Anti-Imperialism & Anti-Humanist Rhetoric of Gilad Atzmon

[compared2what?]

Stop.

barracuda, that nearly gave me a heart attack. I've been working my butt off on a post, and I'm almost done. Please, nobody lock this thread until I've posted. Even if nobody gets it, or even reads it, I do want to have it up. Please.

Alice, please address the "Yeshu" reference.

It's not on my behalf that I'm asking, fwiw.

Thanks.

[JackRiddler]

slimmouse's latest excuse for Atzmon: Rejecting the strict "chosen people" Judaism that he suffered through as a child necessarily makes him anti-Jewish now and excuses whatever he says, because otherwise he's so compassionate. Poor guy. Long as you understand it's still the Jews' fault. (Oh, sorry, "entities," "real perps," "powers that be," etc.)

I actually prefer Atzmon's lack of apologetics. What I find genuine about his self-defense is how childish it is. He enjoys the provocation.

[eyeno]

I also reject the bastardized form of Christianity that is perpetuated upon its followers of today. All of these major religions, Christianity, Judaism, etc... morph over time to fit the political means of the day. Some were created out of a sincere belief in goodness and some were created simply for nefarious purpose. Organized religions, all of them, whether or not they started as control tools, have become political control tools over time. The ability to write, record, and refine information over time helps hone organized religion into a tool for control. At the present time (i could be wrong) I can't think of any major organized religion that has not been honed into a tool for control.

The exception may be very small localized spiritual beliefs that prosper in places such as the Amazon jungle regions or similar places. Small centers of spiritual belief that have not suffered the refinement of the written word.

[slimmouse]

slimmouse's latest excuse for Atzmon: Rejecting the strict "chosen people" Judaism that he suffered through as a child necessarily makes him anti-Jewish now and excuses whatever he says, because otherwise he's so compassionate. Poor guy. Long as you understand it's still the Jews' fault. (Oh, sorry, "entities," "real perps," "powers that be," etc.)

Complete and utter crap Jack. Lumping words into anothers mouth. Using the term excuse instead of reason. Using the religon card - those faux labels (as hopefully others will understand that ive gone to great pains to try and explain) sure as hell are useful arent they Jack ?

Lots of "rigour". Zero intuition.

Once we get shut of the labelling, Atzmon ( AFAIC) is angry about the idea of anyone thinking theyre superior to anyone else. I think you are too - arent you ?. Hes probably also miffed about falling for that particular con once over. As such he strikes me as far more humanist than most of his detractrors.


Man those high IQs arent worth a shite sometimes are they ?

[JackRiddler]

Once we get shut of the labelling, Atzmon ( AFAIC) is angry about the idea of anyone thinking theyre superior to anyone else.

Then there are those comments of his that he himself re-quotes and defends, but you keep evading. So you tell us it's bad to think you're superior to anyone else, and this hurt Atzmon, therefore (in Atzmon logic) the Jews are much worse than the "ordinary" colonists of France and Britain? (who literally killed tens of millions) Therefore the Jews got what was coming to them in 1930s Europe? Therefore Jewish Marxists are just trying to steal from the hardworking non-Jewish ruling classes? Etc. etc., recreating the tropes common to the Protocols and The International Jew, minus the hatred for jazz music of course. And it's okay, because these are just little outbursts in a larger oeuvre of love?

Again, in fairness to this thread, here is how it began:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34135

I think you are too - arent you ?

Certainly I reject essentialist/nationalist doctrines, but in the matter of superiority it quite depends on what we're talking about. I'm inferior to Etta James as a singer, whereas you're superior to me as an apologist for Nazi rhetoric insinuating its way into the global resistance movements. Then again, you're not that good at it, either. There are far abler apologists than you out there.

[compared2what?]

Here's my problem with Atzmon: his mouth.

If his heart really is in the right place (as I have tried to suppose), then his mouth betrays that heart by rhetoric that is, frankly, anti-Jewish.

He is, clearly. But that's not really the problem. He's just as entitled to oppose Judaism and/or Jews as I am to oppose fascism and fascists (or as anybody is to oppose anything or anybody). The problem is that he's attacking Judaism and Jews on false, spurious and traditionally hateful grounds, which he represents as central to an understanding of Israel's genocidal policy toward Palestinians.

That tactic only ever benefits the wrong side.

]Absolutely simulist. Hes fallen for the fukin organised religion con, like just about the rest of the world.

Cui Bono ? Imagine my surprise !!

But slim....If you agree that the problem with what Atzmon writes is that it benefits a genocidal power, what do we disagree about?

Take that out of the equation, and what have you got ? Youve got a guy who to me doesnt like the idea of anyone considering themselves superior to anyone else - "Jew", "Christian","Muslim" or anyone else.

