Roots of Anti-Semitism ?

[LeftEyeNine]

The title says it all. Why isn't there anything called Anti-Christianism (or is there)? Is it all about what was told in the holy books? Where do the roots of this long-time hatred lay?

[Dooz]

For one thing, the term anti-semitism shouldn't only apply to Jews as is commonly misused, as Semites encompass more races, cultures and religions from the area. This has always bugged me. If someone is so called "anti-semitic", that holds that they also hate Arab, Maltanese, and a bunch of other people.

Anyhoo, about the question at hand; Originally, the basis of the prejudice was religious. As early as the Middle Ages, however, the argument emerged that "Jewish blood" was different. With the popularization of scientific racist thinking in the ninetheenth century, Jews were commonly viewed as a seperate race, unworthy of the same rights as Christians.

Historically, Christians had relegated the Jews in their midst to marginal positions. In the Middle Ages, when land was the basis of wealth and prestige, Jews had been confined to such urban trades as cattle trading and moneylending. They incurred high risks by lending money: they often were not paid back and faced unsympathetic courts when they tried to collect on debts. To counteract these risks, Jewish moneylenders charged high interest rates that gave them the reputation as usurers.

Also, the emancipation of the Jews in France, Germany and Austria by the 1860's, provided them opportunities they had not had before, and some members of society found it hard to adjust to the prominence a few Jews gained. Because their increased prominence and success occurred concurrently with the wrenching social transformations of industrialization and urbanization, "anti-Jews" pointed to them as the perpetrators of thes unsettling changes.

Political movements based on anti-Jewism were founded in the 1880's. They depicted Jews as dangerous and wicked and called for their exclusion from the political arena and certain professions. In some cases they suggested that Jews be expelled from the state. Politicians were elected on anit-Jew platforms and the movement was quite popular, with an anti-Jewish book being one of the best-sellers of the second half of the nineteenth century.

In Russia, there were organized mass attacks on Jews, killing two thousand and frightening 2 million Jews into exile, mostly to the United States. Russian Jews lived under social as well as legal disabilities, winning full emancipation with the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.

And so, the Zionist movement was founded which culminated in the establishing of a Jewish state in 1948.

[Tribesman]

Roots of Anti-Semitism ?
Well there had to be someone to blame for all the problems , before there were new groups like Muslims or Mexicans to take the blame .
Simple innit .:juggle2:

[Fragony]

Christianity and islam always had it's own homelands I guess, jews have always been guests in other cultures, while holding on to their own. Being somewhat different then the overal population makes you a nice target.

[Tribesman]

Being somewhat different then the overal population makes you a nice target.
So are you anti-Jewish as well Frag ?
They hold on to their own culture , don't fully integrate , keep their own language and customs and heaven forbid .... they even build their own places of worship .~:eek:
Or do you only find muslims a target ?

[Fragony]

Being somewhat different then the overal population makes you a nice target.
So are you anti-Jewish as well Frag ?
They hold on to their own culture , don't fully integrate , keep their own language and customs and heaven forbid .... they even build their own places of worship .~:eek:
Or do you only find muslims a target ?

Unlike muslims jews never cause any trouble, so they are welcome. Stick 666 feathers up your rectum to worship chickens for all I care, just try not to go on robbery and rapesprees and fragony is fine with your existance.

[Navaros]

edit: post removed because I misread the original post before posting.

[Tribesman]

just try not to go on robbery and rapesprees and fragony is fine with your existance.
I shall remember that next time you rant about integration and culture then .:laugh4:

[drone]

Historically, Christians had relegated the Jews in their midst to marginal positions. In the Middle Ages, when land was the basis of wealth and prestige, Jews had been confined to such urban trades as cattle trading and moneylending. They incurred high risks by lending money: they often were not paid back and faced unsympathetic courts when they tried to collect on debts. To counteract these risks, Jewish moneylenders charged high interest rates that gave them the reputation as usurers.
About this paragraph, my understanding was that the Church did not allow any interest to be charged on loans. So naturally no Christians succeeded at banking and moneylending. Jews (and Muslims in Spain, IIRC) therefore filled these roles, and could be easily scapegoated as greedy outsiders when times turned difficult. Rulers could turn the populace against them, as well as earn income by seizing their assets.

