Why did/does everyone oppress the Jews so much?

[Kamilian]

the thread topic says it all.
WHY DO PEOPLE SEEM TO WANT TO GET RID OF THEM?
i mean they're a good people, too. They're normal.
i admire them for the way that no matter what others threw at them, the Jews still continued their lives. They're truly a people of survivors.
one of my theories is that the Jews get so many tests because they're God's Chosen People, to see if they wills tay true to God and their beliefs no matter what - or if they will crumble quickly. And in the end they will receive reward from God for all the suffering.
So... tell me what u think

EDIT: I'm not saying that it was right for 6 million + Jews to die in WW2, or in any numbers, any time, any place, but what if? I mean in the Bible it says something that suggests that the humbled people on Earth will b great in Heaven and that great people on Earth will b humbled in Heaven. So this is where I thought: maybe...

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Only in the Christian countries. In medieval Islamic entities like the Cordoba Caliphate etc, they're welcomed, for their valued skills in business etc.

IMO the reason was probably they stood out, as a people, were successful in economic activities, and refused to integrate culturally into their resident societies.

Also they weren't painted very well in the Christian Bible, hence subject to much antagoism fr Christians... I think.

 

[goododa]

It really doesn't make sense for 'Christians' to prosecute the Jews since Jesus and his disciples were all Jewish. Why they do that I have no idea.

 

[Shady]

Should probably go off topic forum
-------------------------

Anti-semitism has been present since pretty much ever. This is a difficult question to answer. It can only be answered generally and speculatory because the reasons for anti-semitism come and came down to the individual person.

What I would think would be the basic idea of them being outsiders gets them the hate which any outsider group always gets. Another factor might be jaelousy of individual jews' wealth for historically they have been bankers and accountants until the industrial age and so hatred of them had to be limited since they were probably the only ones that knew how to count beyond 10. Those two factors combined=rich outsiders that have more say in your country than you do individually in your own.

That would be a general statement. Now to more specific cases:

There are stretched ideas that jews would be responsible for the german defeat in ww1 which adolf embraced but that's obviously a serious stretch since many factors contributed. Added to this hate in germany would be the publicized idea of the aryan race which didn't discriminate just against the jews, but certainly made them suffer the most, taking into account their overwhelming percentage of the 6 million killed in the death camps according to Eichmann himself.

In another case of interest, the Arab hate.

Prior to the fermentation of Zionism, the Arabs and Turks were tolerant of the jews. Many jews prospered while their contemporaries in Europe were being oppressed. After Zionism which embraced a completely ridiculous idea of resettling the jewish people in palestine the hate started. Modern arab resentment against israel and jews dates back to the opposition to this "claim" which can be unbiasedly analyzed as such:

-The Jews are exiled in 135 AD.
-By the 6th century, the jews have become a minority in Palestine.
-In 1918 out of a population of about 700,000 about 85% were arab and 12% jewish.

This means that only 84,000 out of 700,000 were jewish. Now come along these smart guys who tell the arabs to get the fek out of there; LEAVE THEIR HOMES THEY INHABITED FOR CENTURIES. A parallel would be today that chief joe comes along and gets a summit of fellow chiefs together and they all decided it would be a cool idea to have north america 100% native american again. Well are we 300 mil americans gonna get the fek outta here? I know I wouldn't. Now granted that it was idealistic because of increased persecution in russia and france but was completely uncalled for since it ignored any real political, social, and religious situation at the time. Wherever you hail from in the world, are you gonna leave your country if some ancient tribe tags along and wants it back because they've been there way before you? Granted, the way that the jews had to leave was unjust, as was any comparative exile of people, but that's the reality of ancient problems that are not applicable in the modern world yet zionism says BAM!!! Let's get back there.

So when they get their state in 1948 they of course try to get along nicely with their neighbors and humbly make refugees and forced migrants out of 53 percent of the arab population present. 53 PERCENT!!! But wait, if you relocate by force now, you can manage to create over 4 million refugees over the next 50 years!!

Now the arab neighbors of course sharing culturally with the Palestinians didn't want that to happen. What else to do than attack this state that basically says "we're coming in, get the fek out." Today the situation has drastically changed because of these forced relocation to favor the jews as a majority again. Where justice has weighed out there is in the same place that parallel lines meet. Nowhere. The state of israel is there and the only way it would go away is if the palestinians would reciprocate this "justice" which isn't likely to happen from a military and moral stance.