No. You've got a guy who insists, based on grounds he must know are false, that Jews consider themselves to be superior to gentiles.

If he were making his case honestly, he'd have to admit that as blanket proposition, it's neither any truer or any less true to assert Jews think that than that Muslims, Christians, B'Hai, or Scientologists do. Except for Scientologists. Because they actually do.

And you can rest assured that each of these "holy" bullshit texts contain references to the superiority of the faith of the particular duped sect in question.

Probably. But they definitely all contain references to humility, compassion, and tolerance. As virtues.

Hes pretty damned angry about it by the sounds of it too just like anyone in their right mind would be.

But the grounds for his anger are false. He's lying about them. He is intentionally making demonstrably spurious claims that incite anger and then linking them to a just cause.

Can you understand why I object to that?

Unfortunately we live in a world where being in your right mind is out of the question for most of us.

I agree. But we can't just give in to that, obviously. We have to object to it.

[compared2what?]

Lots of "rigour". Zero intuition.

Once we get shut of the labelling, Atzmon ( AFAIC) is angry about the idea of anyone thinking theyre superior to anyone else.

No. He's only angry about the spurious idea that Jews think they're superior to gentiles, which he spuriously attributes that God's covenant with the Jews in the Old Testament, although there's no more reason to think that's what it is than there is to think the same thing about the equivalent covenants on which other faiths are based. Not excluding zionism, or the foundation of the state of Israel.

I think you are too - arent you ?

I'm seriously committed to equality for all, and not some. That's why I absolutely reject very extreme and reactionary right-wing dogma and rhetoric, as a matter of a fact.

Man those high IQs arent worth a shite sometimes are they ?

They're barely ever worth anything at all.

[Simulist]

Here's my problem with Atzmon: his mouth.

If his heart really is in the right place (as I have tried to suppose), then his mouth betrays that heart by rhetoric that is, frankly, anti-Jewish.

He is, clearly. But that's not really the problem. He's just as entitled to oppose Judaism and/or Jews as I am to oppose fascism and fascists (or as anybody is to oppose anything or anybody). The problem is that he's attacking Judaism and Jews on false, spurious and traditionally hateful grounds, which he represents as central to an understanding of Israel's genocidal policy toward Palestinians.

That tactic only ever benefits the wrong side.

I don't disagree. Although, for me, for someone's rhetoric to be "anti-Jewish" in the way Atzmon's has been, is really the problem. Not a problem because of his strident opinions against religion or a philosophy, but because that vitriol has spilled over onto A PEOPLE.

And, for me, that's where he crosses the line.

[compared2what?]

I also reject the bastardized form of Christianity that is perpetuated upon its followers of today. All of these major religions, Christianity, Judaism, etc... morph over time to fit the political means of the day. Some were created out of a sincere belief in goodness and some were created simply for nefarious purpose. Organized religions, all of them, whether or not they started as control tools, have become political control tools over time. The ability to write, record, and refine information over time helps hone organized religion into a tool for control. At the present time (i could be wrong) I can't think of any major organized religion that has not been honed into a tool for control.

The exception may be very small localized spiritual beliefs that prosper in places such as the Amazon jungle regions or similar places. Small centers of spiritual belief that have not suffered the refinement of the written word.

I think it's the institutionalization of beliefs that drives that, not the written word, per se.

My two cents.
____________________

I mean, both non-institutionalized and non-written creeds can also be used as tools of political control, obviously. But I know that you know that, so it's more of a footnote than it is a disagreement. Because the disparity in scale is a very meaningful difference.

[eyeno]

Gilad can only best criticize what he knows best. I have divulged the fact that I have ancestry on two sides of the fence. I was raised in an air of Christianity (which I consider to be a bastardized form of the original intent) so I can best criticize Christianity and believe me I have no respect for what it has grown into.

Gilad criticizes the thought fence within which he grew up. There are many authors that grew up in a Christian, Hindu, Jewish, etc...thought fence that criticize the fence within which they grew up. Its an epidemic of criticizers criticizing the perimeter they grew up in around this world.

Gilad, for whatever he may be, is only 1 more person critical of the thought fence he grew up in. People get pissed when they realize they grew up in a dark room and Gilad is only one more of these. Gilad is not special. Gilad is only 1 more person that grew up in some sort of dogma that he rejects. This is not a mystery.

[DrVolin]

Not a problem because of his strident opinions against religion or a philosophy, but because that vitriol has spilled over onto A PEOPLE.

And, for me, that's where he crosses the line.

Worth restating as a general principle and a guide for further discussion on this thread and others.

