Anti-Semitism. Why?

Discussion in 'History' started by Laser Eyes, Oct 29, 2004.

  1. geistkiesel Valued Senior Member

    No you are wring I simply see what I see , I see our govt as being involved i nthe deepest corruptions are you too patriotic to see defectss?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Geistkiesel: Perhaps my hands are not clean here, but this thread asked about the reasons for anti-Semitism. I think there is an implication that the question relates to the reasons for prejudice and mistreatment of Jews prior to the 20th century.

    Even if my interpretation of the question asked is incorrect, the thread has drifted far from its original intent.

    You seem to want to argue that the US is very corrupt. I also suspect that you wish to discuss the current Palestinian/Israeli problem, and are pro-Palestinian. Perhaps these are topics for another thread. If I notice another thread addressing these issues, I am likely to comment. I have expressed my view of the reasons for anti-Jewish attitudes and persecution of Jews from the Middle Ages to the beginning of the 20th century, and for the time being, feel I have nothing further to contribute to this thread.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. android nothing human inside Registered Senior Member

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. naciketa Registered Member

    PROUT: A Socio-Economic Theory for the New Millennium

    One of the necessary factors in the development of a healthy society is a proper socio-economic theory. In any age people have to come to grips with the question as to how the resources of the world are to be utilized and allocated. In addition, society needs to arrange a system of government which can meet the needs of all its members. The answers which the society gives to these concerns reflects the socio*economic values which that society follows.

    Today there are two theories which shape the world's approach to economics and politics. Only a few nations still follow economic and political systems and policies which are based on Marxism, while most others have fashioned systems based on capitalism. What is becoming increasingly clear is that neither Marxism nor capitalism are satisfying the all-around needs of society, and the time is right for the introduction of new socio-economic ideas which can fulfill the demands of humanity. In 1959 in a series of lectures later published as Idea and Ideology, P.R. Sarkar first described a socio-economic theory which he called Progressive Utilization Theory, known by the acronym PROUT).

    Although it is possible to show that PROUT has similarities with the existing socio-economic philosophies, a deep understanding of Sarkar's ideas shows that PROUT stands alone in the world today, in that it is based on a spiritual rather than materialistic conception of the universe and of humanity. The idea that all animate and inanimate objects are part of one Supreme Consciousness and are to be treated as part of an integrated whole is the base of PROUT. Just as capitalism and Marxism emerged in an era when physicists and philosophers held a materialistic and mechanistic outlook, PROUT is emerging at a time when humanity is beginning to accept a holistic and spiritual view of the universe.

    This holistic and spiritual base helps to define a new view of economics, history and political leadership and offers the hope that humanity can find a way out of the present socio-economic crisis.

    One way to understand PROUT is to consider Sarkar's definitions of the words progress, utilization and theory by which he defines this new theory. According to Sarkar, progress, in its true sense, takes place on the spiritual plane because only there can one move towards a goal without provoking a counter movement. In the physical sphere, on the other hand, there is "development" such as the invention of the automobile, but it is always accompanied by counter*acting trends, such as the pollution of the automobiles and the increased risk of injury and death in accidents.

    In the mental or psychic sphere there is also develop*ment such as the increase of knowledge amongst the masses in the contemporary era, but once again there are negative results of the development such as the increase of stress, psychic complexes and mental illness which accompanies mental development. The idea of progress defined by Sarkar is for humans to adjust themselves to changing develop*ments in the physical and psychic world while moving towards the spiritual goal.

    Utilization means that the resources of the universe should be used to promote the good and happiness of all, not just of a few. And utilization of resources also applies to supra*mundane, spiritual and psychic potentials which are commonly neglected in many economic approaches.

    Some theories are good in the theoretical realm but cannot be materialized in the practical world due to changing circum*stances. A theory which has been developed after observing the economic situation of the 19th century may no longer apply in the 21st century. Some theories have been advanced by hypocrites who never had any intention to materialize their theory, while others were put forward by logicians who are content to live only in an abstract world and thus these theories have no practical utility for society.

