Sometimes differences are fantastic for a relationship and sometimes they make a relationship impossible.
The Jewish question is the name given to a wide-ranging debate in European society pertaining to the appropriate status and treatment of Jews in society. The debate was similar to other so-called “national questions” and dealt with the civil, legal, national and political status of Jews as a minority within society, particularly in Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
The debate started within societies, politicians and writers in western and central Europe influenced by the Age of Enlightenment and the ideals of the French Revolution. The issues included the legal and economic Jewish disabilities (e.g. Jewish quotas and segregation), Jewish assimilation, Jewish emancipation and Jewish Enlightenment.
The expression has been used by antisemitic movements from the 1880s onwards, culminating in the Nazi phrase “the Final Solution to the Jewish Question”. Similarly, the expression was used by proponents for and opponents of the establishment of an autonomous Jewish homeland or a sovereign Jewish state.
Since the 1950s, there’s been little public discussion of The Jewish Question. Most citizens of the United States, Canada, Australia, England, France and Germany do not question granting their Jews the same rights as everyone else. Prior to the 20th Century, however, most Europeans nations were not down with this.
With the rise of the Alt Right in the past year, there’s been a renewed interest among a few thousand people (my guess) about The Jewish Question.
Alt Right Jewish philosopher “Ari Ben Canaan” tweets: “I support the eventual end of the Jewish diaspora. We belong in Israel, where our home is.”
The sacred texts of Judaism debate this question. Some texts argue that Jews belong in Israel. Other texts say Jews have valuable work to do in the diaspora shining the light of Torah.
From an objective perspective, it seems to me that no people has permanent friends or enemies. In some circumstances, Jews and Muslims, for example, have common interests, and in other circumstances, they have conflicting interests. In some circumstances, gentile countries will find the presence of Jews in their interest and in other circumstances, they will find the presence of Jews a problem. It does not make sense to me that in all times and places outside of Israel, gentile nations will always find Jewish citizens more of a hassle than a blessing. I sure hope that is true because the odds that Israel survives another 50 years as a Jewish state are probably no greater than 50%. If Israel is destroyed and gentile nations start kicking Jews out, Jews will be in big trouble a la WWII.
Like all peoples, Jews have strengths and weaknesses. Jewish strengths include intelligence, industry, energy and a commitment to education. Jews have started disproportionate number of businesses in the West, and they’ve paid, I suspect, a disproportionate amount of tax compared to the public services they’ve used. Most Orthodox Jews, for example, send their children to private Jewish schools while paying considerable taxes to maintain public schools.
If Jews leave the diaspora, who will represent God among the nations? If God wanted goyim to have own countries, He would have given them the brains to defend them. If Jews leave the diaspora, who will teach the goyim how to be multicultural? If Jews leave the diaspora, who will teach the goyim the lessons of the Holocaust?
James M points out: “White people were nothing until the Jews came from the desert & created our civilizations.”
When thinking of nationalism it helps to understand Latin. You are born into a nation. The word nation comes from the word for birth. You don’t choose a nation anymore than you choose a mother. This is why “civic” nationalism or “economic” nationalism is contradictory. “Civic” nationalism comes from civis, which means citizen. Citizenship had to be earned, not just believed really hard. It was difficult. And came with duties and that was why people wanted to be citizens. “Civic nationalism” defines citizenship down. Steve Bannon’s economic nationalism is also absurd. “Economics” comes from Greek word for household and its management. Economic nationalism then is either redundant or misleading about who is in the household. You can’t have many mothers in one house. You can’t have many peoples in one nation. Sooner or later one will dominate the other & there goes “economic nationalism.”
Ask yourself why it is that our country spends more time talking about and thinking about Israeli politics rather than Mexican politics.
Why does it surprise you that those who hate freedom of association would also favor radical inclusion?
Why can’t Jews live in Palestinian state? Why don’t Arabs feel like citizens in Israel? These are the real questions. #nationalismmatters
Those following the debate in Israel should ask “At what point is radical inclusion ethnic closing?” What is so radical about excluding?
If your shitlib friends don’t know what Rhodesia was ask them why they don’t know about it and if they know what else they don’t know.
We need a foreign policy that doesn’t treat Israel as if it were America’s 51st state. #AmericaFirst
Ask your shitlib friends to answer honestly: would you rather your children grow up in Zimbabwe or Rhodesia?
Let me modify John Kerry: you can either be for your people or you can abolish them through radical inclusion.
The Israelis know what we dare not say: radical inclusion is another name for ethnic cleansing.
Will we speak of France & Germany the way our fathers speak of apartheid era South Africa and Rhodesia?
In a way, Trumpism–as the last gasp of “Americanism”–has to fail for the #AltRight to fully emerge.
Let me make one thing clear: I’m a bit black-pilled about Trump; I’m enthused by the Alt Right.
The entire govt. and civil service will be aligned against him, and Trump’s appeasing Cucks, who don’t really have his back.
“Trumpism” will fail because it offers nothing but a cult of personality. Trump is our leader only so long as he is for our people.
I fear that Richard hasn’t learned the lessons of the Holocaust.
Have Jews learned the lessons of the Holocaust? Jews are not a great fit for every nation on earth at all times. For instance, once Germany became a Nazi state, Jews were a bad fit. Nations that regarded themselves as exclusively Roman Catholic were not a good for Jews. Any gentile nation that principally organizes itself around race or religion is not likely to be a good fit for Jews (unless the race is people of Northern European origins and the religion is Protestantism). Jews have done best in WASP countries because people of Northern European extraction who are of Protestant origins tend to see people as individuals rather than as representatives of groups, and a collective strategy will usually out-compete an individualist one.
Protestants nations have never committed genocide against Jews.
Judaism regards Jews as a blessing to the world, but one can believe in God and Torah and understand that in some circumstances, Jews are not a great fit for a particular nation (such as Nazi Germany).
My understanding of Orthodox Judaism is that God’s primary demand of Jews is that they obey the Torah, which would theoretically make them a safe choice for almost any nation. History shows, however, that whenever Jews have had a choice, they have chosen to not be Orthodox and to not be observant of Jewish law.