[Brenus]

The Christians reject the blame on the Jews for the Crucifixion. You know, Ponce Pilate washing his hand and things like that. It was created around the XI century, something like that.

The Church had a problem. Rome was the Capital of Christianity. The Romans killed the Christ. Ouch, problem with the masses you want to convince, so you put the blame on somebody else. So you keep a minority in very visible conditions (they have to be identifiable on immediate view) banning them from position (like the Jews can’t be soldiers and THEN blaming them to be cowards unable to fight for their country), you blame them for bad weather, plague, sun, wars, bad luck and the masses are happy to threw stones to them and will NOT think: Hang on, the Crucifixion was used only on the person who refused Rome’s authority. So, if Christ was put on the cross, it was because a Roman decided it. And from when a Colonial Power as ruthless as the Roman one would have given the right to their own colonial to gave death sentence? Especially somebody like Ponce Pilate, excuse me… It was only one of the multiplicities of the new faiths coming from this area (Mithraism, Mazdaism, Isisism etc).

And when you want to spread a religion with so munch inconsistence than the early Christianity (see the Gnostic), you want the things clear. :idea2: It is all the fault of the Jews.:2thumbsup:

[Justiciar]

The obvious traditional cause of Anti-Semitism (Jewish specifically) in Christian cultures is that they deny Jesus' divinity. Seems fairly simple.

[Brenus]

“Seems fairly simple.” Too simple. Why not the same rage against the Pagans? They were more dangerous at these times…

[Rodion Romanovich]

I agree with Brenus that the romans very a major factor in causing most of the anti-semitism that exited after year 0. After all the romans demonized the Jews in their heavily edited version of the texts that formed the New Testament (obviously they couldn't have a state religion whose prophet was killed by themselves, but they couldn't either deny that they had executed Jesus, so they had to think up a way of making the romans execute Jesus while removing the blame from the romans... Edit: Brenus describes this well...), and the anti-semitism thus unfortunately nearly became a part of the Christian faith itself, with disastrous consequences. A lot of Imperialists throughout the centuries who have had a reverent and incorrect view of the corrupt roman empire have also brought up and reinforced anti-semitism a few times because they see Rome as the ideal society (which it was not) and wanted to embrace all of it's ideals. So I'd say the main direct and indirect cause of anti-semitism was the roman empire, which let out all their frustration over rebellions and fight for freedom among the provinces against the Jews because they made more rebellions than any others, and more effective rebellions than any other single group, in their struggle for their freedom and right to have their own culture, which was what almost the entire world was fighting for at the time.

[Byzantine Prince]

They killed Jesus. :furious3:

https://img181.imageshack.us/img181/6176/jesussouthpark4zf.jpg


Or did they? :laugh4:

[Red Peasant]

The Romans (at least pre C4 AD) were pretty tolerant of the Jews, more so than they were of Christians. The Jewish rebellions were put down as military and politcal threats to Roman imperial power, and they certainly exasperated the Romans, but there is no real evidence of systemic religious or racial persecution. Christianity is at the root of anti-semitism. The Jews actively helped the Moslems to wrest control of key cities in the near east (e.g. Damascus) from the Byzantines because of the long persecution they suffered at the Christian Roman hands. Ironic.

[Kralizec]

Anti semitism predates any Roman interference, or christianity for that matter.