I hope it gives you somewhat of an idea Kamilian

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

Shady, that was impressive

 

[TheStinger]

The bible had to exonerate the Romans for killing Jesus so they blamed the Jew, hencforth they have been called christ killers it was therfeore legitimate to persecute them.

over 1500 years of persecution leaves an ingrained prejudice on peoples minds.

 

[Jorge]

Originally posted by Kamilian1
the thread topic says it all.
WHY DO PEOPLE SEEM TO WANT TO GET RID OF THEM?
i mean they're a good people, too. They're normal.
i admire them for the way that no matter what others threw at them, the Jews still continued their lives. They're truly a people of survivors.
one of my theories is that the Jews get so many tests because they're God's Chosen People, to see if they wills tay true to God and their beliefs no matter what - or if they will crumble quickly. And in the end they will receive reward from God for all the suffering.
So... tell me what u think

Jews have survived hundred os years without a state. This means that wherever they go, they mantain as a comunity without integrating in the sociecity or country they live in. You may like this or not, but the fact is that someone can consider this as racism (for example a jew will have problems if not get married with a jew). If they are considered racist (I'm not telling they actually are), people will treat them in the same way.

 

[bigfatron]

Originally posted by TheStinger
The bible had to exonerate the Romans for killing Jesus so they blamed the Jew, hencforth they have been called christ killers it was therfeore legitimate to persecute them.

over 1500 years of persecution leaves an ingrained prejudice on peoples minds.

Don't understimate the strength of this argument - the medieval church NEEDED a hate figure and the Jews were perfect: scattered, defenceless, easy to identify (in a time when EVERYONE went to church), generally well off, and legitimised by holy scripture as a fair target.

Why this hatred survived the Enlightenment I find more confusing. I can only assume that the dogged determination to remain separate is part of the cause.

I also wonder whether anti-semitism has reduced in some countries as the range of people to hate has grown, i.e. there are the same number of bigots around but they can now direct their attentions to blacks, asians, germans & japanese (at least, after the last war), now arabs and arguably americans too.

Is there any other racial group that has stayed so resolutely separate from the rest of the community? I can't think of one.

Please note, none of the above attempts to justify discrimination or anti-semitism in any way, both of which activities I totally abhor.

 

[Vrylakas]

Bigfatron wrote:

Don't understimate the strength of this argument - the medieval church NEEDED a hate figure and the Jews were perfect: scattered, defenceless, easy to identify (in a time when EVERYONE went to church), generally well off, and legitimised by holy scripture as a fair target.

Why this hatred survived the Enlightenment I find more confusing. I can only assume that the dogged determination to remain separate is part of the cause.

I also wonder whether anti-semitism has reduced in some countries as the range of people to hate has grown, i.e. there are the same number of bigots around but they can now direct their attentions to blacks, asians, germans & japanese (at least, after the last war), now arabs and arguably americans too.

Is there any other racial group that has stayed so resolutely separate from the rest of the community? I can't think of one.

Please note, none of the above attempts to justify discrimination or anti-semitism in any way, both of which activities I totally abhor.

I think anti-Semitism is a single label that really covers many facets of bigotry and prejudice. BFR's church argument is certainly valid, as I've read prayer books as late as the early 20th century that exhorted believers to welcome whatever punishment God can bring upon Jews. Catholics don't have a corner on the anti-Semitism market, of course; Martin Luther wrote many rabidly anti-Semitic sermons.

Sometimes religious prejudice was buttressed by economic or class resentment as well. In medieval Poland the king welcomed waves of Jews fleeing persecution in Western Europe and guaranteed their security and rights as a separate estate in the Polish feudal order, but in the 17th and 18th centuries as royal power collapsed in Poland in favor of aristocratic magnates these royal guarantees became useless. Jews now sought protection from the peasants and church through magnates, who employed them in return for protection. This meant that the magnates squeezed the peasantry through their intermediaries, the Jews - which means that for Polish peasants the tax collector, banker, etc. tended to be Jews. Add to that the destruction of the already tiny Polish middle class by the Russians and Prussians after the 1795 partition and you have the average Pole experiencing early industrialization, with its commensurate capitalistic abuses, through an urban Jewish middle class who owned the first factories in Russian-occupied Poland. (Think Lodz, Lublin, etc.) Throw in the 19th century age of fanatical nationalism throughout Europe, and you have a potentially deadly mix of hatreds.

