Early Zionism was to renounce any sort of biologism and nationalism, to build bridges between every nation of man and bring them together. Berdichevski, Brunner, Popper-Lynkeus, Lessing, Herzl, Buber, Chomsky, Zeitlin... the list goes on. — DifferentiatingEgg
This attempt to make sense of all senseless and useless suffering can (as we already have seen) occur in two ways. Either guilt is attributed to “someone else,” or one looks for the blame in oneself.
It is one of the deepest and most certain principles of national psychology that the Jewish people are the first—and perhaps the only—nation that has only sought solely within themselves the blame for world events.
Jewish doctrine has, since ancient times, responded to the question “Why are we not loved?” with “Because we are guilty.” Many great Jewish thinkers have perceived the central core of Jewish teaching in this formula “Because we are guilty” and in the experience of Jewish communal attribution of guilt and communal responsibility.
It's important for the reader to realize that, as in the viddui, the key to the pathology of our national consciousness lies in this acknowledgment of guilt, emphasized in the mighty Judeo-Christian ethic.
There is only one emergency exit—to make sense of this suffering and make it bearable the Jew must believe that his fate has within it a particular purpose: “God disciplines those he loves.” Within this concept of suffering as punishment lies the beginning of understanding the concept of Jewish “self-hate.”
It is different among happy, victorious peoples. They have no reason for self-flagellating, self-tormenting analysis that endangers a healthy attitude toward life and naturalself-esteem. They answer “Why does misfortune happen to us?” with a forceful accusation against those who, in their opinion, caused the misfortune.
The Jewish situation is thereby doubly endangered. First, because the Jew repliesto the question “Why are we not loved?” with “Because we are guilty.” Second, because other nations answer the question “Why are the Jews not loved?” with “He says so himself—he is guilty." — Theodore Lessing, Jewish Self-Hate.
It is this internalization that causes within the weak, feelings of ressentiment, and bad conscience and being responsible for said shame and guilt. This is the pathology of Judaism—its own backbiting virtue. — DifferentiatingEgg
Psychopathy, or psychopathic personality,[1] is a personality construct[2][3] characterized by impaired empathy and remorse, along with bold, disinhibited, and egocentric traits. These traits are often masked by superficial charm and immunity to stress,[4] which create an outward appearance of apparent normalcy.[5][6][7][8][9] — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy
The weak, however, outnumber the strong more than 1000 to 1.
This is the pathology that Nietzsche details to the Jew, before assigning to them a mission to revamp European communities. — DifferentiatingEgg
“The Jews, however, are beyond all doubt the strongest, toughest, and purest race at present living in Europe, they know how to succeed even under the worst conditions (in fact better than under favorable ones), by means of virtues of some sort, which one would like nowadays to label as vices—” — Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
"The fact that the Jews, if they wanted (or if they were forced, as the anti-Semites seem to want), could already be dominant, or indeed could literally have control over present-day Europe—this is established. The fact that they are not working and making plans to this end is likewise established….[W]hat they wish and want instead…is to be absorbed and assimilated into Europe…in which case it might be practical and appropriate to throw the anti-Semitic hooligans out of the country…."
This passage exemplifies Nietzsche’s typical contempt for Germans, and it stands all the standard anti-semitic tropes of the day on their head. Of course the Jews could control Europe, since they are a “stronger race,” but it is “established” that they have no interest in doing so! And precisely because they are superior to Germans, they should be allowed to assimilate, contrary to anti-semites, who are the ones who should really be thrown out of the country. Holub, remarkably, obscures all this through selective quotation and flat-footed paraphrase (e.g., Holub seems to think Nietzsche’s mockery of German antipathy towards Jews really “validate(s) the German need to exclude Jews as crucial for the health of the nation” [122]). When Holub returns to the same passage in Chapter Five, he suggests that it endorses a distinction between “anti-Semitism and a more acceptable, less virulent Jewish attitude” (161), when it does nothing of the kind. Nietzsche’s point is that he has “yet to meet a German who was well disposed towards Jews,” a fact only obscured by the fact that some Germans advertise their rejection of extreme anti-semitism. But since Germans as a whole (unlike other Europeans) are “a people whose type is still weak and indeterminate,” Nietzsche suggests even those who reject extreme anti-semitism still maintain an anti-Jewish attitude. Holub’s misrepresentation of Nietzsche’s text here is revealing. — https://newramblerreview.com/book-reviews/philosophy/nietzsche-s-hatred-of-jew-hatred
“The weak” are those who have a conscious and who via its quiet affirmations experience shame and guilt for wrongdoings.
