Antisemitism

[Domen]

And what does it have to do with the issue of ethnicity ???

 

[Leoreth]

It's an ethnicity?

 

[Borachio]

And what does it have to do with the issue of ethnicity ???

It was you who claimed that Jewishness is first of all an ethnicity. I'm claiming it isn't.

Even if we know what an ethnicity is. Which I also suggest we don't.

 

[Domen]

Ethiopian Jews trace their roots back to immigrants from the Jewish 5th centuy BC Diaspora community in Elephantine, near modern Aswan (Egypt). So I'm not sure what's the point. Brown skin ??? Well, people living in warm climates evolve dark skin shades. Plus they have mixed a bit with the locals.

Also - whether they are really descended from Jewish immigrants from the north or not, doesn't matter. Because ethnicity is cultural, not genetic.

It seems that they are partially descended from Jewish immigrants and partially from locals culturally assimilated by those immigrants.

It's an ethnicity?

Ethnicity can't be photographed. You can't take a picture of ethnicity, AFAIK. Unless they developed some brand new special camers ???

It was you who claimed that Jewishness is first of all an ethnicity.

Yes, Ethiopian Jews consider themselves to be ethnic Jews and part of the Jewish nation - that's why they apply for Israeli citizenship.

 

[Borachio]

I'm getting a host of contradictory messages from you here. First you say that Ethiopian Jews evolved darker skin because of exposure to a warm climate, then you say that ethnicity can't be photographed.

 

[Domen]

I'm getting a host of contradictory messages from you here. First you say that Ethiopian Jews evolved darker skin because of exposure to a warm climate, then you say that ethnicity can't be photographed.

You seem to be confusing ethnicity with melanin. What term are you looking for ???

https://www.google.pl/search?q=melanin&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=r2BoVY3INIG1sgG6-4DwBg

Melanin: The pigment that gives human skin, hair, and eyes their color. Dark-skinned people have more melanin in their skin than light-skinned people have. Melanin is produced by cells called melanocytes.

 

[Borachio]

I give in.

 

[Domen]

Are you claiming that high-melanin people cannot be descended from low-melanin people?

Well, President Barrack Obama seems to disagree - this is Barrack Obama's mother:



High-melanin Jews also can be descended from low-melanin Jews from more northern regions.

 

[Borachio]

No. I'm not claiming any such thing.

 

[Leoreth]

Ethiopian Jews trace their roots back to immigrants from the Jewish 5th centuy BC Diaspora community in Elephantine, near modern Aswan (Egypt). So I'm not sure what's the point. Brown skin ??? Well, people living in warm climates evolve dark skin shades. Plus they have mixed a bit with the locals.

Also - whether they are really descended from Jewish immigrants from the north or not, doesn't matter. Because ethnicity is cultural, not genetic.

It seems that they are partially descended from Jewish immigrants and partially from locals culturally assimilated by those immigrants.

You think cultural assimilation is a one way street? We all can trace our roots back to central Africa, that doesn't prove anything.

But I know you can't be disabused of your notion anyway that determining ethnicity involves tracing back migration patterns until you reach some ancestral homeland and that all people who share that ancestral homeland must be of the same ethnicity.

Ethnicity can't be photographed. You can't take a picture of ethnicity, AFAIK. Unless they developed some brand new special camers ???

Are you aware of the principle of using images of concrete things to symbolize abstract ideas?

 

[warpus]

I don't know where you get the idea that Jewish people are one ethnicity.

An ethnic group is a social construct which doesn't necessarily have to be based on biology.

An ethnic group or ethnicity is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural or national experience.

The Jews definitely qualify, as weird as it might seem. I don't know of many other examples that are equally odd. But it just seems odd because most other ethnicities correspond more or less to physical traits and biological ancestry and stuff, not religion.

 

[Domen]

But I know you can't be disabused of your notion anyway that determining ethnicity involves tracing back migration patterns until you reach some ancestral homeland and that all people who share that ancestral homeland must be of the same ethnicity.

I wrote above that my notion of ethnicity is cultural, not genetic or genealogical. Have you missed that part ???

We all can trace our roots back to central Africa

Indeed.

It seems that the first division in modern humans was that into Khoisans (who migrated to southern Africa) and Non-Khoisans:

Spoiler :

Check:

http://news.sciencemag.org/africa/2...ribe-may-have-been-most-populous-group-planet

"Khoisan hunter-gatherers have been the largest population throughout most of modern-human demographic history":

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141204/ncomms6692/full/ncomms6692.html

Later those Non-Khoisans (who were initially less numerous than Khoisans) branched into all other known human groups.