Knight-Dragon wrote:

In medieval Islamic entities like the Cordoba Caliphate etc, they're welcomed, for their valued skills in business etc.

Muslims regarded both Christians and Jews as "Peoples of the Book", i.e., people mentioned honorably in the Quran and therefore deserving of at least basic levels of respect. Other groups, non-Jews and non-CHristians, did not fare so well under Mulsim rule...

 

[Shady]

I think that the argument that the Jews are persecuted as Christ-killers is kind of weak as that in at the time this was used as an excuse, since other groups were persecuted the same. You wouldn't see a muslim in europe outside a major port until hell froze over. The Chinese were socially isolated and ridiculed in America until the New Deal.

But the christ-killer excuse is a reason I guess.

 

[EdwardTking]

Three further points:

(1) It is human nature for people to feel comfortable with people who look the same, dress the same and talk the same and they know and share the same outlook AND be uncomfortable with people they don't know and has a different outlook. So the Jews (like others) were oppressed because they were different.

(2) The catholic church was hierarchial and authoritarian in nature claiming a spiritual overlord of the whole of western europe. Any one who did not comply; whether a Pagan, a Cathar, an orthodox Christian, a Protestant or a Jew was therefore seen as an opponent.

(3) Throughout history most minorities were normally either (a) assimilated with the majority, (b) were wiped out or (c) were moved on as the concepts of having multi-cultural societies at any particular place did not exist. For instance in Britain; Celts, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Norsemen and Normands assimilated to form the pre-20th century white British. However the Jews remained separate so (b) and (c) tended to occur. The same thing happened with the other non assimilating minority; the Romany Gypsies.

 

[Kublai-Khan]

What happened to the jews is similar to what happened to the armenians or kurds because they did not assimilated.

 

[aaron_burr]

Some anti-Semitism may have something to do with this:

"The Day of Resurrection will not arrive until the Moslems make war against the Jews and kill them, and until a Jew hiding behind a rock and tree, and the rock and tree will say: 'Oh Moslem, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!'" (Sahih Bukhari 004.52.176)

"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
(Surah 8:12)

"Do not take the Jews and Christians for friends"
(Surah 5:51)

 

[shak]

Well, lets try to get a little perspective on those quotes there, aaron_burr:

The Bukhari quote is a Hadith. It is essentially a compilation of things the Prophet Muhammad or his companions (followers of Islam when it began) said/did while Islam was in its infancy. It relies mostly on people’s memories and their perspectives of events during the founding of Islam. The Hadith you gave does not have the source of the quote, the date, or context.

Hadiths, by there vary nature, should not be relied upon because they can be corrupted by the authors opinions or by a companions uncertain recollection of the event.


Next, Verse 8:12 does not have anything to do with the topic. It is not about the Jews. Even the quote you gave is not even the entire line. It is a butchered translation.

Chapter 8 (Text, Summary) is actually about the first battle Muslims fought, the Battle of Badr. The battle pit the forces of Prophet Muhammad (all Arabs and Muslim numbering about 300) against a force lead by Abu Sufyan (all Arabs and all Idolaters with 600 armored soldiers and cavalry of 100 riders). The entire Chapter has nothing to do with Anti-Semitism, heck, it even has some lines about Prophet Muhammad’s peace treaties with the Jews.

Chapter 8 is essentially a narrative of the Battle of Badr, what lead up to it and its aftermath.


Finally, Verse 5:51. Again, the entire verse is not quoted in its entirety. It is cut up to make it seem more vicious then it is.

Chapter 5 (Text, Summary) is about how the Christians and the Jews broke the covenant with god (I believe the Bible comments on how the Jews broke the covenant with god as well). The entire chapter tells Muslims do not do what the Christians and the Jews did, stay on the right path and do not go astray.

