DEBUSSY...

[MELMOTH]

"Debussy did not create a style: he cultivated the absence of style,
logic and common sense. But it is true that he had a harmonious name.
Had he been called Martin, we would never have spoken of him. In this
case, he would undoubtedly have adopted a psudonym" *SAINT SAENS*

"If Debussy used Spain as the source of one of the most beautiful parts
of his work, he paid so generously for what he took from it that Spain
has now become his debtor. *DE FALLA*

"By dint of looking at the sea through the small end of the spyglass,
M.Debussy gives you rather the impression of the Tuileries basin."
L.*SCHNEIDER*

"This monster of Debussy." *PAUL VALERY*

"The enchanter, the persecutor of learned spiders." *MILAN KUNSERA*

"The French Schumann." *FURTWANGLER*

"Better not to listen to it, you might get used to it, and you'd end up
loving it." *RIMSKY KORSAKOV*

[Herman]

I don't get what you're trying to achieve with these contemporaneous quotes, other than starting as many topics as humanly possible.
People, including some colleagues got Debussy (Brahms etc ad inf) wrong at first. That's only natural. Big deal.
It doesn't add anything to our store of knowledge.

[MELMOTH]

Herman a couché sur son écran :

> It doesn't add anything to our store of knowledge.

But you don't have to read me, hem...
You do as I did with gggggggggggggggggggggg...You plonk me, and you
find all your serenity...

[Chris from Lafayette]

Funny quote from Rimsky, weird quote from Furtwängler - I'd certainly have to see more context to understand what Furty was trying to get at.

[Ricardo Jimenez]

So far, there has been nothing posted that can help verify the
authenticity of any of Melmoth's quotes.

[Chris from Lafayette]

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 11:52:28 AM UTC-7, Ricardo Jimenez wrote:

> So far, there has been nothing posted that can help verify the
> authenticity of any of Melmoth's quotes.

Maybe not, but I've seen some of them (e.g., Tchaikovsky's comments about Brahms) from other sources.

[Malcolm Y]

Le 21/04/2021 à 12:18, Herman a écrit :
> I don't get what you're trying to achieve with these contemporaneous quotes, other than starting as many topics as humanly possible.
> People, including some colleagues got Debussy (Brahms etc ad inf) wrong at first. That's only natural. Big deal.
> It doesn't add anything to our store of knowledge.

you have lost a good opportunity to shut up!
Without Melmoth dk and ggg.ggg this forum would be almost dead!

[Ricardo Jimenez]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:13:22 +0200, Malcolm Y <mal...@gmail.com>
wrote:

What has gone wrong with this forum over the past decade or so is the
narrowing of focus. At the present, there is too much emphasis on
piano recordings and extremely little on vocal music, especially
opera. The most interesting new releases are DVDs/Blurays of operas I
had never heard of. Can you imagine: there are half a dozen or so
blurays available of operas by Monteverdi's pupil Francesco Cavalli!
It would be nice to read discussions are which are worth buying. Most
libraries (and certainly Netflix) don't invest in such stuff.

[Frank Berger]

So why don't you say something about them besides complaining and calling them to our attention?

[Gerard]

Op 2021-04-22 om 13:13 schreef Malcolm Y:

And with them it is dead.

[Frank Berger]

I don't understand what people who complain about the content or nature of the postings are hoping to accomplish. You can't seriously expect that your complaints will change anything. Only actually posting about subjects you want to see can make a difference.

[gggg gggg]

https://gifer.com/en/70Xi

[mswd...@gmail.com]

Bwaahahaha! Good one.

[gggg gggg]

If you go to rec.music.opera and search CAVALLI:

https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/rec.music.opera/search?q=cavalli

[gggg gggg]

- Perro que no camina, no encuentra hueso.

[Andy Evans]

I'm in for discussions of operas, though in my case I'll pass on the early stuff like Monteverdi etc.

I'm very fond of Pelleas, since we're talking of Debussy, and we could talk about recordings of that.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/22/2021 4:45 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> I'm in for discussions of operas, though in my case I'll pass on the early stuff like Monteverdi etc.
>
> I'm very fond of Pelleas, since we're talking of Debussy, and we could talk about recordings of that.
>

I have two recordings of the complete opera, Ansermet with Suzanne Danco, Pierre Mollet and Heinz Rehfuss and Abbado with Maria Ewing, Francois Le Roux, Jose van Dam, Christa Ludwig. I've only listened to each once. I think I preferred the former for performance and the latter for recorded sound.

There is also an arrangement of preludes and interludes by Leinsdorf with the Chicago PO. Don't know if it's available anywhere other than a Chicago Symphony box set.

Of course there are Pelleas' from other composers such as Sibelius, Faure and Schoenberg.

[gggg gggg]

On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 1:45:53 PM UTC-7, Andy Evans wrote:
> I'm in for discussions of operas, though in my case I'll pass on the early stuff like Monteverdi etc.
>
> I'm very fond of Pelleas, since we're talking of Debussy, and we could talk about recordings of that.

http://www.classicalnotes.net/opera/pelleas.html

[gggg gggg]

https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/rec.music.classical.recordings/c/XUFwAVld0MQ/m/cZgHcrgaCwAJ

[MELMOTH]

Gerard avait écrit le 22/04/2021 :
> And with them it is dead.

But my dear, everyone here is waiting for your brilliant contributions,
eh...
Curious...Over a period of one year, I have not seen you once start a
thread...

[Frank Berger]

On 4/22/2021 7:22 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> On Thursday, April 22, 2021 at 4:18:34 PM UTC-7, MELMOTH wrote:
>> Gerard avait écrit le 22/04/2021 :
>>> And with them it is dead.
>> But my dear, everyone here is waiting for your brilliant
>> contributions, eh...
>

> Gerard specializes in objecting to other people's posts.

>
>> Curious...Over a period of one year, I have not seen
>> you once start a thread...
>

> Are you suggesting we should have posting quotas?
> If so you have exceeded yours 10,000% !!!
>
> dk
>

Contrary to what some people might believe you can lurk and still be entitled to complain about the content. Similarly, there is nothing hypocritical about choosing not to vote and then complaining about the outcome. Those who think differently are wrong.

[Frank Berger]

Really great interest in this thread so far. Not.