    Sarkar contends that the best kind of theory is one which is based on a careful assessment of events in the world and which also has built within it the capacity to adjust to changing environmental circumstances. The Progressive Utilization Theory is such a theory which is based on an observation of society and also has within it the means to maintain adjustment with changes in the world

    PROUT incorporates these concepts of progress and of utilization in a theory which is defined in five fundamental principles:

    1. "No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.

    This principle strikes at the fundamental weakness of capitalism which allows a few individuals to accumulate wealth even if it results in the starvation of millions. It clearly establishes the basis of a collective approach to economic questions. While the principle calls for limitations on the individual possession of physical wealth which is something finite, it does not call for limitations on wealth in the mental and spiritual sphere, because that is an infinite treasure of humanity which should not be restricted. Under the Marxism, this distinction between physical and psychic wealth was not understood, and the severe restrictions placed on freedom of thought and religion led to the downfall of most systems based on this theory.

    2. "There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.

    This principle encourages society to utilize all resources of the universe to satisfy human needs. "Rational distribution", means that the minimum necessities of all should be guaranteed but that individuals who have contributed special services to society should be given special rewards to encourage their work and to encourage others also to contribute more to society. Rational distribution does not mean equal distribution.

    3. "There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of the unit and collective body of human society.

    This principle refers to the utilization of human resources, and states that a healthy society must develop the po*tentialities of all people. By denying large segments humanity chances for educational and economic development, the present day society is not correctly utilizing precious human resources. This principle also calls attention to the need to balance collective good with individual good.

    4. "There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supra mundane, and spiritual utilizations."

    Here Sarkar is saying that society should inspire people to work for the individual and collective good, and thus he urges that provisions will be made so that all can earn their minimum necessities through appropriate work. This principle also calls for society to make proper use of comparatively rare faculties such as spirituality

    5. "The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of a progressive nature."

    This principle provides society with a means of adapting to changing circumstances and also calls on humans to utilize scientific research guided by Neo-Humanism in order to bring about the welfare of all.

    Economy of PROUT

    How the principles of PROUT could be applied in society is for the moment a theoretical question as no country as yet has introduced PROUT. Also the means of implemen*ting PROUT will vary from age to age. However, in Sarkar's writings and in the writings of other PROUTist commentators we can see how the principles of PROUT could be used to bring about an economic system that can best be described as Progressive Socialism: a non-Marxist socialism based on Neo-Humanism.

    In his writings on industrial and economic policies, Sarkar has stressed the need to prevent economic exploita*tion. Thus he says that the important economic enterprises which supply people with their basic necessities of life should not be placed in the hands of private enterprise. Sarkar was also aware of the failings of central governments to directly control such enterprises.

    To organise an economy on Proutist lines requires a three-tiered economy. Small enterprises employing few peo*ple and which do not deal with essential goods and services can be managed and owned as private businesses (e.g. a small restaurant).

    The second tier, which consists of the majority of enterprises, would be set up as cooperatives, owned and managed by the people who work in the industries. The workers would be the stockholders of these businesses and would choose the management just as stockholders do today. The third category consists of the largest enterprises which employ large amounts of people and which have important effects on various parts of the economy - the key industries (such as steel production, energy, transport, etc). These should be managed by either autonomous public boards or by local governments, but not by central governments. This category would run on a no-profit, no-loss system.

    Such a system would also follow the principle of economic decentralization and this could be accomplished by re-organizing the economy on the basis of self-sufficient economic zones in which there would be balanced agricultural, industrial, and service sectors of the economy.

    The idea of the Proutist economy is to provide a good standard of living to all people and to see that economic power is not concentrated in the hands of a few.

    Theorv of history and Government

    To bring such a system into being requires new governmental arrangements. Various socialistic experiments of the 19th and 20th Century ended up in failure, disappointment and much worse. How this can be avoided in the future is best understood by examining P.R Sarkar's new interpretation of history which he delineates in the book Human Society.