In Verse 5:51 it says do not take them then as your friends and protectors. In other words do not take them as your best friends when you have Muslims around. You should have good relations with the Christians and the Jews, and you should treat the how you would like to be treated. The idea here you can only rely on your own (just like Jews have done since the beginning).


If I seem a little miffed, it is because I have seen these quotes bandied about the Internet and being accepted at face value without any context. They are also quoted so badly sometimes they leave off 75% of the verse. Quoting one verse from the Quran cannot sum up Islam. Every word of the Quran has meaning beyond the words written in these quotes. It is a great disservice to post these quotes without any context or explanation.

The Quran is a book not of single words but of massive ideas and concepts, spanning single verses, chapters and the entire book itself. There is much more beyond what is written in one or two quotes.

 

[shak]

Now getting back to the topic

I agree with many of the things written above. The Jews do no assimilate well into foreign. They keep their heritage and their religion alive with relatively few numbers. In addition, their wealth and business know how made them a target for many European rulers throughout history.

These two things made them seem different from the societies that they lived in during history. Rulers made them easy scapegoats. It is very easy to get mad at the rich funny people down the street if you are living in disease and filth if you want someone to blame.

The modern anti-Semitism from the Middle East really stems from the Zionist movement. As someone pointed out above, Jews lived relatively unscathed (better then they would have in Europe at least) in the Muslim world.

Once Zionism started making inroads into Palestine it turned into open warfare. Since then it been a mess.

Many people say that the current Jewish/Muslim strife has been around forever. That is not really true, Muslims and Jews lived in relative peace in the middle east before Zionism in the 1800s.

The modern European anti-Semitism is the vestige of the old European anti-Semitism probably brought up by the continued decline of today’s European influence.

 

[test_specimen]

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
Only in the Christian countries. In medieval Islamic entities like the Cordoba Caliphate etc, they're welcomed, for their valued skills in business etc.

IMO the reason was probably they stood out, as a people, were successful in economic activities, and refused to integrate culturally into their resident societies.

Also they weren't painted very well in the Christian Bible, hence subject to much antagoism fr Christians... I think.

It is widely accepted to see Jews as successfull businessmen and traders. However I don't think that it is very good to put such attributes on a whole group of people, even to see them as a coherent group of people. Those were also the arguments of the persecutors. This is exactly how the conspiracy theory idea of Jewish-Imperialism (1930s) emerged: by attributing certain things to them. This is generalization, and I think one should not do it in a positive, nor in a negative way. Same happened with the Islamic verse citation.

And about the caliphate: they were not persecuted, but they had to pay higher taxes for not being islamic. This is more tolerant, especially since the reconquista followed, but still not full acceptance.

I think they were persecuted, because they were an easy target. No official representation, no means of defence, no broad organization. A good reason to desire their own country..

 

[Cecasander]

Becourse their noses looked weird

No, I think the jews were prosecuted becorse the europeans were jalous for their bussiness skills. In medieval Europe, the jews, who were a minority, were pretty powerfull in the bussiness world. About the same reason why the nazi-germans hated the jews.

So actualy, the Europeans didn't hate the jews for being bad, but for being good ans successive

 

[Ram]

The Jews were prosecuted (at medieval-modern times) because the govermants of the countries which oppressed them needed someone to blame for the bad things in the country, and the Jews were ideal - they were (and are) a small community, seperated from the outside world, and very successful. And, in Hitler's words: "If the Jew didn't exist, we would have had to create him."

 

[goododa]

Jews are good people. Anyone who dislikes Jews is evil.

 

[aaron_burr]

In the interest of getting a better perspective on Islam, it's worth noting that the words "fight" and "kill" appear in the Koran more often than the word "pray."

And speaking of Abu Sufyan:

"After the war of the trench, in which Mohammed was besieged by the Quray****es, led by Abu Sofyan, it was alleged that the Jewish tribe Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. Although the alleged help did not materialize and the siege eventually ended, neverthless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.

Muslims turned against Bani Qurayza and blocked their streets for twenty-five days. The Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept surrender, to give up their belongings, and to depart from their homes.

Mohammed, however, would not consent to this, and instead appointed as an arbiter, Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Quaryza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves, and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims.

Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the eight or nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed had spent the previous night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's Biography; vol. 2 pages 240 & 241)."

From: www.islamreview.com