[Charles Timbrell]

[gggg gggg]

(Youtube upload):

Repertoire: Pelléas et Mélisande--Four Major Settings

[Charles Timbrell]

[Ricardo Jimenez]

I'd prefer to talk about DVDs. The 1992 16:9 version conducted by
Pierre Boulez and directed by Peter Stein has surround sound and tries
for tradition and realism more than more performances. A beautiful
tower scene with Mélisande's long hair hanging down. No audience,
IIRC. I also have the CD set with Abbado but find just listening to
this opera a real bore. This DVD is very moving.

[Ricardo Jimenez]

I do but I rarely get much feedback. As for Cavalli, I don't
understand why there are more opera DVDs of his work available than
say Saint-Saëns (only Henry VIII and S&D, AFAIK). While Monteverde's
three surviving operas hold my attention, Cavalli makes me either
fidget or go to sleep. An added interest in Monteverde is that some
of the available DVDs have modernized orchestrations. I have a
blu-ray from about 2009 of Cavalli's Ercole Amante, written for the
coronation of Louis XIV. I find the plot incomprehensible and the
music mediocre. A new blu-ray of the same work has just come out, It
is based on a newer production which has been favorably reviewed. I
haven't seen the two compared anywhere so I will wait. As a
contrast, I have no problem finding thousands of reviews on Amazon of
DVDs of Broadway and Hollywood musicals.

[Frank Berger]

I suspect part of the problem is that the group is devoted to music recordings not video recordings. I understand that DVDs of operas contain music and that video can enhance the enjoyment of music, even non-opera. But most here just don't seem to be into opera, especially videos as much as you. Wasn't there something like rec.music.opera? Is that defunct? How about on talkclassical.com? Maybe they are into opera DVDs.

[Ricardo Jimenez]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 22:27:56 -0400, Frank Berger
<frankd...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I suspect part of the problem is that the group is devoted to music recordings not video recordings. I understand that DVDs of operas contain music and that video can enhance the enjoyment of music, even non-opera. But most here just don't seem to be into opera, especially videos as much as you. Wasn't there something like rec.music.opera? Is that defunct? How about on talkclassical.com? Maybe they are into opera DVDs.

Thanks. rec.music.opera has had only gggg...? posting there for a
while. I don't see anybody posting reviews of recently released opera
DVD/Blu-rays on talkclassical.com. The best place to find reviews is
Amazon where there are a few regulars who buy lots of performances and
comment on them: Noam Eitan, Gio, Keris 9, Santa Fe ... But it used
to be much better here and I don't know what happened.

[Al Eisner]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021, Ricardo Jimenez wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:39:31 -0700 (PDT), Chris from Lafayette
> <CSal...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 12:44:56 AM UTC-7, MELMOTH wrote:
>>> "Debussy did not create a style: he cultivated the absence of style,
>>> logic and common sense. But it is true that he had a harmonious name.
>>> Had he been called Martin, we would never have spoken of him. In this
>>> case, he would undoubtedly have adopted a psudonym" *SAINT SAENS*
>>>
>>> "If Debussy used Spain as the source of one of the most beautiful parts
>>> of his work, he paid so generously for what he took from it that Spain
>>> has now become his debtor. *DE FALLA*
>>>
>>> "By dint of looking at the sea through the small end of the spyglass,
>>> M.Debussy gives you rather the impression of the Tuileries basin."
>>> L.*SCHNEIDER*
>>>
>>> "This monster of Debussy." *PAUL VALERY*
>>>
>>> "The enchanter, the persecutor of learned spiders." *MILAN KUNSERA*
>>>
>>> "The French Schumann." *FURTWANGLER*
>>>
>>> "Better not to listen to it, you might get used to it, and you'd end up
>>> loving it." *RIMSKY KORSAKOV*
>>
>> Funny quote from Rimsky, weird quote from Furtwängler - I'd certainly have to see more context to understand what Furty was trying to get at.
>
> So far, there has been nothing posted that can help verify the
> authenticity of any of Melmoth's quotes.

Are you sure that the book (from which MELMOTH took them) does not
have citatkons? Have you looked at it?
--
Al Eisner

[Ricardo Jimenez]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 22:46:37 -0700, Al Eisner
<eis...@slac.stanford.edu> wrote:

>Are you sure that the book (from which MELMOTH took them) does not
>have citatkons? Have you looked at it?
>--
> Al Eisner

The person who posts outlandish statements has the burden of proof. I
haven't seen the book. I have seen riidiculous supposed claims of
having interviewed famous composers in other books. Somebody named
Abell, who acturally was a music critic for a New York paper, claimed
that Brahms told him that only devout Christians could compose good
music. His book also has an interview with Humperdinck where the
latter quotes Wagner as having said the same thing to him.

[Frank Berger]

Well, Brahms reportedly made anti-semitic remarks on at least one occasion and Wagner - well, we know about Wagner. It seems entirely plausible to me that they might have said such things, possibly in the context of talking about Jewish composers. The quotes above may not be exact; Brahms was supposedly not a devout Christian, i don't know about Wagner.

I realize the quotes above don't necessarily pertain to Jews, but I suspect they do.

[Ricardo Jimenez]

This is the book. I recommend the 1* reviews.
https://www.amazon.com/Talks-great-composers-Arthur-Abell/dp/B0007IXYN0/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

The interview with Brahms was supposedly jointly with Brahms' Jewish
friend Josef Joachim. They kept referring to each other as Johannes
and Josef. Both Brahms and Wagner were agnostics and Brahms' favorite
opera composer Bizet was an athiest. The context of the claimed
conversations was definitely religious, not racial. The book is a $3
bill. I am quoting here a legiitamite Brahms biographer Jan
Swafford: "I look at Schauffler skeptically, as do other
scholars, but still find in him none of the scent
of fraud that, for example, hangs about the “interview”
with Brahms first published in the
1950s by American Arthur Abell. In examining
that supposed interview, one can find
sources for the legitimate information in published
Brahms letters, and perhaps in some reports
from Abell’s friend and Brahms’s colleague
Josef Joachim. One can also identify an agenda
behind Abell’s fabrications: to reveal that
Brahms, like other composers Abell claims to
have interviewed, was a confirrmed spiritualist.
Brahms was not a spiritualist, and Abell’s interview
is manifestly bogus".

