[skyredoubt]

Another question, while i am it, what do the jews do that they end up on the wrong side of history everytime? Holucast wasnt the first time it happenned, exile from babylon, genocide was going on egypt when moses came along, and many other instances in jewish history.

The best explanation I came across is from the book by Yuri Slezkine "The Jewish Century"..

At different times and in different places, there were tribes--ethnic groups--that specialized exclusively in providing services to the surrounding food-producing societies. They include Roma-Gypsies, various so-called “Travelers” or “Tinkers,” the Fuga in Ethiopia, the Sheikh Mohammadi in Afghanistan, and of course the Armenians, the Overseas Chinese, the Indians in East Africa, the Lebanese in West Africa and Latin America, and so on. I call them all “Mercurians,” as opposed to their “Apollonian” hosts.


What do you mean by those terms?

Apollo was the god of both livestock and agriculture. “Apollonian” societies, the way I use the term, are societies organized around food production, societies that consist mostly of peasants, plus various combinations of warriors and priests who appropriate peasant labor by controlling access to land or salvation.

Mercury, or Hermes, was the god of messengers, merchants, interpreters, craftsmen, guides, healers, and other
border-crossers. “Mercurians,” the way I use the term, are ethnic groups, demographically complete societies, that do not engage in food production, but live by providing services to the surrounding Apollonians.

In the modern world, Apollonians have to become more Mercurian--more Jewish, if you will; but Apollonian values, peasant and warrior values, essentially, live on, of course. The two attitudes, two ideal types, are still with us today, and the Jews, the most accomplished of all Mercurians, are still playing a very special role in the modern world--as the models of both success and victimization.

There are striking similarities in the way all Mercurians think of themselves and of their non-Mercurian neighbors, and in the way they actually behave.

Can you give illustrations of what you mean?

Essentially, the idea is that certain things in traditional Apollonian societies are too dangerous or too unclean to be performed by members of those societies: communicating with other lands, other worlds, and other tribes; handling money; treating the body; and dealing with fire by engaging in metal work, for example. All these are typical Mercurian specialities. Most Tinkers and Travelers started out as tinsmiths. My great-grandfather was a Jewish blacksmith.

It’s a very large world, if you think about it: disease, exchange, negotiations, travel, burials, reading. And these were the things the permanent internal strangers, or Mercurians, were willing to do, compelled to do, equipped to do--or very good at doing.

And these occupations were not limited to Jews.

There were a lot of groups performing such functions. And, throughout the world, they share certain features and are regarded in similar ways. Think of Jews and Gypsies. Both were traditionally seen as dangerous internal aliens, homeless for reasons of divine punishment, and engaged in harmful, morally suspect activities. They were always seen as mirror images of their host communities: Their men weren’t warriors, their women seemed aggressive--and, perhaps for that reason, attractive; they remained strangers by staying aloof, not intermarrying, not fighting, not sharing meals--just making, exchanging, selling, and possibly stealing, things and concepts. And so they were feared and hated accordingly, with the Holocaust as the culmination of that long history of fear and hatred.

And I think they were seen in similar ways because they were, in many ways, similar. Both were exclusive, nomadic service providers; both had rigid taboos regarding unclean food and intermarriage; both could only survive by remaining strangers--hence the prohibitions against sharing food and blood with their neighbors, and the obsession with cleanliness.

But Gypsies have certainly not had the success that Jews have had in the modern world.

I distinguish between the majority of Mercurians, including Gypsies, who engage in small, non-literate pariah entrepreneurship; and those, like the Jews, who specialize, among other things, in the interpretation of written texts. With the rise of the modern world, the Gypsies have continued to ply their trade in the diminishing world of folk oral culture, while the Jews have gone on to define modernity.

In any case, the ways in which Mercurians and Apollonians regard each other are similar wherever one looks. What is true of Jews and their peasant neighbors in Imperial Russia is, I think, true of Gypsies and their hosts, as well as of Indians and local populations in East Africa, and so forth.

Including the Overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia?

Yes. The Overseas Chinese too are supposed to be clever--too clever, perhaps. You can call on the usual anti-Semitic list: they are aloof, devious, unmanly, and so on. This is the way Apollonians describe Mercurians throughout the world.