[JackRiddler]

Gilad can only best criticize what he knows best. I have divulged the fact that I have ancestry on two sides of the fence. I was raised in an air of Christianity (which I consider to be a bastardized form of the original intent) so I can best criticize Christianity and believe me I have no respect for what it has grown into.

Gilad criticizes the thought fence within which he grew up. There are many authors that grew up in a Christian, Hindu, Jewish, etc...thought fence that criticize the fence within which they grew up. Its an epidemic of criticizers criticizing the perimeter they grew up in around this world.

Gilad, for whatever he may be, is only 1 more person critical of the thought fence he grew up in. People get pissed when they realize they grew up in a dark room and Gilad is only one more of these. Gilad is not special. Gilad is only 1 more person that grew up in some sort of dogma that he rejects. This is not a mystery.

And no one ever implied otherwise. Nor is this the subject of the thread. There's nothing wrong with any of this, other than that it is bullshit by omission.

How about the part where Christ-killing Jews are worse than "ordinary" colonialists like the French and British, are trying to rip off the precious ruling class, do the terrible things they do because it's in their essence, and got what was coming to them in the 1930s?

That small omission! Such a small part of his work, the part where he endorses Nazi doctrine. Can't we just look past it? Such a lack of generosity on our part.

[eyeno]

And no one ever implied otherwise. Nor is this the subject of the thread. There's nothing wrong with any of this, other than that it is bullshit by omission.

How about the part where Christ-killing Jews are worse than "ordinary" colonialists like the French and British, are trying to rip off the precious ruling class, do the terrible things they do because it's in their essence, and got what was coming to them in the 1930s?

That small omission! Such a small part of his work, the part where he endorses Nazi doctrine. Can't we just look past it? Such a lack of generosity on our part.

jack you and i are not terribly far apart on this issue. if he were criticizing any other dogma the same would apply. it just happens that he is criticizing the one he grew up in. had he grown up in another the variables would be similar but different. anytime a person is critical of the dogma they grew up in certain variables will be in the critical eye. if i criticize the christian belief system, (and i will) certain variables will become the focus of my critical eye. this is inherent in critical analysis of any religion. like i said, no mystery here, the dude is critical of the thought fence he grew up in. i'm critical of the thought fence i grew up in too. and so it goes....

[eyeno]

Maybe I can say it this way to make it clear.

We can talk about the child molesting Catholic Priests or we can talk about the human organ trafficking Jewish Rabbi.

It doesn't matter which we talk about there is still collateral information in the stream of dialogue. Mostly, at the top, or actually the center, is a bunch of damn schmucks.

And then their trained followers at the bottom or outside of the Venn Diagram.

The schmucks live in the middle of the Venn Diagram. The followers live in the periphery of the Venn Diagram. When we argue over this shit we fulfill the purpose of the diagram. This is not complicated.

[compared2what?]

Gilad can only best criticize what he knows best. I have divulged the fact that I have ancestry on two sides of the fence. I was raised in an air of Christianity (which I consider to be a bastardized form of the original intent) so I can best criticize Christianity and believe me I have no respect for what it has grown into.

Gilad criticizes the thought fence within which he grew up. There are many authors that grew up in a Christian, Hindu, Jewish, etc...thought fence that criticize the fence within which they grew up. Its an epidemic of criticizers criticizing the perimeter they grew up in around this world.

Gilad, for whatever he may be, is only 1 more person critical of the thought fence he grew up in. People get pissed when they realize they grew up in a dark room and Gilad is only one more of these. Gilad is not special. Gilad is only 1 more person that grew up in some sort of dogma that he rejects. This is not a mystery.

And no one ever implied otherwise.

I have not only implied, but bluntly stated, that he is either:

Not critical of the thought fence he grew up in; or

Did not grow up in the environment he says he did.

__________________________

I base that on a number of things, but the least debatable one is that he could not have possibly grown up in a thought fence that included thoughts about killing Christ and obliterating his name and memory. There is no sect of Judaism that does -- or even logically can do -- that, while still being Judaism, which does not recognize Christ as a messiah or as anything. The life and death of Christ are of zero significance, from a Jewish perspective. Talking and thinking about them would be like talking or thinking about killing Santa Claus and obliterating his name and memory. Or the Easter Bunny. Or Zeus. Literally. It just has no place in Judaism. None. Because Christ is not a part of Jewish thought.

Therefore, ATZMON IS LYING WHEN HE EQUATES ISRAELI SCORN FOR THE LIFE OF PALESTINIANS WITH JEWISH SCORN FOR THE LIFE OF CHRIST.

IS THAT CLEAR?
___________________

And please don't tell me there's a Talmudic tradition of expressing scorn for the life of Christ or celebrating his murder by Jews or anything remotely like it. There isn't. I mean, if you think otherwise, bring your best game, by all means. I'd be happy to address it.