Did the Young Brahms Play Piano in Waterfront Bars?
Author(s): Jan Swafford
Source: 19th-Century Music, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Spring 2001), pp. 268-275
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/ncm.2001.24.3.268

[gggg gggg]

On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 12:44:56 AM UTC-7, MELMOTH wrote:
> "Debussy did not create a style: he cultivated the absence of style,
> logic and common sense. But it is true that he had a harmonious name.
> Had he been called Martin, we would never have spoken of him. In this
> case, he would undoubtedly have adopted a psudonym" *SAINT SAENS*
>
> "If Debussy used Spain as the source of one of the most beautiful parts
> of his work, he paid so generously for what he took from it that Spain
> has now become his debtor. *DE FALLA*
>
> "By dint of looking at the sea through the small end of the spyglass,
> M.Debussy gives you rather the impression of the Tuileries basin."
> L.*SCHNEIDER*
>
> "This monster of Debussy." *PAUL VALERY*
>
> "The enchanter, the persecutor of learned spiders." *MILAN KUNSERA*
>
> "The French Schumann." *FURTWANGLER*
>
> "Better not to listen to it, you might get used to it, and you'd end up
> loving it." *RIMSKY KORSAKOV*

Has anyone heard this cd? How did Teyte sound as Melisande?:

https://s.yimg.com/aah/yhst-56676699049927/maggie-teyte-the-1948-town-hall-recital-vaia-1063-8.jpg

[Frank Berger]

An interesting episode from a NTY article (not the source is Goldmark's autobiography):

"As for Brahms, he treated Goldmark rudely, and Goldmark, a quiet and inoffensive man, was deeply hurt. Goldmark once composed a chorus with words by Luther, and after the performance there was a party to which Brahms came. Everybody waited to see what Brahms would say. Finally, he grumbled: “Wonderful text. Sorry that a Jew composed the music to it.” Brahms was always notorious for speak ing his mind. Goldmark relates the episode in his autobiography, and tries to make excuses for Brahms. Even some of Brahms's closest friends, such as the composer Ignaz Büll, thought he was completely out of line on this occasion."

It is impossible to judge the degree of Brahms' anti-semitism from this, of course. He could simply have been joking. In my mind, he was, and Brahms' offended friends were guilty of a political correctness indistinguishable from today's. But who knows? Wagner was another matter altogether.

[gggg gggg]

https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/rec.music.classical/c/yrAdPwiYcm8

[Steven Bornfeld]

I don't know--if this guy actually gets the $890 they're asking for this
book, I might be tempted to write some phony baloney too.

Steve

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 4/23/2021 11:44 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>
> An interesting episode from a NTY article (not the source is Goldmark's
> autobiography):
>
> "As for Brahms, he treated Goldmark rudely, and Goldmark, a quiet and
> inoffensive man, was deeply hurt. Goldmark once composed a chorus with
> words by Luther, and after the performance there was a party to which
> Brahms came. Everybody waited to see what Brahms would say. Finally, he
> grumbled: “Wonderful text. Sorry that a Jew composed the music to it.”
> Brahms was always notorious for speak ing his mind. Goldmark relates the
> episode in his autobiography, and tries to make excuses for Brahms. Even
> some of Brahms's closest friends, such as the composer Ignaz Büll,
> thought he was completely out of line on this occasion."
>
> It is impossible to judge the degree of Brahms' anti-semitism from this,
> of course.  He could simply have been joking.  In my mind, he was, and
> Brahms' offended friends were guilty of a political correctness
> indistinguishable from today's.  But who knows? Wagner was another
> matter altogether.

I suppose. For a rabid anti-Semite, Wagner sure did have a lot of
Jewish associates though, didn't he? Stockholm syndrome?
I've read somewhere of Bach's "anti-Judaism" with the author (can't
remember who) tying himself in knots making a distinction between Bach's
"anti-Judaism" and Wagner's anti-Semitism. After reading Schorske's
"Fin-de Siecle Vienna", it is not beyond belief that in the Germanic
world that's what you had to do to get along.
I seem to remember in Schonberg's book about composers that Brahms was
gruff and often off-putting; I don't recall any specific mention of
anti-Semitism though.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/23/2021 1:21 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> On 4/23/2021 11:44 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>
>>
>> An interesting episode from a NTY article (not the source is Goldmark's autobiography):
>>
>> "As for Brahms, he treated Goldmark rudely, and Goldmark, a quiet and inoffensive man, was deeply hurt. Goldmark once composed a chorus with words by Luther, and after the performance there was a party to which Brahms came. Everybody waited to see what Brahms would say. Finally, he grumbled: “Wonderful text. Sorry that a Jew composed the music to it.” Brahms was always notorious for speak ing his mind. Goldmark relates the episode in his autobiography, and tries to make excuses for Brahms. Even some of Brahms's closest friends, such as the composer Ignaz Büll, thought he was completely out of line on this occasion."
>>
>> It is impossible to judge the degree of Brahms' anti-semitism from this, of course.  He could simply have been joking.  In my mind, he was, and Brahms' offended friends were guilty of a political correctness indistinguishable from today's.  But who knows? Wagner was another matter altogether.
>
> I suppose.  For a rabid anti-Semite, Wagner sure did have a lot of Jewish associates though, didn't he?  Stockholm syndrome?

Well, not Stockholm syndrome, but something else. There an infinite varieties of antisemitism. Is religious Christian who believes a Jew will burn in hell unless they are baptized anti-semitic? It's a matter of definition, or we can imagine scale of antisemitism from 1-10, where the former is a 1 and Hitler is a 10. One of my principles or ideologies or whatever you want to call it is that I care a whole lot more about what people do than what they think. I've heard that is a particularly Jewish way of thinking, but I'm not sure of the source. I once heard that in Judaism, sin is heresy, where in Christianity heresy is sin. I'm sure that's an over-simplification if true at all.

It is certainly common for people to hold anti-semitic views of one kind or another and still have Jewish friends. I can think of two obvious explanations. One is the guy in the example. He doesn't hate Jews, he wants to convert them. The other is that the anti-semite can hold generic, stereotypical views on Jews and be friends with those that he thinks are are exceptions to the stereotpe. You see this all the time. I have personally experienced this.

