Is Khodorkovsky question really a Jewish question?

Page 3 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3


What will best describe you?
I live in USA/Canada; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in USA/Canada; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 20%  20%  [ 1 ]
I live in USA/Canada; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in USA/Canada; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Western Europe; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Western Europe; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Western Europe; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Western Europe; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Eastern Europe; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Eastern Europe; I am pro-Israel; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Eastern Europe; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as innocent 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
I live in Eastern Europe; I am pro-Palestine; I view Khodorkovsky as guilty 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Other 80%  80%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 5

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

20 Sep 2011, 5:43 pm

codarac wrote:
Roman wrote:

Also, the more you point out how intelligent Jews are "in positive ways" (such as all the great discoveries that they are making), the more you ALSO imply how they can use their intelligence in negative ways as well (such as controlling the covernments). So what you are saying is not very effective in disproving modern antisemites since this is exactly what they are accusing Jews of. ON THE OTHR HAND, what you said CAN effectively disprove Hitler, since HE viewed Jews as "lower species" and therefore incapable of great discoveries.

This brings me to a very ineresting thought: most people assume that since Hitler is "ultimate antisemite", he would probably agree with everything any other antisemites would say. But from my point of view this might not be the case. After all, modern antisemites view Jews as "too powerful" whereas Hitler views them as "too stupid". These two things are diametrically opposite of each other; hence, modern antisemites and WW2-time Nazis can't possibly agree!


I don't think Hitler view jews as stupid at all.

I think he viewed them as being "not creators". E.g., he thought that whereas many Germans lived through agriculture and industry, many jews lived through financial speculation and exploitation, and that whereas many Germans used their access to the arts and media to create uplifting works, many jews used their access to the arts and media to lower the cultural tone and to denigrate German ideals.

Ultimately, I think Hitler viewed jews as exploiters and corrupters of the German people, which would imply at least some sort of cleverness on the part of jews and some sort of weakness on the part of Germans.


I don't think Hitler's views are particularly insightful he was pretty much a failure of a man.
The Reich was a ponzi scheme that destroyed germany.
His thoughts were tired and pedestrian when they were new.
Mein Kampf is a real nothing of a book nearly unreadable.
I think the real unanswered question of the third reich is what deficit of character
do the folks that follow him have?
Is it some kind of sympathetic resonance of mediocrity?


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Sep 2011, 7:45 pm

codarac wrote:
.

Ultimately, I think Hitler viewed jews as exploiters and corrupters of the German people, which would imply at least some sort of cleverness on the part of jews and some sort of weakness on the part of Germans.


Which was Einstein? A corrupter or an exploiter. Same question concerning Mark Chagal..

One Hitler liquidated the Jews of Europe the average IQ of Europe dropped 10 points.

ruveyn



codarac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 780
Location: UK

25 Sep 2011, 5:25 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
I don't think Hitler's views are particularly insightful he was pretty much a failure of a man.


Well at least he succeeded in providing the world with a historical figure that every faceless internet poster can safely feel superior to.

JakobVirgil wrote:
The Reich was a ponzi scheme that destroyed germany.


Propaganda rubbish. It was losing the war that destroyed Germany (and "winning" the war did not do a whole lot of good to Britain's Empire either), and the question of how a border dispute between Germany and Poland escalated into a World War is more complicated than the "Hitler wanted to take over the world" propaganda that the masses are still fed to this day. The destruction of Germany and the war that caused it had nothing to do any Nazi ponzi scheme.

In fact, the legacy of the Nazi monetary system actually gave Germany an advantage in the immediate post-war world, as monetary reformer James Gibb Stuart explained in his book The Money Bomb:

"The total destruction of the [post-world-war-one] mark , with all its debit-bearing loans and liabilities, had also wiped out the Federal Government debt. So when did the Germans get their Federal Debt back again? Certainly not during the Nazi regime, which began about 1933, and continued till the military collapse in 1945! ... whatever else the Nazis did, to their own people or to the millions that languished under them, they funded their war effort without leaving behind a debt structure which would burden their successors ... those [post-world-war-two] West Germans embarked on their economic miracle with a negligible degree of national indebtedness, whilst among their former enemies ... the British were funding a debt of some £25,000 million and the Americans ... £270,000 million."


JakobVirgil wrote:
His thoughts were tired and pedestrian when they were new.


Your thoughts are tired and pedestrian. (See how easy it is to argue in this fashion?)

JakobVirgil wrote:
I think the real unanswered question of the third reich is what deficit of character
do the folks that follow him have?
Is it some kind of sympathetic resonance of mediocrity?


Do (present tense) or did (past tense)?

And do you think there was anything historically unusual about Hitler's so-called "mediocrity". Do you think that our modern-day leaders (whom millions vote for) such as Bush, Obama, Blair and Cameron are men of outstanding character, bravery and intellect?



Last edited by codarac on 25 Sep 2011, 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

codarac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 780
Location: UK

25 Sep 2011, 5:28 pm

ruveyn wrote:
codarac wrote:
.