    Sarkar says that history can be understood as the cyclical dominance of the different classes of society. His con*cept of class is however far different from previous, materialistic ideas of class. Sarkar defines class by mental characteristics rather than physical or materialistic concerns. He says that at the dawn of humanity the dominant mentality or class was that of the Shudras - people in whom matter is dominant over mind. These people were primarily concerned with the struggle to survive. Throughout history the toiling people concerned with physical survival belong to this class of Shudras or workers.

    Sarkar notes that leadership of society then passed into the hands of people with another mentality. The class of Ksattriyas (warriors) developed the mentality that "with my physical force I will overcome the world (matter)". From the times of the Neolithic period and throughout the period known as "ancient history," this class ruled society. The chronicles of wars fought by the great civilizations of the Middle East are an example of this age of warriors.

    With the further evolution of society another class rose to predominance. The Vipras or intellectuals had a different approach to the conquest of the world. They thought, "With my mental force I will overcome the world." Thus in the Middle Ages, ministers, advisors or priests (popes, Imams, etc.) held the real power of society even though warrior-kings were often the nominal rulers. This intellectual class brought about psychic and sometimes new spiritual ideas, but they also exploited society and are responsible for the religious wars of that time.

    The cycle of society is always moving. The intellectuals ceded their authority to a class of Vaeshyas or capitalists who created the industrial and commercial revolutions that ushered in the modern age. The mentality of this class is to use mental strength to accumulate wealth. Just as the warrior age had a particular type of government, monarchy, and the intellectual age had its variation of monarchy which Sarkar calls Ministocracy, the age of capitalism saw the rise of democracy. Currently most countries of the world are in the capitalist era.

    According to Sarkar this Vaeshyan era is near its end and it will finish with social revolution of economically, politically and psychologically oppressed masses. Following revolution, the age of warriors will come again.

    But is the future of civilization so dim that we can only expect revolution and military dictatorship in the future? Sarkar's theory holds forth another possibility. He says that the best arrangement is for the evolution of a declassed human whom he calls the Sadvipra. The Sadvipra is a spiritually and morally based revolutionary who works against the exploitation of any particular class. The problem with most social changes in the past is that inevitably the class which initiated the change eventually ended up exploiting the other segments of society. The only way to avoid this is to create Sadvipras who will work for the rights of all.

    The political concept of PROUT is based on establishing an electorate composed of spiritually developed people. Democracy of the present day will have to be reformed. Today democracy, although better than any other system yet introduced, has a number of weaknesses. First of all there is no provision for the economic rights of the people and democracy has even been the preferred government of powerful economic interests who can easily buy their way into influence and power. In addition there are three basic qualities often lacking in the electorate which insures that a very poor standard of leaders are elected year after year.

    The three qualities are as follows: Education: where many illiterate or uneducated people vote then unscrupulous politicians take advantage and get votes easily through dishonest practices. This is particularly prevalent in the less developed countries. Morality is another quality that is missing. If more than 51 per cent of people are dishonest, then dishonest people can be elected. Another missing ingredient is Socio*economic-political consciousness. Mere education is not enough. Those voting must know what they are voting for or else they will easily be misled by opportunistic politicians. Thus, Sarkar says that the standard of education, morality and socio-economic consciousness must be raised and from amongst such a public, real leaders with the spirit of social service (the Sadvipra) can then emerge and serve society. With such universalistic leadership, humanity can reverse the weaknesses of the present period and will be able to set up a social and economic system which is rational, just and truly progressive.

    For more information about the Progressive Utilization Theory, visit the following websites:
  8. All.For.One 1 Corinthians 11:1..are you in Registered Senior Member

    If you read the book of 'Esther' from the Bible there was a man trying to wipe out the Jews and that was in the 'Old Testament'!! So anti jewish movements have been around for a very,very long time.
  9. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    so all these people throughout the centuries, milenia even.. maybe they've been on to something..
    could it be that jews really should be dealt with once and for all
    just imagine.. no more jews to whine of holocaust, no more jews to ask compensations, etc, etc! :m:!
  10. Hapsburg Hellenistic polytheist Valued Senior Member

    Antisemitism is hating people who are or were jewish because they are or were jewish, or because they were decended from jews. The Spanish Inquisition against the Jews, Moriscos, and everything else that wasn't catholic was like that.