Some of my best friends are anti-semites.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/23/2021 4:14 PM, Marc S wrote:

> A better way to sum the quality of (modern day?) antisemitism up might be:
>
> People are overwhelmed with the realities of capitalism and project the effects of capitalism onto jews => people trying to overcome these realities by killing the jews.
>
> At least that's how I understand it.
>

A traditional Jewish way to understand antisemitism is that the Torah says that in every generation there will be those who hate us. In other words God set it up that way. Which is not to say haters are not held accountable individually. There are those (me included) who feel that the modern form of antisemitism is disguised as anti-Zionism. By modern I mean the mainstream most common form. In the past it was that the Jews killed Jesus. What that became too old fashioned it became the Jewish capitalists or the Jewish communists (as if it could be both). Or the Jews controlling Hollywood. Or the Federal Reserve.
All of these are no longer widely acceptable (though they exist), so hating Israel is the substitute ("I don't hate Jews as such, just Zionists").

I hope this discussion ends now or we will be hearing from certain people.

[Steven Bornfeld]

I agree totally

[Al Eisner]

But is any of that relevant? You seem to be condemning one book
because you have issues with a different book and by a different
author. I don't know one way or the other. I was asking you if
you know, and I think it is safe to translate your response into a
"No".
--
Al Eisner

[Herman]

On Saturday, April 24, 2021 at 11:50:43 AM UTC+2, Marc S wrote:
>
>
> "No functionalist explanation of the Holocaust and no scapegoat theory of anti-Semitism can even begin to explain why, in the last years of the war, when the German forces were being crushed by the Red Army, a significant proportion of vehicles was deflected from logistical support and used to transport Jews to the gas chambers. The specificity of the Holocaust requires a much more determinate mediation in order even to approach its understanding."
>
It's not that hard. Eliminating Jews was more important to Hitler than winning the war. He looked forward to losing the war, shooting himself and taking the German people with him in a faux-mythical apocalypse.

[Herman]

On Saturday, April 24, 2021 at 12:05:43 PM UTC+2, Marc S wrote:

> Herman schrieb am Samstag, 24. April 2021 um 11:58:28 UTC+2:


> > >
> > It's not that hard. Eliminating Jews was more important to Hitler than winning the war. He looked forward to losing the war, shooting himself and taking the German people with him in a faux-mythical apocalypse.

> It was not just Hitler who made these decisions. And I still think it's kind of hard to grasp, that people put killing jews above saving their own lives (which you also see in Hamas Suicide Bombers).

I guess you're not familiar with the "working towards der Führer" concept. Hitler made these decisions; he didn't always have to put them explicitly. Also, the military leaders were well aware things weren't going to end well for them if they did not do Hitler's will.

[Herman]

On Saturday, April 24, 2021 at 12:16:31 PM UTC+2, Marc S wrote:


> If I remember correctly Hitler didn't kill a single jew.

wow.
just wow.

[Henk vT]

Op zaterdag 24 april 2021 om 11:50:43 UTC+2 schreef Marc S:
> dan....@gmail.com schrieb am Freitag, 23. April 2021 um 23:56:05 UTC+2:

> > On Friday, April 23, 2021 at 4:14:54 PM UTC-4, Marc S wrote:
> > > Frank Berger schrieb am Freitag, 23. April 2021 um 20:20:48 UTC+2:

> > > > On 4/23/2021 1:21 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> > > > > On 4/23/2021 11:44 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> > > > >>

> > > > >> An interesting episode from a NYT article (not the source is

> > > > >> Goldmark's autobiography):
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "As for Brahms, he treated Goldmark rudely, and Goldmark, a
> > > > >> quiet and inoffensive man, was deeply hurt. Goldmark once
> > > > >> composed a chorus with words by Luther, and after the
> > > > >> performance there was a party to which Brahms came.
> > > > >> Everybody waited to see what Brahms would say. Finally, he
> > > > >> grumbled: “Wonderful text. Sorry that a Jew composed the
> > > > >> music to it.” Brahms was always notorious for speak ing his mind.
> > > > >> Goldmark relates the episode in his autobiography, and tries to
> > > > >> make excuses for Brahms. Even some of Brahms's closest friends,
> > > > >> such as the composer Ignaz Büll, thought he was completely out
> > > > >> of line on this occasion."
> > > > >>

> > > > >> It is impossible to judge the degree of Brahms' antisemitism from this,

> > > > >> of course. He could simply have been joking. In my mind, he was, and

> > And how does "your mind" know if he was really joking ?!?

> > > > >> Brahms' offended friends were guilty of a political correctness
> > > > >> indistinguishable from today's. But who knows? Wagner was
> > > > >> another matter altogether.
> > > > >
> > > > > I suppose. For a rabid anti-Semite, Wagner sure did have a lot of
> > > > > Jewish associates though, didn't he? Stockholm syndrome?
> > > >
> > > > Well, not Stockholm syndrome, but something else. There an infinite
> > > > varieties of antisemitism. Is religious Christian who believes a Jew will

> > > > burn in hell unless they are baptized antisemitic? It's a matter of definition,

> > > > or we can imagine scale of antisemitism from 1-10, where the former is a 1
> > > > and Hitler is a 10. One of my principles or ideologies or whatever you want

> > When one helps sending people to gas chambers it does not matter if one is a
> > 1 or a 10 on Frank Berger's antisemitism scale. Or are we splitting legal hairs
> > as in first, second or third degree murders or various degrees of manslaughter?

> > > > to call it is that I care a whole lot more about what people do than what they
> > > > think. I've heard that is a particularly Jewish way of thinking, but I'm not sure
> > > > of the source. I once heard that in Judaism, sin is heresy, where in Christianity
> > > > heresy is sin. I'm sure that's an over-simplification if true at all.
> > > >

> > > > It is certainly common for people to hold antisemitic views of one kind or

> > > > another and still have Jewish friends. I can think of two obvious explanations.
> > > > One is the guy in the example. He doesn't hate Jews, he wants to convert them.

> > > > The other is that the antisemite can hold generic, stereotypical views on Jews
> > > > and be friends with those that he thinks are are exceptions to the stereotype.

> > > > You see this all the time. I have personally experienced this.
> > > >

> > > > Some of my best friends are antisemites.

