its time to read theory. you are currently at the utopian anarchist stage. which is a step in a better direction, but ultimately irrational.
you need to better understand that the people in the image [conveniently] on the left incorporated violence because they lived under the constant threat of deadly violence. 99% of the violence was directed at them. Fred Hampton was executed by the police not long after that picture of him was taken.
Topology nightmare snake #2
Adolph Eichmann said this at his trial.
In the minds of the ones who passed that law though?
Aren’t those the probable buyers?
The best thing the zionists could do to stop anti-semitism would be too simply go home and let Palestine be free.
Well, zionism is an anti-semitic movement, so stopping antisemitism isn’t really its goal. Quite the opposite in fact. What you are describing is what they would call a “feature” not a “bug.”
Check out Dave Van Ronk Going Back to Brooklyn
Also, while you are on the Gaughan kick, check out Handful of Earth and his live album at The Trades
Genuine question (and I don’t know if you’ve gone down this rabbit hole) but does “el” in the context of Hebrew names refer to the concept of any god generically or was “el” the name of the one monotheistic god (before being combined with the monotheistic god with the other name) and the “els” in the names of the angels meant to be an attachment to the court of the one god in a similar way to “isra-el” being not another god but a kingdom/people bearing the name of the god it served (of course talking about biblical Israel and not the modern state).
And then he writes a whole long-ass argument based on this new definition of antisemitism. They even call it the “new” antisemitism.
But for real, this is an establishment media blitz trying to officially define antisemitism as anti-zionism. It’s not meant to make sense in the previous definitional framework.
Biden has actually been this openly ghoulish for a half a century at this point. Look for that quote from him on the senate floor in the 80s talking about the massacres in Lebanon.
I see what you mean. Most of my exposure to the hypothesis (other than the aforementioned Zionist tropes) is from Cold War era non-Zionist Jewish sources, and they really didn’t deal too much with the Yiddish thing. I believe the idea of the constant movement of peoples, in those tellings, explained why they ended up north and west of Khazar land for the same reason the Magyars and others ended ups in similar places. The main up-shot of those sources, at least in my reading, kind of goes to your final point, but in a different way. The idea being that the peoples in the Steppe were always a fluid amalgam of people and there were home-grown Jewish influences there that became a cultural seed that developed in groups in the area that sought to neither ally with the Christian world to the west and what was developing into the Persian/other empires and Muslim world to the east. So that reading of it goes that essentially no one has mythic ancestors in any one place because the version of history during any time period where one would posit a homogenous genetic group stayed “pure” from others is, at least with respect to Eurasian and African history, false. As those writers point out from the genetic (albeit, genetics as they existed a few decades ago) perspective, Jews generally are more genetically similar to the populations they live with than Jews from disparate places have genetic commonality with each other. I definitely agree none of this matters with respect to the current genocide of the Palestinians, but the modern politics overshadow the almost mundane aspect that I am more curious about regarding the movement and interactions of peoples from Eastern Europe to Central Asia prior to and after the Rus came into the picture.
Can you elaborate on you second bullet point a little? I’ve definitely not surveyed all academia on the Khazars but almost all criticism of the hypothesis I’ve been able to find is straight up hasbara talking points that simply treats the idea as a heresy without actually engaging in any sort of objective evidence based response. They even call it the Khazar Heresy even though the Jewish religion is indifferent to the “genetic” origins of Jewish groups across the world. The heresy is a heresy against the Zionist religion in that formulation. And from proponents of the Khazar idea, while I’ve seen them use it, in part, as a cudgel against the idea of a Jewish nation emerging from a specific gene pool in the Levant, arguing that this is actually a concession to Zionism seems like accepting Zionist bad-faith counter-framing (which is done by Zionists in bad faith).
That first quote is such a weak argument too. People get kicked out of places all the time for doing illegal and terrible things. Who is this “we” that goes “after the bad guys and holds them accountable”? What does that even mean?
And while we’re at it, why wouldn’t there be some sort of interdiction with the post office? Are “we” not telling the government about these bad guys doing illegal and/or terrible things? Are “we” Batman or something?
Not volumes. As you say, a little can go a long way. But rather than relearn the lessons of history from first principles, engaging with writings from people who have already seriously grappled with these things is the only efficient way to wrap one’s mind around many different major factors working simultaneously in the material world.