And of course one could interpret these same qualities in a positive light. “Cunning” and “deviousness” may become “intelligence” and “a general commitment to the life of the mind.” Gypsies are proud of being smarter than the non-Gypsies they deal with, as Jews are, or were in the traditional Jewish world. Mercurian views of Apollonians tend to be negative too: “soulfulness,” “courage,” and “earthiness” may become “stupidity,” “belligerence,” and “uncleanliness.”

In other words, the oppositions mind/body, intelligence/physicality, impermanence/permanence, non-belligerence/belligerence remain the same and are agreed upon by everyone involved. Everyone knows which traits are associated with which group; the difference is in the interpretation.

Which leads you to conclude what about the Jews?

Seen in this way, some things about the Jewish experience and the traditional Jewish economic role become less unique, so to speak. To be crude about it, perhaps, it’s not an accident that there was a Gypsy holocaust.

What do you mean?

That there are similarities between Jews and Gypsies and a whole lot of other peoples who engaged in similar pursuits that go beyond their common fate under the Nazis, or the hostility that they encounter wherever they go.

This could change the way one understands anti-Semitism.

In my book, I tried to contextualize the Jewish experience, to explain both the Jewish victimization and the Jewish success.

On the particular question of anti-Semitism, my book makes the argument that anti-Semitism is not a disease, not mystical, not inexplicable. It makes the argument that the beliefs and perceptions and actions usually associated with anti-Semitism are very common, and that they are applied not only to the Jews.

[Black_ronin]

I know that wikipedia is not to be used as a true historical source but for the web I will use it

History of the Jews under Muslim rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't say that they were treated all that well but hey thats me

2 and 3 sentences from link you provided:

After the expansion of Islam into the Middle East from the Arabian Peninsula, Jews, along with Christians and Zoroastrians, typically had the legal status of dhimmi.[1] As such, they were accorded rights and were not persecuted for their religious beliefs unlike most parts of Medieval Europe, but were not accorded full privileges such as those accorded to native Muslims.

When I agree it wasn't easy to be a Jew in the past why do you think Jews in Medieval Europe treated better than in Muslim countries?

Relatively speaking, Jews were probably treated better by Muslims than Christians. It has been no picnic being a Jew anywhere until very recently. Certainly in Spain, Jews fared better under the Moors than their conquerors, Ferdinand and Isabella.

Exactly my point. Most tensions between Arabs and Jews are escalated within last 60 years. And the sad part is that it's all was clear that there would be escalation. Much easier to control fighting sides than peaceful neighbors

[deadwolfbones]

If you want to read a funny/poignant (fictional) book about the Jewish experience in the Middle Ages in Europe, check out Pilgermann, by Russel Hoban. Fantastic book.

[techmulla]

Exactly my point. Most tensions between Arabs and Jews are escalated within last 60 years. And the sad part is that it's all was clear that there would be escalation. Much easier to control fighting sides than peaceful neighbors

and that is exactly when Israel came into being? co-incidence?

The post world war one scenario of international politics is completely different than the one before that. Post WW1, there was no Turkish Ottoman empire, thus the formed Muslim states took refuge in borrowed political ideas, rather than what Muslims are used too. Currently, all the Muslim states are confused between the western political ideas, and their own, and whenever some Muslim state tries to go back to their own, there is an outcry of radical Islam! What is radical Islam?

Why an outcry? Is it alright for Israel to deny basic human rights to people of GAZA on the back of claims "if they are allowed to prosper, they are going to destroy Israel", and not for Iran to have nuclear missiles on the same ground?

The History of Muslim Rule is not that tarnished with blood when compared to the Colonial Era that was experienced by Africans and native Americans. I wouldn't say, there is no blood, but the colonial expansions of European nations proved to be barbarian for the locals in Africa and america.

So for the jews, it is alright for you to be insecure based upon your history, but that doesn't mean you take it out on the people of Gaza. Nobody is out there to get you.

If somebody says, on the base of historical evidence, Israelites are right, People of Gaza will become a problem, I would say, Iran is right on the same grounds i.e the historical evidence of the past 60 years.