“The strong”, in turn, must then be those devoid of a conscious and who thereby experience no shame or guilt for any wrongdoing whatsoever (maybe not even recognizing that the concept of wrongdoing can apply to them). — javra
It's been a while since my reading of him, granted, but this is not the Nietzsche I know of, limited as my knowledge of him is, who I’m guessing would have for example likely kicked Hitler in the groin where he to have been around – as painfully as possible, if not worse – and who can be quoted as admiring the Jewish community at large. — javra
You have committed one of the greatest stupidities — for yourself and for me! Your association with an anti-Semitic chief expresses a foreignness to my whole way of life which fills me again and again with ire or melancholy… It is a matter of honor with me to be absolutely clean and unequivocal in relation to Anti-Semitism, namely, opposed to it, as I am in my writings.
...The fact that the Jews, if they wanted (or if they were forced, as the anti-Semites seem to want), could already be dominant, or indeed could literally have control over present-day Europe — https://newramblerreview.com/book-reviews/philosophy/nietzsche-s-hatred-of-jew-hatred
The Jews, however, are beyond all doubt the strongest, toughest, and purest race at present living in Europe, they know how to succeed even under the worst conditions (in fact better than under favorable ones), by means of virtues of some sort, which one would like nowadays to label as vices — Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
This is the pathology that Nietzsche details to the Jew, before assigning to them a mission to revamp European communities. Which is what Zionism aimed to accomplish pre 1948. — DifferentiatingEgg
Nope it actually reads that the weak internalize negatively and gain a bad conscience, which the strong internalize positively and don't have a bad conscience. — DifferentiatingEgg
Because it's only the psychopath that does not experience this, right? — javra
Aristotle draws an example of acting from the sphere of private life, in the relationship between the benefactor and his recipient. With that candid absence of moralizing that is the mark of Greek, though not of Roman, antiquity, he states first as a matter of fact that the benefactor always loves those he has helped more than he is loved by them. — Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition
Even the Titans do not yet know the incredible Semitic
and Christian inventions, bad conscience, fault and responsibility. — Deleuze, Nietzsche and Philosophy
The tale of Prometheus is an original possession of the entire Aryan family of races, and documentary evidence of their capacity for the profoundly tragic; indeed, it is not improbable that this myth has the same characteristic significance for the Aryan race that the myth of the fall of man has for the Semitic, and that there is a relationship between the two myths like that of brother and sister. The presupposition of the Promethean myth is the transcendent value which a naïve humanity attach to fire as the true palladium of every ascending culture: that man, however, should dispose at will of this fire, and should not receive it only as a gift from heaven, as the igniting lightning or the warming solar flame, appeared to the contemplative primordial men as crime and robbery of the divine nature. And thus the first philosophical problem at once causes a painful, irreconcilable antagonism between man and God, and puts as it were a mass of rock at the gate of every culture. The best and highest that men can acquire they obtain by a crime, and must now in their turn take upon themselves its consequences, namely the whole flood of sufferings and sorrows with which the offended celestials must visit the nobly aspiring race of man: a bitter reflection, which, by the dignity it confers on crime, contrasts strangely with the Semitic myth of the fall of man, in which curiosity, beguilement, seducibility, wantonness,—in short, a whole series of pre-eminently feminine passions,—were regarded as the origin of evil. What distinguishes the Aryan representation is the sublime view of active sin as the properly Promethean virtue, which suggests at the same time the ethical basis of pessimistic tragedy as the justification of human evil—of human guilt as well as of the suffering incurred thereby. The misery in the essence of things—which[Pg 79] the contemplative Aryan is not disposed to explain away—the antagonism in the heart of the world, manifests itself to him as a medley of different worlds, for instance, a Divine and a human world, each of which is in the right individually, but as a separate existence alongside of another has to suffer for its individuation. — Nietzsche, Birth of Tragedy
Because it's only the psychopath that does not experience this, right? — javra
No, moralizing, the bad conscience, ressentiment, and responsibility are trade marks of the Judeo-Christian morality: — DifferentiatingEgg
Because Buddhist, Hindus and all others, the Inuit included, don't experience any of these ... not being themselves of a Judeo-Christian morality.