> > > >
> > > > > I've read somewhere of Bach's "anti-Judaism" with the author (can't remember
> > > > > who) tying himself in knots making a distinction between Bach's "anti-Judaism"

> > > > > and Wagner's antisemitism. After reading Schorske's "Fin-de Siecle Vienna", it

> > > > > is not beyond belief that in the Germanic world that's what you had to do to get
> > > > > along. I seem to remember in Schonberg's book about composers that Brahms

> > > > was gruff and often off-putting; I don't recall any specific mention of antisemitism

> > > > though. A better way to sum the quality of (modern day?) antisemitism up might be:
> > >
> > > People are overwhelmed with the realities of capitalism and project the effects of

> > > capitalism onto Jews => people trying to overcome these realities by killing the Jews.
> >
> > What else is new? Jews have been blamed for all the evil in the world for millennia.

> > > At least that's how I understand it.

> > Sounds like you understand it pretty well! ;-0
> >
> > dk
>
> >What else is new? Jews have been blamed for all the evil in the world for millennia.
> The quality inherent to modern day antisemitism is new. I don't grasp it fully myself. As I would need a better understanding of the theory of Marx. You are using the word "blame", but in fact it is more than that I believe (Bernie Sanders and Occupy Wall street is also a form of modern day antisemitism).
>
> To quote Postone:

>
> "No functionalist explanation of the Holocaust and no scapegoat theory of anti-Semitism can even begin to explain why, in the last years of the war, when the German forces were being crushed by the Red Army, a significant proportion of vehicles was deflected from logistical support and used to transport Jews to the gas chambers. The specificity of the Holocaust requires a much more determinate mediation in order even to approach its understanding."
>

> "What is required, then, is an explanation in terms of a social-historical epistemology. A full development of the problematic of anti-Semitism would go beyond the bounds of this essay. The point to be made here, however, is that a careful examination of the modern anti-Semitic worldview reveals that it is a form of thought in which the rapid development of industrial capitalism, with all its social ramifications, is/ /personified and identified as the Jew. It is not merely that the Jews were considered to be the owners of money, as in traditional anti-Semitism, but that they were held responsible for economic crises and identified with the range of social restructuring and dislocation resulting from rapid industrialization: explosive urbanization, the decline of traditional social classes and strata, the emergence of a large, increasingly organized industrial proletariat, and so on."
>
> "The Jews were not seen merely as representatives of capital (in which case anti-Semitic attacks would have been much more class-specific). They became the personifications of the intangible, destructive, immensely powerful, and international domination of capital as an alienated social form."
>
> Modern day antisemitism is a symptom of capitalism. It's hard to believe that this type of antisemitism ceases to exist without capitalism ceasing to existing.

These days there is anti-Semitism. Period. It doesn't help to link it to a certain -ism. The -isms are secondary, as history illustrates.

Henk

[Christian Scheen]

On 21/04/21 at 20:39, Chris from Lafayette wrote:
>
> [...] weird quote from Furtwängler - I'd certainly have to see> more
context to understand what Furty was trying to get at.
The quote is from Furtwängler's /Notebook/, that he wrote 1924--54.
Don't know if there's an English translation of those notes, but in
their French translation (/Carnets 1924-1954/, published by Georg
Éditeur, Genève, Suisse, in 1994 [ISBN: 2-8257-0510-1]), the quote
is from a 1947 note and appears on page 91 of the French edition.
A rough, Deepl translation goes like this:

>> German music, even classical, bears witness to the realities of
>> the European soul. French music is the school of good taste. I
>> have always loved Debussy, a modern French Schumann, and have
>> always appreciated the spirituality of his art, infinitely
>> personal, comparable to no other. Ravel is rather the conscious
>> classical master. Next to them, Strawinsky will belong, at least
>> in part, to the history of French music.

Original text in French:

>> La musique allemande, même classique, témoigne des réalités de
>> l'âme européenne. La musique française, elle, est l'école du bon
>> goût. J'ai toujours aimé Debussy, un Schumann français moderne,
>> et su apprécier au plus haut point la spiritualité de son art,
>> infiniment personnel, comparable à nul autre. Ravel est plutôt le
>> maître classique conscient. À côté d'eux, Strawinsky appartiendra,
>> en partie du moins, ) l'histoire de la musique française.

HTH,

Christian

[Christian Scheen]

Oopses:

/the quote is from a 1947 note and appears on page 91/
shoud be:
/the quote is from a 1947 note that appears on page 91/

/appartiendra, en partie du moins, ) l'histoire/
should be:
/appartiendra, en partie du moins, à l'histoire/

[Bob Harper]

On 4/23/21 11:20 AM, Frank Berger wrote:

(snip)

> Well, not Stockholm syndrome, but something else.  There an infinite
> varieties of antisemitism.  Is religious Christian who believes a Jew
> will burn in hell unless they are baptized anti-semitic?

Maybe, but what is certain is that he's wrong.

It's a matter
> of definition, or we can imagine scale of antisemitism from 1-10, where
> the former is a 1 and Hitler is a 10.  One of my principles or
> ideologies or whatever you want to call it is that I care a whole lot
> more about what people do than what they think.

An excellent distinction.

  I've heard that is a
> particularly Jewish way of thinking, but I'm not sure of the source.

I would call it a recognition of reality for human beings of any
religion. Certainly it is for Catholics. Besides, what one thinks
ultimately drives how one acts.

> I once heard that in Judaism, sin is heresy, where in Christianity heresy
> is sin.  I'm sure that's an over-simplification if true at all.
>

To return to your distinction, I would say that for Catholics (this one
anyway) heresy is about wrong beliefs, sin is about wrong actions. They
are related but not identical.

> It is certainly common for people to hold anti-semitic views of one kind
> or another and still have Jewish friends.  I can think of two obvious
> explanations.  One is the guy in the example.  He doesn't hate Jews, he
> wants to convert them.  The other is that the anti-semite can hold
> generic, stereotypical views on Jews and be friends with those that he
> thinks are are exceptions to the stereotpe.  You see this all the
> time.   I have personally experienced this.
>
> Some of my best friends are anti-semites.

Careful, Frank. That won't get you cancelled yet, but.... :).

(snip)

Bob Harper

[Bob Harper]

Yes. He really wanted to make Louis VV's quip, "Après moi, le déluge"
the German reality.

I am thankful he failed.

Bob Harper

[Bob Harper]

Oops. Louis XV.