[DanielT74]

Pilgermann is a very good book, but for someone who actually wants to learn a bit about what happened rather than go on a journey of imagination, there are better books, I am sure.

[Ash]

Why an outcry? Is it alright for Israel to deny basic human rights to people of GAZA on the back of claims "if they are allowed to prosper, they are going to destroy Israel", and not for Iran to have nuclear missiles on the same ground?

Sure it's borne out of fear, but the feeling of being threatened is there, and the more the oppression, the more the tension brews. Catch 22.

The History of Muslim Rule is not that tarnished with blood when compared to the Colonial Era that was experienced by Africans and native Americans. I wouldn't say, there is no blood, but the colonial expansions of European nations proved to be barbarian for the locals in Africa and america.

I'm sorry, I do not think this is accurate. Islam has had its fair share of violent uprisings right from the beginning, and is justified in scripture.

Islam and Violence
TheReligionofPeace - Islam: Verses of Violence
Islam's history of violence :: Reader comments at Daniel Pipes
etc.

So for the jews, it is alright for you to be insecure based upon your history, but that doesn't mean you take it out on the people of Gaza. Nobody is out there to get you.

The precedence of oppression is set and carried on, perhaps even more passionately, by the future generation of Holy Land inhabitants. As above, the threat will only grow - why would they take the risk? You sound sure that Palestinians have no bone to pick with the Jews. You will find though that the issues between them are deep seated and hardly reconcilable.

[techmulla]

The precedence of oppression is set and carried on, perhaps even more passionately, by the future generation of Holy Land inhabitants. As above, the threat will only grow - why would they take the risk? You sound sure that Palestinians have no bone to pick with the Jews. You will find though that the issues between them are deep seated and hardly reconcilable.

So, if there is going to be a war, let it be! The world war one came to end because both side were tired of fighting each other. Some restrictions were commissioned against the so called losers of the war to restrict their rise. Look what happened. The people put faith in a war monger whose only promise was to restore the lost glory. You cannot a build a war machine that has enough firepower to last for about eight years without the support of the people. Besides, war machine is just hardware, men on the ground makes a difference. (I shouldn't emphasize on the value of two hands on a photography forum, after all its the man who takes the picture ).

No matter how hard somebody tries, one cannot prevent the situation from turning ugly at some point in time. You and I will be mere spectators in all this. The kettle is boiling and it will explode. The whole situation is just waiting for somebody to take the ownership. It will happen today, tomorrow, or in next few years, it will happen.

As for the apologies from Ira, lets just say, one can only start a war, how the war is going to take its turn, nobody can predict that. Pearl Harbor forced the hand of United States into war. If only that hadn't happened. Germany decided to attack Russia and their attention was diverted from the rest of Europe, if only that hadn't happened.

Its an irony that history is always written by the victors, we always had a very little account of the other side of the story.

When I said, the insecurities are justified, but that doesn't mean you start dictating your terms in your neighbors house, leave your neighbor alone, i meant, stop meddling with other people affairs, or the fire is going to destroy yours own house.

Lets say, you and I get into a fight and start beating each other. each one of us is hitting the other with everything they have got, but at some point in time, we both start to feel jaded. so we agree on terms. you are badly hurt, so you say, i dont want to fight you anymore, would you please not eat two breads in the morning, please dont have meat, and whatnot. so i agree and reduce my diet. And then you humiliate me on everyday basis. At some point, I will get up and hit you again.

I established this story, because I believe the current world political scene resembles this scenario.

As for the history of violence, I never said, there was no violence in history of Islam. Expansionists everywhere use the religion agenda to exploit masses. So is the story of Islam. Fun Fact. The word assassin is described from the word hashasheen. A notorious group of assassins used for political motives. Who were they, how were they cultivated is a topic in itself. Its one of the darker point of history of Islam. I only compared the muslim expansion era to the colonial expansion era. The latter is tainted with continuous acts of barbarism and disrespect for humanity.

The sooner the acts of preventive politics stop, the better it will be for everybody.