Yea. No. I disagree. — javra
That's fine if you don't agree, doesn't make you right. — DifferentiatingEgg
It's common knowledge that Greek antiquity were premoral. As were many other. — DifferentiatingEgg
What can that even mean? Let me guess, it means that in Greek antiquity, if they'd so want, they'd stomp on their own babies heads for the fun of it without any moral compulsion. Thereby being "premoral". — javra
Don't make me wrong either. Especially in light of the fact that your theory contradicts blatant evidence, such as that previously offered. — javra
Nothing you've said contradicts me. — DifferentiatingEgg
There were over 200 delegates at the First Zionist Conference and the program waw adopted unanamously.get it from Zionist philosophers, not a 7 man swiss committee making propositions on land, — DifferentiatingEgg
Quite true - especially considering that Chomsky was born in 1928 - 30 years after these events. But even apart from this obvious goof on your part, these people were all wa-a-a-y outside the mainstream Zionist movement. I don't have the time or energy to bring you up to speed - but I'll leave it that the end goal of mainstream Zionism from the very start was colonization - the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.you'll notice none of the names I mentioned are even on that committee. — DifferentiatingEgg
Quite true - especially considering that Chomsky was born in 1928 - 30 years after these events. — EricH
I was connected to a considerable part of the Zionist movement which was opposed to a Jewish state. It’s not too well known, but until 1942 there was no official commitment of Zionist organizations to a Jewish state. And even that was in the middle of World War II. It was a decision made in the Hotel Biltmore in New York, where there was the first official call for a Jewish state. Before that in the whole Zionist movement, establishing a Jewish state was maybe implicit or in people’s minds or something, but it wasn’t an official call.
The group that I was interested in was bi-nationalist. And that was not so small. A substantial part of the Kibbutz movement, for example, Hashomer Hatzair, was at least officially anti-state, calling for bi-nationalism. And the groups I was connected with were hoping for a socialist Palestine based on Arab-Jewish, working-class cooperation in a bi-national community: no state, no Jewish state, just Palestine. — Chomsky
There were over 200 delegates at the First Zionist Conference and the program waw adopted unanamously. — EricH
In 1942, an "Extraordinary Zionist Conference" was held and announced a fundamental departure from traditional Zionist policy[21] with its demand "that Palestine be established as a Jewish Commonwealth."[22] It became the official Zionist stand on the ultimate aim of the movement. — Your source.
"Get real bruh."I don't know where you get this notion, but it has no relationship with reality. — EricH
Indeed, and the idea that the wretched, slaves, etc. were in their place precisely because they were wicked was obviously a popular opinion amongst the ancient Jews, since so many texts feel the need to weigh in on it. — Count Timothy von Icarus
I will give Nietzsche the benefit of the doubt here though and assume he is not primarily thinking of the fairly warrior-centric Hebrew culture of Joshua and Judges though, and more of later periods. The problem though is that Maccabees isn't that different. — Count Timothy von Icarus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.