Easter is antisemitic?

Any discussion of the holocaust that dwells on any supposed Christian "fault" for it, and does not concentrate on the philosophy underpinning Nazism (most definitely not Christian) misses the point. I seem to be plowing a lonely furrow here. This is sad, and dangerous, particularly when the encouraged philosophy today (materialism) has more in common (note: I did not say it was the same) with that of the Nazis than with Christianity.

Many books discuss the materialist philosophy of Hitler and his opinion on Christianity. Hitler: A Study in Tyranny by Alan Bullock is good...

"Christian" mistreatment of Jews was wrong, the extermination of millions of people, including Jews, in the holocaust was obviously wrong. They are not the same, they did not happen for the same reason, the former did not inevitably lead to the latter, nor was the latter in any way dependent on the former - the holocaust could have happened without Christianity (indeed, it could not have happened if there was a genuine commitment to Christian teaching.) Historic mistreatment of Jews (while of course wrong) differed in purpose, basis and execution (literally) to the form of so called scientific racism, Aryan-ism, twisted Darwinism etc. that arose after the enlightenment. We should not conflate the two.

Christian philosophy and theology is completely contradictory to that of the Nazis which led to WW2 and the extermination of millions of people. If the laws of God were adhered to, horrors such as the holocaust could not happen. Nazism was a rejection of Christianity.

What I object to, by implication or otherwise, is conflation of anti Jewish persecutions by Christians (or whomever) with the specific form of antisemitism fostered by the Nazis, which was based upon and "justified" by a philosophy that was not Christian (in fact it was decidedly anti-christian). They are different, and it is important to stress this. Commentary along the lines of something like christian persecution of Jews "culminated" in the holocaust can suggest to readers a degree of inevitable linear progression from one to another.

Lets look at a current day example. Travelers are probably the most discriminated against minority in Ireland. I think it is fair to say that the majority of people in Ireland are wary of them, and perhaps even fearful. There are a whole load of reasons for this, with which we will all be familiar, but I think the general bigoted opinion would be something along the lines of "they are violent/messy/destructive/thieves etc." and that this justifies discrimination against them in a whole load of areas. Now such bigotry, in my opinion largely born of misunderstanding and a clash in culture, both now and especially in the past, is clearly immoral and wrong.

However if someone came along and said that travelers were an inferior race, not deserving of rights, life etc. and gave a supposed "objective and scientific" reasoning to demonstrate this, that they are not really human this is discrimination of an altogether different kind, played out and justified on an abstract, philosophical level. Such evil cannot stand and take up a position of dominance without the philosophical underpinning. Without the philosophy, it is 'mere' bigotry from hateful people. With the philosophy, it is an enlightened scientific position. This is the insidious nature of Nazism, it is essential to understand this. The Nazi regime was not made up of the likes of the nasty individual racist that (in the before times) could sometimes be found propping up the end of a bar sharing his unsolicited "opinions".

Now, the fact that this poison would be initially aimed at an already "unpopular" group in society may mean that it finds fertile ground, but if it did not have some new element, the aforementioned twisted, "scientific" philosophy, the leap from "I don't want a halting site down the road" to "they are an inferior race undeserving of rights or life" does not happen. In the absence of this philosophical underpinning giving "objective and scientific" reasons for such a position the middle classes are shocked at such naked hatred from the likes of the man at the bar and continue as they did before, doing things like leaving the pub if a group of travellers arrive for a drink (if the barman lets them in of course). Of course, even with such a philosophical underpinning the "respectable" would probably still be uncomfortable to hear it stated in such a way - they would speak from an objective scientific point of view of course, much more sophisticated than the racist drunk.

The point of this is that a poisonous ideology that holds that inferior undesirables should be eliminated (for supposedly objective, scientific reasons) is something different to "regular" bigotry and racism. It is "respectable". There need not be a bed of existing antipathy towards a group for this "scientific" racism to take hold (after all, the holocaust murdered many other groups aside from the Jews). This is the danger, if we go down the road of saying that Nazism happened because everyone was already a kind of bigot, so of course Nazism took hold, and sure we are not bigots today so it wouldn't happen, we are setting ourselves up for it to happen again.

We have to learn from the lessons of history. If we, as decent people, look at the racist bigot in the pub, the occasional racist taxi men (this is a cliche I know, but I think most have experienced it at some point) and think, even at the back of our minds, that this was the type and form of thinking and person that leads to horrors like the holocaust we are wrong, dangerously wrong. Such a thought is reassuring (after all, you or I would never be such an unsophisticated, hateful person as our clichéd racist man in the pub, or the taxi man). But we are not so superior, the reason why the likes of the holocaust in particular happened is that there were arguments made that persuaded sophisticated and respectable individuals like those who even have discussions like we are having, that there was a scientific, objective, elevated and enlightened philosophical basis for such evil. (of course, this can be something that largely happens in the zeitgeist rather than individual philosophical discussion). This is what is so scary about Nazism and this philosophy, it allows the 'respectable' to simultaneously look down their nose at the naked, drunken bigot, while actually being many, many times worse themselves.

It is very uncomfortable, but to understand the Nazi regime (and also others like Communist ones) we need to understand that it happened not because everyone went mad or were just bad people - bigots, but rather that there were arguments and circumstances that led to ordinary, decent people like ourselves believing, supporting and implementing such horrors. You need to ask yourself "Why would I" take part in such a regime. The disturbing reality is that you probably would have, and if you are not careful, could do so. It is very much a cop out to say or imply that we are so much better, or it was small minded bigotry, or religion paved the way, or leaders hypnotized the population. No, people like us did it, so we need to be on our guard, especially when variants of the type of philosophy the Nazism spawned from (not to mention Communist regimes!) are still around, with their siren appeal.

antiskeptic wrote: »

The problem is that Christianity Carried On Crusading. More recently, it carried on considering loose women as some kind of sub-human, to be cast away in "homes" for loose women.

This was all justified by a theology that was Christian. You might say that it's not Christian but you'd have to forgive an onlooker when they see little difference between murderous philosophies/theologies.

Christianity is responsible for all it's actions, for good or ill.

Perhaps you might try again, and see if you can get past the first paragraph to the sections where the subtle dangers of an attitude like yours whereby you do not (or do not want to) see the nuances, and differences, of what is at play.

antiskeptic wrote: »

What do you think will happen in the face of rapidly depleting resources? What do you think will happen when folk in poorer parts of the world are driven to cooler climates by global warming, a product of capitalism. What do you think will happen as peoples livelihoods are wiped out with the destruction of eco systems.

Well, what will happen is what does happen, except on genocidal scale. War, rape, robbery and, as we see in the Med, allowed to drown in droves because capitalism doesn't actually want to deal with the waste products of it's activity

They are considered sub-human now. And will continue to be considered so to increasing degree.

Nazism took some time to evolve from deporting Jews to eradicating them wholesale. Such is Capitalism.

Capitalism has been around for a long time - although I do agree that a reckoning is coming.

However I would be interested in the implications of the view you hold - if you view capitalism as "just as bad" as Nazism or Communism, how do you reconcile this with your complicity in such a system?