Native Egyptians had a traditonal loathing for jews because jews always thought of the former as villains (you know the background)
This was worsened as many jews served the Ptolemaic kings as soldiers or tax collectors, making them accomplices to the hated Macedonian overlords.
As noted, the jews usually did not assimilate in their host countries, and Alexandria in Egypt was no different. Clanging on to their exclusive monotheism and always forming some sort of distinct class of citizens, whilst still participating in daily life and demanding of certain rights and priviliges, the local Greeks also developed sort of a hate of jewry. In the Levant, the Seleucids also learned to despise them after the Makabean revolt. All this did much to affect the way pagan intellectuals thought of judaism. When people throughout the mediteranean world became christian, this anti semitism also got a theological dimension, but the roots can be found in pagan time.

More generally, in the Roman and Hellenic world religion was thought of as a communal responsibilty. These jews, who worshipped only one god and denied the existence of all others, were a liability. Should the gods decide to smite them, it would be inevitable that many others would die in collateral damage. Hence their monotheism was perceived as a danger to the community.
EDIT: and obviously the christians felt the same way about jews.

[Avicenna]

Add the religious history and things that Kralizec said to the fact that they're generally very rich and powerful in the countries they're in, taking good jobs.

[Justiciar]

Why not the same rage against the Pagans? They were more dangerous at these times…
I feel it's safe to say that there was a degree of hatred aimed at Pagans. They were a violent, evil menace that had to be converted or eradicated. If Pagans in Europe had survived (as members of mainstream societies or hostile kingdoms rather than scattered people on the borders) they'd probably have be treated just as poorly, if not worse than Jews. If the Mongols had moved into Europe, kept their faith, and then tried to live with the locals I doubt they'd have had an easy time of it.

[Alexanderofmacedon]

Some of the modern hate comes from South Park, I'm sure.:sweatdrop:

[Dooz]

Some of the modern hate comes from South Park, I'm sure.:sweatdrop:

Oh come now. The co-creator is a Jew. If he hates 'em, so can you!

South Park is the best show around : )

[naut]

Wonderland is right! That has also bugged me! A semite IIRC is one descended from Abraham.

Also, I know you all wont take what I say next well, so here I go:

Technically it was the Jews you killed Jesus, Poncus Pilate gave the Jewish masses the choice to have Jesus killed or another (a murderer IIRC) killed. They picked Jesus to die, and Pilate said Okay then ... now he will die.

But the current peoples can not be blamed for the actions of people long dead ... so personally I don't think it matters who killed Jesus!!!

Back on Topic:

Anti-Semitism, goes long back ... the Romans had them slaugtered when they first conquered Judea.

Then the early church blamed them for killing Jesus

This led to the dispora, or the mass immirgration of Jews into Europe. In Europe they gained a bad reputation as userers. Also, Rumors where spread that they used the blood of christian children in there Passover Ceremonies. IIRC St. Simon was a 12 year old who was bled like a cow, by the Jews. This is obviously BS, but he was canonised none the less.

Next came the Russian Pogroms of the 1800s, basically mass Government funded massacres and persecutions.

In the late 1900 hundreds Race "science" became a hot topic, and the Jews (along with black peoples) were classified as less than by "scientists"

And the most recent was Hitlers Holocaust, 6 million Jews killed including 1.5 million children

[Rodion Romanovich]

The Romans (at least pre C4 AD) were pretty tolerant of the Jews, more so than they were of Christians. The Jewish rebellions were put down as military and politcal threats to Roman imperial power, and they certainly exasperated the Romans, but there is no real evidence of systemic religious or racial persecution. Christianity is at the root of anti-semitism. The Jews actively helped the Moslems to wrest control of key cities in the near east (e.g. Damascus) from the Byzantines because of the long persecution they suffered at the Christian Roman hands. Ironic.

Yes, but I'm talking about romans after around 100 AD. For instance there was Trajan ordering a massacre of Jews in Mesopotamia when he heard the Jews in Cyrenaica rebelling. Was an absolutely cracy decision, even more so for the fact that the romans had no chance of holding Mesopotamia or anything else they tried to conquer at that time. Then there was Hadrian expelling all Jews from Jerusalem because they didn't accept that Hadrian tried to forbid much of their culture and maybe also tear down the Jewish temple to build a temple to Jupiter. It was that roman anti-semitism that they later put into Christianity.



