Nicholas J. Fuentes, Candace Owens, and other Right Wing Grifters

Of course you can have it both ways. Hitler blamed Jews for communism and Marx blamed Jews for capitalism. They both explicitly wrote about eliminating Judaism from society.

We can stick to the issues. I can post evidence of genocide alongside the text of international and U.S. law forbidding genocide. I can dig up my posts from 10 years ago where I am saying that Zionism is an ethnic cleansing project. We can put that against you saying Hamas Hamas Hamas and from there I guess it's just "opinion" that we don't need to state on who is delusional. I could go through the list of crimes, the bombing of hospitals and schools and every other building in Gaza. I could give quotes about the intention of ethnic cleansing and genocide from high ranking officials. The case is air tight and that's why some countries making it, because the truth is just that compelling that it makes it worth it to piss off the most weaponized and violent country in the history of the world, the U.S.

But, politely straying from the issues for a sec, I really don't think either of us is delusional. I'm saying there is an ongoing genocide is Gaza. You say there isn't. But you don't believe what you say, which is why you're not delusional. You're not unaware of the reality of the situation. No one could fail to recognize the genocide for what it is, at least to themselves, and also be able to tie their own shoes. You're just cool with it because your ideology is supremacist, or maybe you profit monetarily from the genocide. Why you and your ilk cling on to the thinnest, comical justifications for genocide is something I don't quite fully understand. I don't think you do either. I think you are just following the fascist herd, like some lower mammal. Like the part of your brain that says "these people are killing and getting stuff so I go with them" is the dominant part of your brain. Ok maybe that wasn't so polite, but I don't know how to be totally polite when someone is comically justifying a live streamed ethnic genocide like it's not happening. Once you see children targeted and assassinated and are not against it you've simply lost your humanity.

Why do you hate me? because I have too much concern for sniper shot children? because you think everyone is like you and don't care about sniper shot children and I am faking my outrage? Honestly, I'm not on the losing side of neoliberalism. If I supported the democratic party instead of trying to destroy it I would be, incrementally, helping myself materially, at least in the short term. But my true analysis is that capitalism/neoliberalism is going to eventually put us in conflict with people are have military parity with us via nuclear weapons. I think this economic regime can lead to total collapse through several mechanisms, and partial collapse through even more mechanisms. Even if everyone who isn't a materialist is insane, I'm still not insane or deluded. You could think of me as just looking down the road a bit past next quarter's profits.

I mean if you think I'm insane then you also have to think all the uber rich who are building elaborate survivalist bunkers like there is no tomorrow are absolutely batshit. But you worship these people. You can't have it both ways.

Marx’s opinions on Jews need a bit of nuancing imo. It’s true he wrote a horrible screed against Judaism, it’s also true that he advocated for Jewish representation in civil society. I wouldn’t say he blamed Jews for capitalism, but he did mock antisemites by comparing them to their anti-jewish caricatures. That’s what I got from his essay “On Jews”. I think he would have advocated for eradicating Judaism on atheist grounds, if anything.

Based on what I've read (which isn't much) from Marx defenders, this is a fair point.

They say he wasn't so much anti-Jew as anti-Judaism.

Kinda like an atheist can be against Christianity (as a worldview) without being against Christians.

I just read the essay, I dont see anything rabid in it. you can argue that he is playing on the whole "antisemitic tropes" but its not like hes calling for violence against Jews. but if there is one thing we have learned the last few years it is that even the slightest bit of possible antisemitism is the worst thing ever so whatever.

Haven’t read it in a bit but doesn’t he say Jews worship money like capitalists worship money?

If you want to say he's no Hitler.....ok. But he knew how antisemitic people were and very purposely chose to associate capitalism with Judaism to tap into to people's visceral hatred of Jews. That he was smart enough to figure out antisemitism itself was pretty stupid doesn't absolve him of that decision.

kinda. he says that the Judaism of that time is inherently capitalist and Jews are the best at it.

