This is a fun project in part because it’s an example of the maxim what goes around comes around; I’m essentially beating the bad guys at their own game – except I’m doing it more honestly. It’s also an awesome exercise in political activism. In that sprit, it’s very educational and so full of surprises! I’ve run into so many catch-22’s and revelations, my head is still spinning.
If you’ve dealt with propaganda and Jewspeak before, this might all be old news to you. But if you’re new to the game, please read on…
First, there are many propagandists out there who will defend the word antisemitism to the death. Likewise, there are fools and liars who will manufacture every lame-brained excuse they can think of to argue against adopting words like jewarchy. In fact, we can learn a lot from two insanely convoluted non-discussions about the meaning of such words on the website English Language & Usage (Word for people who hate some but not all jews and What rule(s) does this question violate?).
I should point out that the first discussion, in particular has been heavily edited and censored. After I posted the question, it wasn’t long before people began calling me antisemitic and racist. A moderator(s) deleted some of those posts, but the question was then closed.
These discussions are actually a gold mine for students of propaganda. In that spirit, let’s pick them apart and see what lessons we can learn.
1. Confusing the Issue
Forget About Me!
Sven Yargs concludes, “I’m voting to close this question as off-topic because I don’t think it is so much about English language and usage as about the poster’s wish that [there] were a word that could sum up his sociopolitical position on a particular issue.”
That’s a whopper of a red herring. Yes, I do wish there was a word that describes non-racist who hate corrupt Jewish organizations. But I’m not alone. There are millions of people around the world who hate one or more corrupt Jewish organizations.
The issue is bigger than the individual.
Male Feminists vs Non-Jewish Jews?
When Sven Yargs points out that some feminists are men, he’s confusing the issue again. With gay marriage widely legalized, we could arague that some men are housewives, which somehow curtails are freedom to make statements about housewives. Loosely translated, Yargs seems to be saying that one can’t logically hate some Jews because some Jews aren’t really Jews – I guess.
Later, he answers the question with a bizarre philosophical exercise that’s almost painful to read. Again, he seems to be suggesting that my very logical question is illogical, which makes no sense at all. If it’s logical for people to hate Zionists, why would it be illogical for them to hate another group of Jews (or the Sicilian Mafia, corrupt U.S. politicians, etc.)? And why would it be illogical to hate multiple groups of Jews, or all corrupt Jewish groups for that matter?
What is a Jew?
Little Eva continues Sven Yargs’ FUD campaign in posting a second answer. (An acronym for Fear, Uncertainty and Deception, FUD is associated with Microsoft, though it was reportedly pioneered by IBM.) Her tirade is similarly complex, confusing and illogical, and even longer.
This appears to be the crux of her thesis:
“If the concept of race ever had any validity, that time is long past. . . . While I cannot condone hate, I can at least logically accept that one individual can hate another specific individual. But one person hating some amorphous group of human beings – be they labeled a race, a religion, an ethnicity, a gender or non-gender – is logically impossible.”
First, there is an ongoing debate regarding the meaning and validity of the word race. Little Eva therefore has every right to scoff at the idea of race, but there are literally millions of others who have other ideas.
In fact, Jewish scientists have described Jews as a unique race. European Jews, in particular, are apparently quite inbred, due to what scientists call a genetic bottleneck that occurred several hundred years ago. That means they’re extremely closely related, regardless of what you want to call it – race, tribe, clan, kissing cousins, whatever.
Second, Little Eva’s claim that it’s logically impossible to hate an amorphous group of humans is absurd. People can and do hate anything, including things that don’t even exist (e.g. demons they dreamed about). They can fear death and the afterlife, or lack thereof.
Apparently, Sven and Little don’t know the difference between psychology and sociology. Most psychiatrists study psychology so they can treat or counsel individuals or small groups of people. Sociologists study big groups of people, as in populations.
To cut to the chase, a political activist doesn’t need to offer a clinical definition of the word Jew any more than one has to scientifically analyze what makes a person a feminist or “white.” There are millions of white people whose parents, grandparents or great grandparents interbred with other races or whatever you want to call groups of people who aren’t normally called “white.”
If you met a dark-skinned white person face to face, you might be tempted to put him under a microscope. You might conclude that he isn’t so white after all.
But so what? Does that change the fact that European settlers (i.e. white people) built the U.S. on slavery and Native American genocide?
Believe it or not, the word white often works just fine when discussing large groups of people. When people who can be classified as persecuted minorities say they hate white people, most of us wouldn’t chide them because a relative handful of those white folks they hate helped to free the slaves. An intelligent person instinctively understands what they’re saying; they’re angry at white people in general.
