Socio-economic status (i.e. wealth) is the biggest determining factor with respect to future life chances, not race, religion or gender. So what are you suggesting? That Jews, the victims of the Holocaust, are better off than everyone else? I found your conclusions deeply troubling, particularly for fellow socialists/left-wingers who have always been historically against demonising Jewish people.
This myth about all Jews being rich is right-wing propaganda and harmful to the socialist cause, but then again, the people peddling that myth no doubt know that.
I'm associating Aryanism with privilege. I don't see how that is dangerous or damaging. However, your insistence in linking wealth, and thus power, to one of the most discriminated groups in history is deeply dangerous and damaging. Either you know what you're doing or you should just shut up now, unless of course you wish to see an even greater tide of anti-Semitism bubble up in austerity-hit Europe. You must know the historical implications of linking power to Judaism in times of economic distress (next you'll tell me you haven't heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion). If you care about the pernicious spread of anti-Semitism you must stop contributing to the myth of the 'greedy capitalist Jew'. Then again it doesn't surprise me that people think Jews 'rule the world' beating in mind there are some people who think Rupert Murdoch is Jewish.
As I'm sure you know, 'Aryan' is a term that was used by the Nazis to describe the 'Nordic race', which included any Northern European. Perhaps the term 'Nordic' then would be more accurate, but it encompasses people of Scandinavia, the British Isles, Germany, the Netherlands, and even, yes, North Russia, Poland and the Baltic States, and is characterised by light hair, light eyes, and a naturally tall, slim body shape. It certainly doesn't apply to people of Mediterranean extraction, such as myself.
I understand hey the term 'Aryan' or 'Nordic' is troubling, not least because the logic behind it was a discredited pseudo-science. My use of the term is not for biological/anthropological reasons but socio-historical reasons. I have little time for racial distinctions. There are greater genetic differences between individuals than there are between racial groups. But from a socio-economic perspective critical race theory does sadly have some significance because it explains why some groups (i.e. African-Americans for instance) are still at a disadvantage.
And whilst I agree that the traditional WASP stranglehold on society's industrial-military-complex has loosened over time it is only within the last few decades and the emergence of non-whites overtaking the numbers of whites that this has occurred. Most senators and congressmen are still overwhelmingly white gentiles.
reply
share
10 years ago
[deleted]
HarveyManfredSinJohn
10 years ago
I will endeavour to respond to your post in full later (and in fact I do agree with some of your points now that you've corrected your argument suggesting that Jews are mostly wealthy).
However, I want to ask you where you've come to this absurd notion that Southern Europeans are part of what the Nazis described as the 'Aryan race'. Of course one doesn't have to be blonde haired and blue eyed to be an Aryan, and plenty of Germans, Anglos and Nordics possess dark hair and brown eyes. But Mediterraneans, including the Greeks, Italians, Iberians, Turks and Southern French were never regarded as Aryans and there is nothing in historical texts or online to suggest otherwise.
I did a quick search to see if there was anything to back up your contention and I found nothing. This is the first link, outside of Wikipedia (which outlines the various racial gradings adopted by proponents of Nordicism, which I alluded to in my last post), that addresses Southern Europeans: http://historacle.org/hitlers_supermen.html
A few of the things you said in your last post were true but you should stop peddling the offensive lies that Hitler considered Southern Europeans as Aryans. He didn't and all evidence backs my position. The Nordics view Southern Europeans (i.e. the people of the PIGS countries who are currently bearing the worst brunt of German-led austerity) like me as they've always done, as swarthy, feckless, inferior mixed-breeds. So be it. I don't want to belong to their fair-haired, blue-eyed club anyway. But don't tell me we've always been members even after they've continually shut the door in our faces. That's just rubbing salt into the wound.
We're poor ethnics and we stand side-by-side with other ethnics like the Africans and the Jews against the Northern European socio-ethnic elite, as well as the KKK and Aryan Brotherhood who hate us Catholics/Papists almost as much as they hate the 'Negro' and the Jew. If you're a 'left-winger' as you claim to be I find it frankly astonishing you'd object to my position.
Then again, the Nazis did call themselves 'National Socialists' after all.
reply
share