    Lenin - At least one-quarter Jewish, spoke Yiddish in his home and was married to a Jewess
    Trotsky - Jewish, Real name Lev Bronstein
    Zinoviev - Jewish, Real name Hirsch Apfelbaum
    Kamenov - Jewish, Real name Rosenfeld
    Sverdlov - Jewish
    Lunacharsky - Gentile
    This is just the tip of the iceberg believe me, and ive not even touched on Bela Kuhn and company who brought Hungary to its knees briefly during 1919,

    I must also add that the two main sybols of Bolshevism are overtly Jewish, the clenched fist symbol was an Ancient Jewish symbol of defiance going back to the days of Rome?
    And the Red star is also known as the Morning star or Esther's Star another undeniably Jewish symbol.
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Lawrence wrote:
    I must also add that the two main sybols of Bolshevism are overtly Jewish, the clenched fist symbol was an Ancient Jewish symbol of defiance going back to the days of Rome?
    And the Red star is also known as the Morning star or Esther's Star another undeniably Jewish symbol.

    So a shared symbol means that it is instantly that? How do you address Communist hatred of Religion? Indeed, you seem also under hte impression that Religion is inherited from parents. How rare. So, I should by birth be Christian. I can assure you I am not. People choose religion, it does not choose them in any way. Religion is a free choice. To be a Communist, you must pretty much reject religion. It is a form of control and oppression in any form, and should, as such, be abolished.

    If anything is a Jewish plot, it's the Western Media I tell you! Or the USA... and if Communism is so Jewish, what the hell is with this chap? Albert Mashakov, at hte top... he's a right nut.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    So a shared symbol means that it is instantly that? How do you address Communist hatred of Religion? Indeed, you seem also under hte impression that Religion is inherited from parents. How rare. So, I should by birth be Christian. I can assure you I am not. People choose religion, it does not choose them in any way. Religion is a free choice. To be a Communist, you must pretty much reject religion. It is a form of control and oppression in any form, and should, as such, be abolished.

    If anything is a Jewish plot, it's the Western Media I tell you! Or the USA... and if Communism is so Jewish, what the hell is with this chap? Albert Mashakov, at hte top... he's a right nut.
    Before I address all your points, like i always do, i'd like you to address all my previous points, rather than just taking bits here and there that you feel a little more "comfortable" with.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be honest, reading 1984 I wouldn't call Orwell left wing... he doesn't really paint a very rosey view of proles.

    I know leftists who don't speak very rosily about "proles" either. Socialism is a means of improving people.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be honest, i've read 1984, i wouldnt call Orwell left wing
    If more of you would pay attention to what im actually telling you, you wouldnt go off on needless nonsense such as the above.
    If you read my post properly you will find that i stated that Orwell had "fallen out with the British Lunatic left", meaning he was at one time friendly but not anymore -it is at this stage that he wrote his two classics Animal farm and 1984 .
    Two books that Orwell's long time leftist Jewish publisher Harold Laski refused to print.
Sign In or Register to comment.