Non-Khoisans went through numerous population bottlenecks, struggling to survive for thousands of years and often being close to extinction:

Coalescent analysis shows that the Khoisan and their ancestors have been the largest populations since their split with the non-Khoisan population ~100–150 thousand years ago. In contrast, the ancestors of the non-Khoisan groups, including Bantu-speakers and non-Africans, experienced population declines after the split and lost more than half of their genetic diversity.

Maybe this is why the Khoisans look a bit like Africans, a bit like Asians, a bit like Native Americans, a bit like Australians and a bit like Europeans.

Check also - "Ice Age Europeans On Brink Of Extinction":

http://www.dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/03/ice-age-europeans-on-brink-of-extinction.html

(...) In some cases, small bands of potentially as few as 20 to 30 people could have been moving over very large areas, over the whole of Europe as a single territory, according to Professor Ron Pinhasi, principal investigator on the EU-funded ADNABIOARC project.

Prof. Pinhasi's team has found that the genomes sequenced from hunter-gatherers from Hungary and Switzerland between 14 000 to 7 500 years ago are very close to specimens from Denmark or Sweden from the same period.

These findings suggest that genetic diversity between inhabitants of most of western and central Europe after the ice age was very limited, indicating a major demographic bottleneck triggered by human isolation and extinction during the ice age.

This demographic model is based on new evidence that suggests populations were much smaller than is generally thought to be a stable size for healthy reproduction, usually around 500 people. Such small groupings may have led to inbreeding, reduced fitness and even extinctions. (...)

He believes that early humans crossed the continent in small groups that were cut off while the ice was at its peak, then successively dispersed and regrouped over thousands of years, with dwindling northern populations invigorated by humans arriving from the south, where the climate was better.

You see a real reduction in population numbers and diversity, so you see the few lineages that probably split or separated before the ice age, and then stayed isolated during the ice age (...) Some time after the ice age, they kind of re-emerge, or disperse, and get together, as we see new contributions to European lineages from Asia and in particular the Near East. (...)

You think cultural assimilation is a one way street?

No. But Ethiopian Jews think of themselves as culturally Jews - so why should we deny their Jewishness ??? Because they are brown-skinned ???

But it just seems odd because most other ethnicities correspond more or less to physical traits and biological ancestry and stuff, not religion.

How do you know that most other ethnicities do correspond to biological ancestry and to physical traits? Or that they do so more than Jews do ??? Actually, stereotypical "Jewish look" tends to be common among Jews - perhaps more common than, say, stereotypical "French look" among French people.

 

[Borachio]

Interestingly, the Khoisan are an amalgam of two peoples: the hunter-gathering San and the pastoral Khoi, who although plainly distinct from the Bantu are also distinct from each other.

But just to complicate matters, under pressure from the Bantu, some Khoi were obliged to abandon pastoralism and become hunter-gatherers. And are now considered to be San. Though they aren't.

And, of course, there are various ethnographic differences between the Northern San and the Southern San.

 

[warpus]

How do you know that most other ethnicities do correspond to biological ancestry and to physical traits? Or that they do so more than Jews do ???

Well, the Jewish ethnicity is based around their religion, while I can't think of any other one that is set up like that. Polish ethnicity is for example defined along much closer ancestral lines, i.e. Polish people giving birth to more Polish people. Jews do that too, but as far as I know if you convert to Judaism you also become a part of that ethnic group. If you become a Polish citizen, you do not become ethnically Polish.

That's what I meant when I said that most other ethnicities are based on much more biological lines.

 

[Domen]

Well, the Jewish ethnicity is based around their religion, while I can't think of any other one that is set up like that.

There are also some other ethnic groups which are set up like that (and Jewish ethnicity isn't based exclusively around Judaism).

I've mentioned Armenian ethnicity, which is based - among other things - around their religion - the Armenian Apostolic Church.

Armenia was actually the very first nation that adopted Christianity as their national religion - in year 301 AD.

Polish ethnicity is for example defined along much closer ancestral lines, i.e. Polish people giving birth to more Polish people.

Polish ethnicity has traditionally been centered around Polish language and culture, the last of which often included (since the Counter-Reformation) Catholicism. When Вишневецький converted to Catholicism (from East Slavic Orthodoxy) and started speaking Polish, he became Wiśniowiecki.

From ~950 until ~1750 for ~800 years Poland had a positive migration balance, and descendants of all those immigrants over time became ethnically Polish, unless they failed to assimilate. The main obstacle to assimilation or intermarriage was always religion, language was less of a problem.

Jews do that too, but as far as I know if you convert to Judaism you also become a part of that ethnic group.

Jews stopped actively proselytizing 2000 years ago.