Technically it was the Jews you killed Jesus, Poncus Pilate gave the Jewish masses the choice to have Jesus killed or another (a murderer IIRC) killed. They picked Jesus to die, and Pilate said Okay then ... now he will die.

But the current peoples can not be blamed for the actions of people long dead ... so personally I don't think it matters who killed Jesus!!!


First of all, it's true that current people aren't responsible for actions a long time ago, which applies IF the Jews killed Jesus. However, there's a lot of evidence suggesting that the romans were the guilty:
1. the Jews had a right to free one death-sentenced criminal each year, and they chose to release Barrabas. But that requires that some roman official had first sentenced Jesus to death!
2. crucifiction was given to "enemies of the empire", i.e. rebels and dangerous political opponents. If Jesus hadn't been sentenced by the romans there's little chance he would have died on a cross, but by some other method.
3. the romans had firm power over the province - in fact most major Jewish rebellions came AFTER year 0, so the romans had the ability to fully decide whether or not to execute a man that the locals wanted punished would be executed or not.
4. the romans carried out every part of the execution and torturing of Jesus
...so it's very unrealistic and unhistorical to blame anyone else but the romans for the death of Jesus. The problem was that Rome couldn't lead a religion which loudly proclaimed that Rome had tortured and killed the saviour of earth. Luckily enough Christianity has lately turned from being a power institution into becoming a religion after they were forced into carrying out the counter-reformation, after nations of Europe become more independent of the church's control, then the church had to competite with new breakoff churches (baptists, metodists etc.), and then has also carried out several instances of both reformation and rebirth of the messages that Jesus initially preached.

[Sjakihata]

To claim that you are Gods chosen (implictly saying that others aren't) is, I believe, the roots of the conflict. Everything can be traced back to that particular statement. Hate and jealousy springs from that, like a fountain. Then through Roman hegemony, medieval ignorance, 1800 scientific anthropology to german nazism, it's that simple - or maybe not. At least that is a historical explanation of it. It can also be argued (as has already been hinted in this thread) that jews are scapegoats of other cultures and that the conflict arise from social and political events. Maybe a mixture, multiple perspectives, the fact is it still exists today and is likely not to go away, no matter how 'enlightened' we have become.

[Bar Kochba]

the ironic thng is you use the term scapegoat do you know where the term comes from?

[Sjakihata]

yes, that's why I used it ;) except the jews have been the goat and now every sin put on it, a bizzare world, eh?

[Bar Kochba]

well the whole world at the time were using sacrifeces and so were the jews

[Alexanderofmacedon]

Oh come now. The co-creator is a Jew. If he hates 'em, so can you!

South Park is the best show around : )

Hey I didn't say it's not the best show around (even though Seinfeld is better. You know; more intelligent humor ~;)).

It's just that usually when my Jewish friends get called something (usually joking), they've usually blamed South Park for a lot of it.:sweatdrop:

[Brenus]

“Technically it was the Jews you killed Jesus, Poncus Pilate gave the Jewish masses the choice to have Jesus killed or another (a murderer IIRC) killed. They picked Jesus to die, and Pilate said Okay then ... now he will die.” I think that is a pure Christian/Roman propaganda. Ponce Pilate was sent to Judea because he was one of the roughness governors the Roman had. The Romans were fed up with these Jews, who didn’t stop to rebel (last one the Judas the Galilean’s revolt, when Pilate crucified 2,000 of the insurgents –revolt against Rome-) and times were for harsh decisions. This continuous fight of the Jews will be illustrated by Massada then the revolt of Bar-Kokhaba against Hadrian, the revolt against Caligula’s Statue in the temple, etc.
No technical issue here, Jesus received the punishment reserved to the rebels against Rome (like Spartacus -at least his followers-, and for the same reasons).