[Herman]

On Saturday, April 24, 2021 at 8:57:15 PM UTC+2, Bob Harper wrote:

> >
> > Yes. He really wanted to make Louis VV's quip, "Après moi, le déluge"
> > the German reality.
> >
> > I am thankful he failed.
> >
> > Bob Harper
> Oops. Louis XV.

Of course in Hitler's case it was no quip but a pathological self-dramatisation on a global scale.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/24/2021 5:50 AM, Marc S wrote:
> dan....@gmail.com schrieb am Freitag, 23. April 2021 um 23:56:05 UTC+2:
>> On Friday, April 23, 2021 at 4:14:54 PM UTC-4, Marc S wrote:
>>> Frank Berger schrieb am Freitag, 23. April 2021 um 20:20:48 UTC+2:

>>>> On 4/23/2021 1:21 PM, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>>>>> On 4/23/2021 11:44 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>>>

>>>>>> An interesting episode from a NYT article (not the source is

>>>>>> Goldmark's autobiography):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "As for Brahms, he treated Goldmark rudely, and Goldmark, a
>>>>>> quiet and inoffensive man, was deeply hurt. Goldmark once
>>>>>> composed a chorus with words by Luther, and after the
>>>>>> performance there was a party to which Brahms came.
>>>>>> Everybody waited to see what Brahms would say. Finally, he
>>>>>> grumbled: “Wonderful text. Sorry that a Jew composed the
>>>>>> music to it.” Brahms was always notorious for speak ing his mind.
>>>>>> Goldmark relates the episode in his autobiography, and tries to
>>>>>> make excuses for Brahms. Even some of Brahms's closest friends,
>>>>>> such as the composer Ignaz Büll, thought he was completely out
>>>>>> of line on this occasion."
>>>>>>

>>>>>> It is impossible to judge the degree of Brahms' antisemitism from this,

>>>>>> of course. He could simply have been joking. In my mind, he was, and

>> And how does "your mind" know if he was really joking ?!?

>>>>>> Brahms' offended friends were guilty of a political correctness
>>>>>> indistinguishable from today's. But who knows? Wagner was
>>>>>> another matter altogether.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose. For a rabid anti-Semite, Wagner sure did have a lot of
>>>>> Jewish associates though, didn't he? Stockholm syndrome?
>>>>
>>>> Well, not Stockholm syndrome, but something else. There an infinite
>>>> varieties of antisemitism. Is religious Christian who believes a Jew will

>>>> burn in hell unless they are baptized antisemitic? It's a matter of definition,

>>>> or we can imagine scale of antisemitism from 1-10, where the former is a 1
>>>> and Hitler is a 10. One of my principles or ideologies or whatever you want

>> When one helps sending people to gas chambers it does not matter if one is a
>> 1 or a 10 on Frank Berger's antisemitism scale. Or are we splitting legal hairs
>> as in first, second or third degree murders or various degrees of manslaughter?

>>>> to call it is that I care a whole lot more about what people do than what they
>>>> think. I've heard that is a particularly Jewish way of thinking, but I'm not sure
>>>> of the source. I once heard that in Judaism, sin is heresy, where in Christianity
>>>> heresy is sin. I'm sure that's an over-simplification if true at all.
>>>>

>>>> It is certainly common for people to hold antisemitic views of one kind or

>>>> another and still have Jewish friends. I can think of two obvious explanations.
>>>> One is the guy in the example. He doesn't hate Jews, he wants to convert them.

>>>> The other is that the antisemite can hold generic, stereotypical views on Jews
>>>> and be friends with those that he thinks are are exceptions to the stereotype.

>>>> You see this all the time. I have personally experienced this.
>>>>

>>>> Some of my best friends are antisemites.

>>>>
>>>>> I've read somewhere of Bach's "anti-Judaism" with the author (can't remember
>>>>> who) tying himself in knots making a distinction between Bach's "anti-Judaism"

>>>>> and Wagner's antisemitism. After reading Schorske's "Fin-de Siecle Vienna", it

>>>>> is not beyond belief that in the Germanic world that's what you had to do to get
>>>>> along. I seem to remember in Schonberg's book about composers that Brahms

>>>> was gruff and often off-putting; I don't recall any specific mention of antisemitism
>>>> though. A better way to sum the quality of (modern day?) antisemitism up might be:
>>>
>>> People are overwhelmed with the realities of capitalism and project the effects of
>>> capitalism onto Jews => people trying to overcome these realities by killing the Jews.
>>
>> What else is new? Jews have been blamed for all the evil in the world for millennia.
>>> At least that's how I understand it.
>> Sounds like you understand it pretty well! ;-0
>>
>> dk
>
>> What else is new? Jews have been blamed for all the evil in the world for millennia.
>
> The quality inherent to modern day antisemitism is new. I don't grasp it fully myself. As I would need a better understanding of the theory of Marx. You are using the word "blame", but in fact it is more than that I believe (Bernie Sanders and Occupy Wall street is also a form of modern day antisemitism).
>
> To quote Postone:
>

> "No functionalist explanation of the Holocaust and no scapegoat theory of anti-Semitism can even begin to explain why, in the last years of the war, when the German forces were being crushed by the Red Army, a significant proportion of vehicles was deflected from logistical support and used to transport Jews to the gas chambers. The specificity of the Holocaust requires a much more determinate mediation in order even to approach its understanding."
>

> "What is required, then, is an explanation in terms of a social-historical epistemology. A full development of the problematic of anti-Semitism would go beyond the bounds of this essay. The point to be made here, however, is that a careful examination of the modern anti-Semitic worldview reveals that it is a form of thought in which the rapid development of industrial capitalism, with all its social ramifications, is/ /personified and identified as the Jew. It is not merely that the Jews were considered to be the owners of money, as in traditional anti-Semitism, but that they were held responsible for economic crises and identified with the range of social restructuring and dislocation resulting from rapid industrialization: explosive urbanization, the decline of traditional social classes and strata, the emergence of a large, increasingly organized industrial proletariat, and so on."
>
> "The Jews were not seen merely as representatives of capital (in which case anti-Semitic attacks would have been much more class-specific). They became the personifications of the intangible, destructive, immensely powerful, and international domination of capital as an alienated social form."
>
> Modern day antisemitism is a symptom of capitalism. It's hard to believe that this type of antisemitism ceases to exist without capitalism ceasing to existing.
>
>
>

I think modern day antisemitism has next to nothing to do with capitalism, as I've explained.