So Jews have been defined along ancestral lines for a much longer time than vast majority of modern European ethnicities.

BTW there are many Jews who are Atheists, and are sill Jews, they go around always underlining their ethnic Jewish roots when you ask them.

That's what I meant when I said that most other ethnicities are based on much more biological lines.

But that's doubtful. Some genetic studies on Jewish people exist and they show that Jews are not much more diverse than other ethnic groups.

Some studies show that majority of Jews are actually relatively closely related to each other, compared to other ethnic groups.

Ethnic Hungarians for example are a hodge-podge of all people around them. Hungary has been a historical (and prehistorical as well) melting pot.

If you become a Polish citizen, you do not become ethnically Polish.

If you become an Israeli citizen, you also do not become ethnically Jewish. Ethnic Arabs are ~30% of Israeli citizens, after all.

============================

Interestingly, the Khoisan are an amalgam of two peoples: the hunter-gathering San and the pastoral Khoi, who although plainly distinct from the Bantu are also distinct from each other.

But just to complicate matters, under pressure from the Bantu, some Khoi were obliged to abandon pastoralism and become hunter-gatherers. And are now considered to be San. Though they aren't.

And, of course, there are various ethnographic differences between the Northern San and the Southern San.

Thanks for the info. As for the Khoi and the San - don't they share common ancestors? They look similar and speak similar "click" languages.

 

[warpus]

TIL about the Armenians.

I find this particularly interesting:

Some studies show that majority of Jews are actually relatively closely related to each other, compared to other ethnic groups.

It does contradict what I was saying. I would have expected exactly the opposite, given how Jewish ethnicity is defined compared to the "usual" way.

If you looked at all Jews and not just those who are relatively closely related, would you see a lot more variance then? I would imagine so, but now I don't really know what to think. For example, I'd expect people from all over the world becoming Jews (by converting) to make the Jewish ethnic group fairly diverse. Although I suppose I have no idea how easy it is to become Jewish - maybe it's easier to assimilate into Polish culture and become a Polish citizen (for example)?

 

[Domen]

It does contradict what I was saying. I would have expected exactly the opposite, given how Jewish ethnicity is defined compared to the "usual" way.

If you looked at all Jews and not just those who are relatively closely related, would you see a lot more variance then? I would imagine so, but now I don't really know what to think. For example, I'd expect people from all over the world becoming Jews (by converting) to make the Jewish ethnic group fairly diverse. Although I suppose I have no idea how easy it is to become Jewish - maybe it's easier to assimilate into Polish culture and become a Polish citizen (for example)?

Most of modern Jewish groups, are mostly (or at least largely) descendants of Ancient Israelites.

The only time and place in which large number of conversions of Non-Jews to Judaism happened were Hellenistic kingdoms and early Roman times.

For example a recent study on genetic origins of Ashkenazi Jews shows that they are 50% of Middle Eastern origin (so these would be the original Ancient Israelites), 35% Southern European (these would be conversions from Hellenistic and Roman times), 12% Eastern European and 3% Western European.

The same study also shows that while Ashkenazi Jews are 35% Southern European in origin, not much mixing with Southern Europeans took place during the last 2000 years. So most of this 35% was acquired ca. 2000 years ago and earlier - exactly during Hellenistic times and early Roman times.

And then there is this Eastern European component - 12%. This admixture originated in more recent times, from the Middle Ages until the 20th century.

And also 3% Western European admixture which is probably from times when Jews lived in the Frankish Empire and in the Holy Roman Empire.

So while Ashkenazi Jews are mixed, the main core of their ancestry - 50% - still dates back to ancient Israelites / Hebrews.

And most of the rest - 35% - was from conversions and / or sex which took place in Hellenistic kingdoms and in the Roman Republic / Empire.

====================================

Non-Jewish people who are genetically closest to Jews, are Samaritans - a small ethnic minority who live in the Middle East:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans

And Samaritans actually had common ancestors with Jews. They split in ancient times only because of religious differences.

The Palestinian Arabs are also quite close genetically to Jews, due to sharing part of their respective ancestors.

But Palestinians are mixed with Arabs and other Non-Levantine immigrant groups as well - they aren't any "purer" than Jews.

