@AbbieNormal

> antisemitism by leftists doesn't negate what I argued

It doesn't. What concerns me though is I've seen this continual "othering" of antisemitism, as in "It's not my group that has this problem, it's this other group.", like "It's not *my* political party, it's just some in leadership", etc.

This story hit me hard because that's my university, where I went to school.

...

@emacsen

I understand, I can only extend my hugs

And I whish you the best for your project

@AbbieNormal

I don't actually like bringing up antisemitism. It makes me uncomfortable. It makes me a target.

But in the last few years, I don't feel like I have a choice. Things are at a boiling point.

I wouldn't feel safe going back to my country of birth.

I wouldn't feel safe in many places.

And now even my beloved city of NYC doesn't feel safe, and neither do many universities.

The fediverse too.

So I'm speaking up/speaking out.

@emacsen

I experienced discomfort by a person I was having an affair with in showing affection in the street

Or on the beach (not the gay one)

Let alone what's happening with the lgbt issue on tv, here

Yes, speaking up and making yourself a target is necessary

I think I can say I relate to that

maybe the lgbt issue is not as transversal as antisemitism is, that's true

@emacsen

I also know that antisemitism is a thing in the blm field

I didn't mean to negate that

@AbbieNormal

And the Free Software world as well.

@emacsen

the free software world is just littered with general right wing politics

but I take that you're referring to the left leaning free software world 😕

@clacke @emacsen

I see what you mean but I disagree

I think the psycological process at the base of antisemitism is the same

it's true that historically antisemtism has its specificity

but that's because the women issue and the lgbt issue and the way people can move today are relatively recent

@clacke @emacsen

that same psycological proccess is at the base of religious integralism, political integralism (think maoism) and at the base of negationism

@clacke @emacsen

I'm drawing this conclusion from a book, specifically

you can read it on line here
https://luigidemarchi.wordpress.com/scimmietta-ti-amo/

I undertsand there's no English translation but there's a German one

@clacke @emacsen

the same author published the same ideas in another book too that's more academic

maybe there is an English translation for the second one

https://www.ibs.it/shock-primario-radici-del-fanatismo-libro-luigi-de-marchi/e/9788839712080

@clacke @emacsen

I think the historical specificity of antisemitism is just contingent

The jewish identity lends itself particularry well to the psycological process the book describes

@AbbieNormal @clacke

Jews have a unique experience of being persecuted for 3000 years.

And the excuses for it are always conveniently inconsistent.

Jews are attacked for being too rich, for being too poor, for being too foreign, for being white, for not being "pure", for not assimilating, for "hiding amongst the people", for being too intellectual, for rejecting "reason", for being communists, for being capitalists, for having foreign "loyalties" etc.

@emacsen @clacke

Ok, I won't go on

I'll just point out that the author of those books is not suspicious of any hint of antisemitism

@emacsen @clacke

andI hope I'm not either

@AbbieNormal @clacke

I don't think you are, I just think you fall into the trap of trying to "reason it" or "justify it" as part of something larger.

The problem is that when you do that, it's a form of erasure.

@emacsen @clacke

admittedly I was tryng to make it part of something larger

Not justifying it, just explaining it

But if that amounts to erasure, I'll take some time to think this over

I didn't mean to attempt any erasure, I'm sorry if I was mistaken

@AbbieNormal @clacke

I didn't think you meant harm by it, but there are two forces at play.

First, any time one person "intellectualizes" hate, it's walking dangerous ground. It's very hard to do well, and there's a tendency to "justify" it in a sesne.

Secondly, antisemitism is unique in that it's not a limited time issue, and that the justifications always shift and change. It has a tendency to lead to "If they only did ___, they'd be okay" and it's never true.

@AbbieNormal @clacke

This ties into the belief that many Jews have (particularly North American Jews) that if they assimilate, they'll be accepted.

Jews have always had this conflict of assimilation vs not- it's even in the Hebrew Bible! Many Jews, including me, struggle or have struggled with it.

It's part of the search for peace from persecution that Jews are constantly seeking, but never actually find.

That's why understanding antisemitism is different is important.

EOF :)

@emacsen @clacke

Ok, assumed that I gave up on my attempts to make antisemitism a part of something larger, I think it can be helpful to briefly illustrate the thesis of the books I mentioned

This has to do (in my opinion) with the (lack of) time limitedness of antisemtism and with the arguments "if they had just.."

(deep breath)

@emacsen @clacke

The main idea of the author is tha the human species is the only liveing species (as far as we know) exposed to the awareness of being destined to die

@emacsen @clacke

he believes that the cultures that humanites have created along its history are huge building around the anguish of death

@emacsen @clacke

he uses this perspective to explain the evolution of the phenomenon that's otherwise studied by what we call "scienze politiche", science of politics

not just recently but from the beginning of humanity

@emacsen @clacke

he explores ancient and far away indigenous cultures (with a hint of anthropology)

He explores literature, culture in general

he argues, among other things, that urbanization started as a need to be close to graves to practices rituals related to the dead

@emacsen @clacke

he argues that religion has been a human creation to oppose the death anguish

the ethernal life, partculary

the divine judjgement and the need to appease the God(s) is seen as a psycological desperate reaction to the terror of being destined to rot

@emacsen @clacke

then he goes on to the political rvolutions and he applies the same argument

the new man promised by revolutions is just another defense against the death anguish

@emacsen @clacke

so the idea is that "others" threath our integrity towards the divinities and put our salvation in jeopardy

@emacsen @clacke

Admittedly the author doesn't simplify the nazi experience

That was me

I think the author was jewsh himself, I'm not sure

I just was superficial in believing I could make this analogy in a probably too simplistic way

@emacsen @clacke

I just found the book compelling

I think it explains evil in a way that is more convincing and less prone to contrdictions than any other way I know