[Frank Berger]

Works for me.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <0bb512d3-e8fa-45e1...@googlegroups.com>,
Marc S <marcs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>How did Hitler get to power?

Please take this off-topic discussion elsewhere.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/25/2021 4:48 PM, Marc S wrote:

> Maybe I wasn't clear enough: He didn't directly kill jews. This was kind of in response to what you said here:

>
>> Also, the military leaders were well aware things weren't going to end well for them if they did not do Hitler's will.
>

> This is WOW... just WOW... What are you trying to say with this? That the germans had no choices? This has got to be a joke really...
>
> How did Hitler get to power? Why did (most of) the germans just watch when things started getting bad for the jews? etc. etc.
>
> Your view is way too simplistic...
>

I've often wondered who was more evil. Hitler and those who (may have) actually thought they were doing the world good by ridding it of Jews or those who knew that was monstrous bullshit and went along anyway for reason of fear, greed, whatever.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/25/2021 4:57 PM, Marc S wrote:

> That has maybe sth to do with the fact that you haven't researched the matter. I think Postone is very much on point in his analysis. I would think that you never even tried to really categorize the difference between Christian-Antisemitism in the mid and modern ages and modern-day Antisemitism.
>
> Off Postone's wikipedia entry:
>
> "Postone showed that modern antisemitism is very different from most forms of racism and Christian antisemitism; it differs from them because it casts a huge global invisible power of international Jewry, the idea of a global conspiracy that is intrinsic to modern antisemitism."
>

Did you read my previous post? In it I defined what I consider to be the prevalent form of modern antisemitism and described earlier types. You may disagree but you have no call to question the degree to which I have "studied" antisemitism.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/25/2021 5:00 PM, Marc S wrote:

> Are specifically referring to that topic? No worries, it was a rhetorical question...
>

You might have answered as I would - if you don't like the topic don't read it. Or go elsewhere.

[Frank Berger]

On 4/26/2021 10:11 AM, Marc S wrote:
> Marc S schrieb am Montag, 26. April 2021 um 16:03:39 UTC+2:

>> As history illustrates there are different forms of antisemitism depending on time and location. It very much helps understanding the differences between them. The Shoah is much different from anything that has happened before and since. I think it is actually an imperative for people to understand this. Israel is the only means for Jews to fight annihilation in modern times.
>>
>> It is not secondary to link certain types of antisemitism to a certain -ism, but actually helps to understand the issue in order to combat it. It would have been helpful if you would have at least tried to read and understand the essay of Postone I posted...
>
> In order to understand the Shoah (which ofc one never fully can grasp) one must make a connection to the time and location it has taken place in. Since the society at that time was under capitalist conditions, it is very much necessary to analyse the connections to capitalism to understand...
>

The fact that the Shoah was perpetrated by Germany in a capitalist environment does not mean that capitalism itself had anything to do with it. Antisemitism exists everywhere, at all times, under all regimes. It is most virulent under totalitarian governments. Capitalism is simply a side effect of freedom. It is people engaging in voluntary economic interactions. Period. Any other theory is bullshit. I wish you (and I) would drop this thread now.

[Bob Harper]

On 4/26/21 7:24 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 4/26/2021 10:11 AM, Marc S wrote:

(snip)

>>
>> In order to understand the Shoah (which ofc one never fully can grasp)
>> one must make a connection to the time and location it has taken place
>> in. Since the society at that time was under capitalist conditions, it
>> is very much necessary to analyse the connections to capitalism to
>> understand...
>>
>
> The fact that the Shoah was perpetrated by Germany in a capitalist
> environment does not mean that capitalism itself had anything to do with
> it.  Antisemitism exists everywhere, at all times, under all regimes.
> It is most virulent under totalitarian governments.  Capitalism is
> simply a side effect of freedom.  It is people engaging in voluntary
> economic interactions.  Period.  Any other theory is bullshit.  I wish
> you (and I) would drop this thread now.

I don't want to prolong this thread, but was Nazi Germany capitalist or
corporatist? They don't seem to me to be the same. I would argue that
the Holodomor is more closely connected with communism than the Shoah
with capitalism, but it may be more appropriate to attribute it to the
fact that Stalin was as evil as Hitler.

Bob Harper

[Henk vT]

Op maandag 26 april 2021 om 16:11:15 UTC+2 schreef Marc S:

> Marc S schrieb am Montag, 26. April 2021 um 16:03:39 UTC+2:
> > hvt...@xs4all.nl schrieb am Samstag, 24. April 2021 um 12:49:29 UTC+2:

> > As history illustrates there are different forms of antisemitism depending on time and location. It very much helps understanding the differences between them. The Shoah is much different from anything that has happened before and since. I think it is actually an imperative for people to understand this. Israel is the only means for Jews to fight annihilation in modern times.
> >
> > It is not secondary to link certain types of antisemitism to a certain -ism, but actually helps to understand the issue in order to combat it. It would have been helpful if you would have at least tried to read and understand the essay of Postone I posted...

> In order to understand the Shoah (which ofc one never fully can grasp) one must make a connection to the time and location it has taken place in. Since the society at that time was under capitalist conditions, it is very much necessary to analyse the connections to capitalism to understand...

I have read some. Postone's views on capitalism are Hegelian-Marxist. If I understand correctly, Marxist capitalism has something to do with creating abstract values. Jews are said to have something to do with this kind of capitalism. Nazism is anti-capitalistic. Therefore, Nazism sold its anti-Semitism as anti-capitalism.

Postone is no fool, and his theory is far more complex than this. Nevertheless, as far as I can tell he doesn't mention for example Roma, Sinti and other ethnic groups. Nor does he mention everyday anti-Semitism in the 1920s and 1930s Germany that is was least as old as Luther's translation of the Bible.

As Todd advised, we better leave this to those who know what they are talking about. Not because the subject is taboo here (RMCR is a digital pub), but because we can only guess..

Henk

[Frank Berger]

My point was that it doesn't matter. It was a totalitarian form of government that enabled the Shoah. It had nothing to do with with the nature of the economic system.

[Frank Berger]

I'm getting nauseous.

[Henk vT]

Op maandag 26 april 2021 om 20:15:25 UTC+2 schreef Frank Berger:

I'm sorry. I should have reread my post before sending it.