Honestly the whole essay is a rather pathetic edgelord affair so I’m not after some vindication of Marx. I guess what I’m saying is that Marx’s project itself was only using antisemitism, and that he was setting the antisemitism he was using over and against the popular antisemitism at the time, which was a racial and religious antisemitism.

It’s hard to see how Marx’s antisemitism is connected much to any sort of modern antisemitism, as it was a peculiar conversation he was having in the context of the rise of modern antisemitism, which is heavily influenced by the very German idealism that Marx was himself completely opposed to. We could take that as a historical contingency, which it is, which is why it doesn’t absolve Marx, but it also doesn’t fit very neatly into our modern conception of what antisemitism is, as Marx didn’t really care at all about marshaling society to discriminate against Jews (in fact he was rather against discrimination against Jews because he felt that being anti-Jewish was a total red herring which served to reify the ruling class).

I'm not after some vindication of Marx either, because who really cares. Antisemitism from a guy born in the early 19th century is not particularly noteworthy. But it's silly to pretend like it's not there.

--I would have put this in the Candace thread, but it was locked. But that being said, I dont think she is making a run for VP anytime soon.

This Macron stuff seems about as likely as your theories about the chef's death in MV -- that is, something less than 0.000001%.

It's not at all hard to see how Marx's bog-standard antisemitism is any different from what you'd hear from Nick Fuentes, esp given how they use the same crude shopworn cliches about Jews, money, and scams.

This is not how you come across, FWIW.

"Oh he was secretly not an antisemite, he just strategically deployed racist tropes about Jews and money" feels like a distinction without a difference. Plus, his private correspondence regrading Jews is even more offensive than what he wrote publicly.

modern antisemitism is anything critical of Jews or Israel. so yes that would include the Marx ideas about them.

but its also not antisemitism when pro-Israel Jews say it as a brag.

Come the **** on, dude.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/wo...

What were the goals and prescriptions that he had that are related to modern antisemitism?

My brother in Christ, "The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the trader, and above all of the financier" is just bog-standard antisemitism. It's exactly what dipshits like Fuentes would say if they knew about fancy words like "chimerical."

You don't have to defend this trash. Or maybe you do.

I haven't been keeping up with the news, so I have a quick question: Has Candace been killed yet?

I think you are confused on the point that we disagree about so you’re arguing about some other point I’m not trying to make.

Your "point" is a dumb bit of sophistry that I guess is supposed to disguise what is unarguably antisemitic screed. I suspect you're just trolling, bc honestly who gives a rip? Marx was a product of his time, his economic ideas are still interesting regardless of the fact that he had basic 19th-centruy prejudices against Jews. It's a curious thing to get defensive about.

The sophistry is you responding to things I’m not saying and not responding to things I am saying, as well as these dumb snide personal attacks. It’s already stipulated he was being antisemitic, so you repeating that as if I didn’t say it from the start is either you failing to track or trying to do a gotchya. Either way I’m not interested.

You think it is super important to give a microphone to someone who you think might be a fed or a shock jock? Amazing.

Indeed, antisemitism was ingrained into the zeitgeist of the 1800s. If there was one drawback with the rise of romanticism, it was that it gave far more room to the idea that minorities did not fit in with the national ideal. Unlike today this was rarely a debate on immigration, rather it was ire aimed at minorities that had lived side by side with other ethnicities / nationalities for centuries or even millennia.

You can pretty much draw a direct line from these ideas to the rise of destructive ideologies and the genocides / pogroms of the 20th century. 19th centuries ideologies such as the "Völkische Bewegung" would come to serve as direct inspiration for authoritarians and totalitarians a century later.

Often when we debate this issue, we tend to focus on the 20th century politicians as people who instigated and started these violent persecution and mass killings. While there is certainly truth to that, there is also another and far more grim perspective: Throughout Europe that we saw the rise of leadership and government unwilling to slow or stop public sentiment that demanded discrimination of minorities. It isn't always about leaders who start the persecution, it also about the leaders who refuse to stop it.