Ultimately, I think Hitler viewed jews as exploiters and corrupters of the German people, which would imply at least some sort of cleverness on the part of jews and some sort of weakness on the part of Germans.


Which was Einstein? A corrupter or an exploiter. Same question concerning Mark Chagal..


I don't know. You would have to ask Hitler. However, I should clarify that I was talking about Hitler's views on the jews' overall impact as a group.

The celebrated jewish writer, Susan Sontag, once said "Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Balanchine ballets, et al. don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history."

I would suppose that Hitler held similar views about jews vis a vis their group impact on the Germans to the views Susan Sontag held vis a vis Whites and their group impact on the world.

ruveyn wrote:
One Hitler liquidated the Jews of Europe the average IQ of Europe dropped 10 points.
ruveyn


There's that figure again. I thought the average ashkenazi IQ was about 110. Either you think the number of jews in the world past and present is far larger than is actually the case, or you place the average ashkenazi IQ at somewhere over 200.



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

25 Sep 2011, 6:09 pm

codarac wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
I don't think Hitler's views are particularly insightful he was pretty much a failure of a man.


Well at least he succeeded in providing the world with a historical figure that every faceless internet poster can safely feel superior to. [three points well said]

JakobVirgil wrote:
The Reich was a ponzi scheme that destroyed germany.


Propaganda rubbish. It was losing the war that destroyed Germany (and "winning" the war did not do a whole lot of good to Britain's Empire either), and the question of how a border dispute between Germany and Poland escalated into a World War is more complicated than the "Hitler wanted to take over the world" propaganda that the masses are still fed to this day. The destruction of Germany and the war that caused it had nothing to do any Nazi ponzi scheme.

In fact, the legacy of the Nazi monetary system actually gave Germany an advantage in the immediate post-war world, as monetary reformer James Gibb Stuart explained in his book The Money Bomb:

"The total destruction of the [post-world-war-one] mark , with all its debit-bearing loans and liabilities, had also wiped out the Federal Government debt. So when did the Germans get their Federal Debt back again? Certainly not during the Nazi regime, which began about 1933, and continued till the military collapse in 1945! ... whatever else the Nazis did, to their own people or to the millions that languished under them, they funded their war effort without leaving behind a debt structure which would burden their successors ... those [post-world-war-two] West Germans embarked on their economic miracle with a negligible degree of national indebtedness, whilst among their former enemies ... the British were funding a debt of some £25,000 million and the Americans ... £270,000 million."

[-2 points no such thing as the marshal plan and demilitarization?]
JakobVirgil wrote:
His thoughts were tired and pedestrian when they were new.


Your thoughts are tired and pedestrian. (See how easy it is to argue in this fashion?)
[-2 point for use of making a "I know you are but what am I" retort]

JakobVirgil wrote:
I think the real unanswered question of the third reich is what deficit of character
do the folks that follow him have?
Is it some kind of sympathetic resonance of mediocrity?


Do (present tense) or did (past tense)?
[-3 points for lack asking an answered question]
And do you think there was anything historically unusual about Hitler's so-called "mediocrity". Do you think that our modern-day leaders (whom millions vote for) such as Bush, Obama, Blair and Cameron are men of outstanding character, bravery and intellect?
[2p unrelated but completely true they are all nebishes ]


-2
Hitler was a sleepwalker and a bumbler a failure at everything thing took upon himself to do.


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


codarac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 780
Location: UK

25 Sep 2011, 6:55 pm

JakobVirgil wrote:
Hitler was a sleepwalker and a bumbler a failure at everything thing took upon himself to do.


Hitler decided to enter politics soon after being injured in World War I. He was in his late 20s, virtually penniless, with virtually no family or connections, no university education and no political experience. He ended up being jailed for his political activities. But less than ten years after being released from prison, he became Chancellor of Germany.

And yet you think he was a "failure at everything (he) took upon himself to do". Lol!
You would sound more credible if you just called him the devil incarnate (or something) like most others have been taught to.



JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

25 Sep 2011, 7:13 pm

codarac wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
Hitler was a sleepwalker and a bumbler a failure at everything thing took upon himself to do.


Hitler decided to enter politics soon after being injured in World War I. He was in his late 20s, virtually penniless, with virtually no family or connections, no university education and no political experience. He ended up being jailed for his political activities. But less than ten years after being released from prison, he became Chancellor of Germany.

And yet you think he was a "failure at everything (he) took upon himself to do". Lol!
You would sound more credible if you just called him the devil incarnate (or something) like most others have been taught to.

Ah, a success only if you rank him as a conman. He was successful at being promoted past his worth.
but unless his goal was to take over and run a country into the ground, I will have to stick with the word failure.
Kinda like George Bush to use your analogy failed at school, failed at business, succeeded in gaining power
worthless at the wielding of it.

Maybe we should vet our politicians with the question have you ever done anything to prove your competence,
other than winning Office? Adolf would have to answer
"no well um I wrote a incomprehensible book that blames Jews for everything
and uh, lazy thinkers like to pretend they have read it"


_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

25 Sep 2011, 11:54 pm

He is most definitely not a Jewish question.


_________________
.