=====================================

Here is a nice reading about conversions to Judaism in Hellenistic and Roman times:

http://www.theopavlidis.com/MidEast/part10.htm

(...) One of the consequences of Pax Romana was the expansion of Judaism as a religion and the inroads of Greek culture amongst the Jews. These developments facilitated later the spread of Christianity. It is important to understand that in those times it was possible for a person to be at the same time a Jew, a Greek, and a Roman because each of these designations was applicable to a different domain of human experience. (BL95, pp. 30-32) After the Babylonian exile a Jew was a person who followed the religion of Judaism (as it is in modern times) without having to speak Hebrew or live in the land of Israel. A Greek was someone who spoke Greek and, possibly, followed certain cultural customs. After Alexander's conquests It did not imply adherence to the religion of the Olympian deities and it never implied an affiliation with a state. Until the early 19th century there was no Greek state; there was an Athenian state, a Spartan state, a Theban state, etc but no Greek state. The Roman empire developed for the first time in history the concept of citizenship that could be acquired legally without any presumptions on ethnic origin. Thus someone could be a Jew by religion, a Greek by language, and a Roman by citizenship. (One famous person who was all three was Paul of Tarsus.)

Not only the number of Greeks peaked during the Hellenistic period, so did the number of Jews. According to the article on Proselytes of the Encyclopedia Judaica [EJ2007, vol. 16, pp. 587-594] there was active proselytization in ancient times and even a case of "mass and forced conversion to Judaism of the Edomites by John Hyrcanus". Josephus has written that "the inhabitants of both Greek and barbarian cities evinced a great zeal for Judaism" (Contra Apion, 2:39 as quoted in Encyclopedia Judaica [ibid]). As a result Jews were far more numerous in proportion to the population than they are today. (...)

A good place to appreciate the integration of Greek and Jewish culture is the Jewish Museum in Rome. The museum contains a large exhibit of ancient tombstones, all of them in Greek that are almost indistinguishable from Greek tombstones that can seen in museums in Athens. In a few cases one can see a depiction of a menorah, otherwise one must read the text to realize that they are Jewish Tombstones. For example, the word ΑΡΧΙΣΥΝΑΓΩΓΟΣ (head of the Synagogue) can be found often. Figure 1 shows an example of Greek-Jewish syncretism.

The biggest monument to Greek-Jewish interaction is the translation of the Jewish Bible into Greek, the Septuagint. The name is derived from the Latin word for 70 because, supposedly, there were 70 translators. The translation was carried out in Alexandria in the 3rd century BCE by Jewish scholars who were, supposedly, convened by the Greek king of Egypt. The Septuagint played a major in Christianity and it is still used by the Greek Orthodox Church. (...)

Most of converts to Judaism were probably Greek-speakers who lived in Hellenistic kingdoms and in the Roman Republic / Empire.

So most of this 35% Southern European ancestry is perhaps Greek, though that term included lots of various people from different regions:

(...) Modern Greeks like to emphasize their descent from Greeks of the classical era. A more realistic lineage is from Greeks of the Hellenistic era when the number of people identifying themselves as Greeks reached its peak. The number stayed high till the Arab conquest of the 7th century CE. That event started a series of steep declines, in particular, those that followed the Seljuk and Ottoman Turk conquests with conversions to Islam and adoption of other languages [SV71]. In the west the Greek population decline came as southern Italy and Sicily became part of Italian kingdoms with Greeks adopting both the western version of Christianity and the Italian language (although Greek was spoken in some villages till the 20th century). Therefore descendants of the Hellenistic period Greeks could be found not only in Greece but also in Italy, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, and other parts of the Middle East and Northern Africa. Because of population movements inhabitants of modern Greece descend not only from the Greeks of the classical era (...)

Modern Greeks like to emphasize their descent from Classical Era Greeks, but are in fact descended largely from Hellenistic Era Greeks (which - compared to the Classical Era - included a lot of previously Non-Greeks, who then became assimilated into Greek culture).

The same applies to modern Germans, who like to emphasize their descent from Ancient Germanic tribes, but are in fact largely descended from Celtic, Slavic, Baltic peoples, Roman citizens, immigrants from all over, and other groups, who became assimilated (Germanized).

So just because 50% of Jewish ancestry is Non-Israelite, does not mean that they are any less Jewish than Greeks are Greek or Germans German, etc.

 

[Domen]

Check also "languages of the Jewish people":

1. Introduction (on Semitic languages):


Link to video.

2. Main video about Jewish languages:


Link to video.

 

[daft]

Would you consider an anti-Bylonian Jew an anti-Semite?

There are several Semitic tribes out there in the world, not just Jews. Portraying themselves as the sole victims of anti-Semitism is a way of claiming the right to the term: Semite. That's very similar to, for example, Croats proclaiming themselves to be the only Slavs out there.

 

[daft]

Lets not forget about the current mass passive genocide against white people via multiculturalism.

Eventually, there will be no white people left due to interbreeding with people with darker skins or something according to the BNP.

That might possibly happen in the future, although how is that a bad thing?