The Jewish Mafia is Jewish by definition, and members of the Jewish Mafia probably prefer to keep it that way. If you were a member of the Jewish Mafia, and you were asked to recruit a new member, would you go out and hire a Filipino or a Libyan?
Jewish bankers are Jewish by definition. The word “bankers” is a little vague, but we’re obviously talking about people who are somehow associated with the banking industry. Moreover, the emphasis here is largely on very influential individuals, such as Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman and Paul Wolfowitz, because their very power speaks volumes.
Even the LA Times has published articles about the Jews who control Hollywood. I’ve seen no rebuttals asking how the LA Times defines Jews.
Anyone with any common sense can guess what the terms Jewish media and Jewish porn mean. If we discover a media whore who’s only half Jewish it doesn’t change the big picture.
Ditto for Jewish U.S. politicians. Little Eva cites Madeleine Albright, who claims she didn’t even know she was Jewish until she was nominated for some office.
Albright is a corrupt politician! She probably knew she was Jewish all along. Even if she told the truth, it doesn’t change the fact that Henry Kissinger, Joe Lieberman, Alan Greenspan and lots of other powerful U.S. politicians have been Jewish, some of them even with dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship.
2. Lies, Ad Hominem Attacks & Character Assassination
Propagandists love to smear people who don’t drink the Koolaid. (That’s political slang for people who don’t believe their lies.)
Farther down the page, a user who posts as Little Eva writes, “After reading all of the threads associated with user David Blomstrom’s ‘Jewish problem,’ I couldn’t avoid the conclusion that all of his posted questions and comments were merely an exercise in disingenuous spamming – using EL&U, and Meta, as convenient platforms from which to indulge in the public exhibition of hatred and of scapegoating.”
That’s a lie – and a very common propaganda technique. You just claim that someone who asks a provocative question that you can’t handle must be spamming.
My question was obviously provocative and controversial in some people’s eyes, but what better place to ask than a forum focusing on the English language? Unfortunately, forum members reacted just like political junkies on an amateurish political forum.
Little Eva wrote, “I attempted via commentary, to discover what criteria the OP used to determine precisely who he hated. The OP had no desire to participate in that discussion, which of course, was not surprising.”
That’s a bald-faced lie. She even quoted my response!:
Well, there are people who are Jews because they embrace Judaism, and there are ethnic Jews. As I understand it, it’s very hard to convert to Judaism, so the great majority of Jews are ethnic Jews. I don’t want to get into a big discussion about that, but there are tons of resources on the Internet you can peruse.
She also wrote, “This exhibitionism is ironic and secret because, though the OP’s hatred is publicly disseminated and visible, the author of these posts remains hidden and invisible, remains effectively anonymous and intangible, always at a safe distance from his audience, always removed from the real-life effects of his self-indulgence.”
Yet I posted under my real name! If anyone’s hiding, it’s “Little Eva.”
3. More Notes
Odious Topics Forbidden?
In the second discussion, Josh61 says my question regarding a word for people who hate some but not all Jews was “odious.”
So what kind of world do we live in where mature adults can’t discuss odious questions? People have written books about murder, war, rape and incest, but we can’t discuss anti-Jewism? Is the ongoing slaughter of Muslims not odious?
In fact, there are millions of people who hate Jews, either all Jews or certain Jewish groups. The most familiar example consists of people who hate Zionists. We even have a name for such people – anti-Zionists.
(Some propagandists might point out that not all Zionists are Jews. We discussed that under What is a Jew?)
Know Your Enemy
If you visit Little Eva’s profile page, you’ll discover that she lives in the “Deep South” and is a big fan of Noam Chomsky.
The Deep South is the heart of a region known as the Bible Belt. It’s where a lot of right-wing Christians live. They were pResident George W. Bush’s most prominent supporters.
Many Christians have been brainwashed into believing that Jews are their natural allies against heathen Muslims.
Noam Chomsky is a Jew. He’s also a member of what is popularly called controlled opposition. In other words, his real allegiance is to Jewarchists, not reformers and political activists.
In summary, it’s a good bet that Little Eva is a right-wing Jew. If not, she’s probably a right-wing Christian.
The most common propaganda tactic you’re going to encounter consists of one stupid word: antisemitism.
It’s very versatile because it confuses the issue and smears you as antisemitic (and, by extension, racist) at the same time.
That’s precisely why I’m trying to upgrade the vocabulary so we can replace antisemitism with the more accurate terms anti-Jewism and anti-Jewarchism.
In the meantime, the next time someone calls you antisemitic, just ask what they’ve done to oppose the persecution of Muslims by the U.S. and Israel. If they condone or try to justify torture and murder, then it’s obvious who the racist is.