[Black_ronin]

If somebody says, on the base of historical evidence, Israelites are right, People of Gaza will become a problem, I would say, Iran is right on the same grounds i.e the historical evidence of the past 60 years.

Iran is right on what? That Israel should be wiped out of world's map? I wonder when all these anti-Israeli rhetorics started to appear in Iran politics. 30 years ago? Coincidence?

And honestly what is there between Iran and Israel? Was there war between Israel and Iran? Nothing except yelling and shouting at each other. Iranians don't give a hoot about Palestinians. Iranians are not even Arabs. Tell me, during last 60 years how many Iranians were killed by Arabs? How many Iranians were killed by Israel?

Don't listen to puppet moron Ahmadinejad. Lets numbers and history talk. It's all about finding outside enemy to get public attention away from more important internal affairs. It happens in Iran, it happens in US, it happens in China. We've all been there, seen that. Give us something knew.

[dadipentak]

Don't listen to puppet moron Ahmadinejad. Lets numbers and history talk. It's all about finding outside enemy to get public attention away from more important internal affairs.

Word.

[deadwolfbones]

Pilgermann is a very good book, but for someone who actually wants to learn a bit about what happened rather than go on a journey of imagination, there are better books, I am sure.

Oh, certainly. I was just pimping a fiction favorite at an appropriate moment.

[Nesster]

... getting back to the question (as I see it): what do I think may be in Israel's best interst relative to Egypt? Clearly, retaining conditions to peace. What's the best way for this to happen? Publicly, stay out of it, or express the desire to retain the current peace... Sabre rattling is likely to have the reverse effect of polarizing Egypt and strengthening those politicians who would like to ride anti-Israel sentiment to power. A quiet, conciliatory stance does not of course mean the military possibilities shouldn't be prepared for. There is much room for diplomacy as yet.

[Wheatfield]

... getting back to the question (as I see it): what do I think may be in Israel's best interst relative to Egypt? Clearly, retaining conditions to peace. What's the best way for this to happen? Publicly, stay out of it, or express the desire to retain the current peace... Sabre rattling is likely to have the reverse effect of polarizing Egypt and strengthening those politicians who would like to ride anti-Israel sentiment to power. A quiet, conciliatory stance does not of course mean the military possibilities shouldn't be prepared for. There is much room for diplomacy as yet.

I think both publicly and covertly stay out of it. Mossad is pretty well known for playing dirty tricks, but they also tend to be pretty inept sometimes at covering their tracks.
Israel may think that covert involvement in Egypt with a mind to destabilize the country even further (if that is possible) may be advantageous in the short term, but in the long run, it may well have exactly the opposite effect.
As a non sequiter, watch how the finding of American made tear gas canisters that were used against the protesters plays out. You can be pretty sure that it will foment some anti American rhetoric.
People will act on suspicions, and if there is suspicion that Israel has played some cards to the detriment of the Egyptian people with the intent of causing more havoc, more bloodshed and more deaths, there will be more than home made rockets falling on Tel Aviv in the future.

[redrockcoulee]

I know that wikipedia is not to be used as a true historical source but for the web I will use it

History of the Jews under Muslim rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't say that they were treated all that well but hey thats me

I did not say they were treated well but they were treated better by Moslems than by the Christian world. Sure there is a list of hostile acts over a large geographic area and period of time but compare it to the treatment in Europe over that same period of time. In addition during many of the periods without presecution Jews held important roles in commerce and in govenment whereas their rights were extremely restricted in Christian Europe.

Govenment slaughter of Jews by Christian govenments continued into the 20th Century even if you exclude Germany.

[Nesster]

...and by quasi-Western officially atheist governments, to include the Soviet Union...

And one may argue that a Christian government (Britain) acting in a colonial manner created the current problem between Israel and palestine in the first place.

[Black_ronin]

Israel may think that covert involvement in Egypt with a mind to destabilize the country even further (if that is possible) may be advantageous in the short term, but in the long run, it may well have exactly the opposite effect.

Wheatfield, why would be Israel interested in destabilizing Egypt even further? Only if there was open war going on. Or that Egypt is in the edge of civil war. I don't see any of this there.