“the Jews had a right to free one death-sentenced criminal each year, and they chose to release Barrabas. But that requires that some roman official had first sentenced Jesus to death!” Again, that is only mentioned in by the Christians. I am not a specialist of this period, but I don’t remember Flavius Joseph speaking of such thing. For what we know of every empire, the justice is done by governors and the conqueror. Not by the vanquish, especially the ones who don’t stop to create problems…

[doc_bean]

To claim that you are Gods chosen (implictly saying that others aren't) is, I believe, the roots of the conflict.

Probably true, they refused to integrate in almost any society, always hanging on to their own traditions and God. Now this might be a noble thing to do, but it sure doesn't make you popular with the society you are supposed to be a part of.

But the fact that there are still Jews after several thousand years of persecution and animosity from the rest oft he world certainly proves they're a resilient bunch. Some might say it's a sign they've got it right :sweatdrop:

[Red Peasant]

Many Jews have observed their own religion and customs over the centuries, but they have always integrated well in many other ways and have made positive contributions to the communities that they have joined. They have always lived at peace with those communities, a complete contrast to many muslim attitudes to host communities. Yet Christian attitudes and beliefs about the Jews as 'Christ-killers', views fostered by the Church for many centuries, have been at the core of the oppression and I find it amazing that anyone can doubt that.

There is a large Jewish community, of many generations standing, in the area of Liverpool in which I now live and they are as fully British as I am and consider themselves as such, and they are proud of it as well. They contribute more than most to the wider community.

[doc_bean]

Many Jews have observed their own religion and customs over the centuries, but they have always integrated well in many other ways and have made positive contributions to the communities that they have joined.

By integrate I meant literally 'become a part of'. They have almost always stayed outsiders. I never said this was a bad thing, it just made them 'different'. And if haven't noticed, being 'different' isn't considered a good thing by many people.

As for Muslim integration, it's a difficult issue, on the one hand we've had more crime related to them, on the other hand, we have more muslim celebrities and muslim politicians than Jewish ones. They also don't have separate schools like the Jews. overall i'd say they're better integrated. But it's how you look at it I suppose.

[Brenus]

“By integrate I meant literally 'become a part of'.” The problem was, and sometimes still is, they were not ALLOWED to integrate. You can’t do this, you can’t do that, you live here and you have to be there at the time we impose etc. It isn’t the way to integrate people.
And even if you wish to do so, you will always have a Hitler, a Petain, a Front National, BNP or KKK to remind you that YOU are NOT a real citizen of this country because you are a Jew.
Remember the Captain Dreyfus: what could he have done more to integrate? Married, 2 kids, officer in the artillery, ready to fight for his country. But he was chosen to be the traitor just because he was a Jew. After 20 years he was reintegrate in the Army, but his only guilt was to be a Jew.

[BHCWarman88]

Christianity and islam always had it's own homelands I guess, jews have always been guests in other cultures, while holding on to their own. Being somewhat different then the overal population makes you a nice target.

Jews never Actually have a Homeland. For Example,Muslims Settled Mainly in the Middle East, Chirstians in the West,Hindu and Buddism in Asia,etc... Jews doesn't have a Main Homeland to settle to (uness you count Iserail)

[Papewaio]

Probably true, they refused to integrate in almost any society, always hanging on to their own traditions and God. Now this might be a noble thing to do, but it sure doesn't make you popular with the society you are supposed to be a part of.


By that reasoning any member of a minority religious or for that matter non-religous group will be unpopular with the rest of society. So which is in the wrong the minorities for practicing what they believe in or the societies for having an issue with that?

[doc_bean]

By that reasoning any member of a minority religious or for that matter non-religous group will be unpopular with the rest of society. So which is in the wrong the minorities for practicing what they believe in or the societies for having an issue with that?

I'd say society. And you don't agree that minority groups are often a target ? :dizzy2:

if they're small enough people tend to leave them alone, if they become larger, society tends to have a problem with it...

[Papewaio]

Actually I agree with the reasoning in the specific case and that it is a good example of something that happens in general. So you have pointed out a universal rule of bad social behaviour.