Henk

[Frank Berger]

Not your fault. I have a visceral reaction when ever forced to or attempting to read hear anything written by Marxists. Any kind of Marxist. Everything I've ever read by Marxists seems intuitively, obviously stupid. I know millions disagree and have disagreed and millions are dead because of it and many more millions were doomed to lives of misery because of it. I'm going outside for a breath of fresh air. When I come back I'm going to read from Hayek.

[Bob Harper]

On 4/26/21 12:16 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
(snip)

>
> Not your fault.  I have a visceral reaction when ever forced to or
> attempting to read hear anything written by Marxists.  Any kind of
> Marxist.  Everything I've ever read by Marxists seems intuitively,
> obviously stupid.  I know millions disagree and have disagreed and
> millions are dead because of it and many more millions were doomed to
> lives of misery because of it.  I'm going outside for a breath of fresh
> air. When I come back I'm going to read from Hayek.

An excellent antidote to the obscurantism of Marxist thinking.

Bob Harper

[Herman]

Marc, did you say you went to the U of Chicago?

[gggg gggg]

On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 10:38:45 AM UTC-7, Marc S wrote:

> I very well think the Shoah to be related to capitalism. If it is not related to capitalism, why didn't it happen in the middle ages? Even though there was antisemitism everywhere during the middle ages it didn't lead to sth like that. There must be some difference to the quality of antisemitism during capitalism which led to the Shoah. And still some countries try to continue the mission of annihilating the jews. These sort of qualities I think are modern.
>
> Also on an individual basis, I don't recall racists going into e.g. black neighbourhoods blowing themselves up on a regular basis, like antisemites do.

> >Capitalism is simply a side effect of freedom. It is people engaging in voluntary economic interactions.

> I believe capitalism has led you to believe you are engaging in voluntary economic interactions. No man is free under capitalism. But I believe it to be the most free scoietal system that ever existed. But it must be criticised in certain points to make it even more free. I unfortunately don't have a better idea than capitalism.

> >I wish you (and I) would drop this thread now.

> I think it is an interesting topic to talk about. But you may drop this anytime you like.

https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/dutFrEM0ReY

[MELMOTH]

Dans son message précédent, Marc S a écrit :

> I think it is an interesting topic to talk about.

On a forum dedicated to records and "classical" music ?...
Hum...

[Frank Berger]

On 4/27/2021 1:38 PM, Marc S wrote:

> I very well think the Shoah to be related to capitalism. If it is not related to capitalism, why didn't it happen in the middle ages? Even though there was antisemitism everywhere during the middle ages it didn't lead to sth like that. There must be some difference to the quality of antisemitism during capitalism which led to the Shoah. And still some countries try to continue the mission of annihilating the jews. These sort of qualities I think are modern.

Did the technology for exterminating mass numbers exist in the middle ages? No transportation, no gas, no machine guns. Also the absence a powerful leader bent on a mission. If someone says I hate the Jews because they are capitalists, doesn't mean that is true. He may hate them for absolutely no reason or a different reason.

> Also on an individual basis, I don't recall racists going into e.g. black neighbourhoods blowing themselves up on a regular basis, like antisemites do.

Arab terror in Israel is primarily political, not religious in nature.

>
>> Capitalism is simply a side effect of freedom. It is people engaging in voluntary economic interactions.
>

> I believe capitalism has led you to believe you are engaging in voluntary economic interactions. No man is free under capitalism. But I believe it to be the most free scoietal system that ever existed. But it must be criticised in certain points to make it even more free. I unfortunately don't have a better idea than capitalism.
>

I agree I would be more free if the government was smaller. Perfect freedom would mean the absence of crime. There never has and never will be perfect freedom. One man being rich because he is productive economically and another poor because he is not is not absence of freedom. If I am entitled because my ancestors weren't enslaved (well, mine probably weren't treated so well in Poland, Ukraine, Belarus nd Latvia, but never mind that) and another fellow is disadvantaged because his ancestors were enslaved, that is the result of the absence of freedom in the past, not today. If my ancestor enslaved his ancestor there may be a case for reparations, not otherwise. By the way, I am consistent. I don't believe today's German taxpayers should be paying reparations to Israel.

>> I wish you (and I) would drop this thread now.
>

[Frank Berger]

On 4/27/2021 1:43 PM, Marc S wrote:

> But this totalitarian government was chosen by the people.

Surely you know that although Hitler came to power democratically, he did not maintain power democratically. No representative system of government has perpetrated crimes anything like the Shoah.



Even though they knew how antisemitic it was.

Extirmination of Jews was not what brought Hitler to power.

Wasn't Hamas chosen by the people as well after Israel left Gaza? Why do people want antisemitic totalitarian governments? I think its all somehow related to capitalism as capitalism dictates our everyday life.
>

Hamas came to power because (assuming the elections were fair) because the voters were tired of the corruption of the PLO. Zero to do with capitalism.

I don't believe you are thinking at all. I think you are regurgitating (or trying to) what some Marxist professor said. Go read Hayek or Friedman.

You are not even making sense at the simplest level. If there are two systems, call them capitalism and communism and Jews are murdered in mass numbers in both, what sense does it make to blame "antisemitism" on one system or the other? Only those who feel they must defend one or the other will even try and they are not to be believed.

[Herman]

On Tuesday, April 27, 2021 at 8:36:43 PM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:


> Did the technology for exterminating mass numbers exist in the middle ages? No transportation, no gas, no machine guns. Also the absence a powerful leader bent on a mission. If someone says I hate the Jews because they are capitalists, doesn't mean that is true. He may hate them for absolutely no reason or a different reason.

Yes

[Bob Harper]

On 4/27/21 10:38 AM, Marc S wrote:
(snip)

> Also on an individual basis, I don't recall racists going into e.g. black neighbourhoods blowing themselves up on a regular basis, like antisemites do.
>

Um, I don't think those blowing themselves up are capitalists. They are,
rather, fanatic Muslims; their economic preferences if any are
immaterial to the question at hand.

Bob Harper

[Bob Harper]

On 4/27/21 10:59 AM, Marc S wrote:
(snip)

> Nazis (National Socialists) as the word suggests thought of them as an anti-capitalist socialist movement (Gemeinschaft, Volk etc.).
>
Exactly. So why are you going on about capitalism, for crying out loud?

Bob Harper