    Religious Persecution is persecuting because they believe in it, but not simply because they are decended from other jews. What the Romans did was this.
  11. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Naciketa: How does your theory relate to anti-semitism?

    Your theory is a variation of communist socialist concepts described as something else. It is a bankrupt theory which requires a huge bureaucracy and a totalitarian police state for its implementation.

    Why not start a new thread to sell your concepts?
  12. Religion Incarnation #1: Polytheism

    Polytheistic religions such as Greek, Roman, and Egyptian served their populaces fairly well, and reflected the nature of their respective societal values (or lack thereof) at the time.

    The Good: Polytheistic religions allowed followers to pick their favorite or most useful deity for the purpose at hand.

    The Bad: Polytheistic religions were not very good at unifying populations as localities often centered their efforts around a select few deities, which were often different from those of neighboring localities.

    The Ugly: Polytheistic religions did not typically reflect ideals for human civilization to aspire to. The "Gods" were more like exaggerated humans, flaws and all.

    Religious Incarnation #2: Monotheism part 1

    The first monotheistic religion was that of Akhnaton (formerly called Amenhotep IV).

    The Good: In an effort to unify the people of Egypt, he tried to distill Egyptian polytheism down to one god, Aton.

    The Bad: Unfortunately, he tried to do so by force and without first inspiring the people of Egypt to his cause.

    The Ugly: Since he upset the installed power base of the Egyptian Priesthood, his son Tutankhaten (later, Tutankhamun, or King "Tut"), was likely killed at age 17 in an effort to restore the old ways.

    Religious Incarnation #3: Monotheism part 2

    The Jewish people were the first truly successful monotheists.

    The Good: The Jews changed the nature of religious belief to inspire a code of conduct that would foster the development of civilized and productive society.

    The Bad: However, in doing so, they chose to isolate themselves from their polytheistic forebearers and thus engendered much disdain. Today, Judaism survives more as a heritage than a religion, but due to its introverted nature and stubborn resistence to assimilation, will always be looked upon with suspicion by outsiders.

    The Ugly: The Jewish people have historically been made an easy scapegoat. The lack of an altruistic "help thy non-jew neighbor" doctrine makes it easy to see them as selfish and/or greedy. In addition, thousands of years of persecution have led to a darwinian effect. Only the most successful and bright have been able to survive (which makes them appear to have undue influence relative to their % of the population). Unfortunately, most people don't realize that the majority of jewish people today are secular and don't really care about religion for religion's sake.

    Religious Incarnation #4: Monotheism part 3

    Christianity was born out of the Jewish faith and popularized by Roman Emporer Constantine, who leveraged its monotheistic nature to unify the disparate groups that encompassed his vast empire. The evangelical nature of Christianity was an important development as it created a marketing campaign to ensure its spread.

    The Good: Christianity followed the jewish example of promoting virtuous values to promote the growth of advanced civilization, but took the extrapolation out much further. The original premise of non-violence and love they neighbor offered the world a collective approach that would yeild more optimal result for humanity in the long-run.

    The Bad: Unfortunately, the success of Christianity and its ingratiation into the Roman order quickly turned it into a empirical, bureaucratic organization. Devout believers of Christianity began worshiping the canonized dogma of religion itself rather than the original principles it promoted.

    The Ugly: The mental gymastics required to fully believe (as real-world historical and logical fact) in "the trinity," satan, the crucifixion and resurrection, or the general fundamental accuracy of the bible leaves the human mind succeptible to many other breaches of reason. It is interesting to ponder the true historical aspect of the life of Jesus, and how Roman politics shaped the nature of modern Christianity (and in-effect, perpetuated anti-semitism). explicates one possibility.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 18, 2005
  13. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Good summary, sleeper! Although you seem to have omitted Islam from your list, which is a rather large monotheistic religion.
  14. True... I left out Islam, as well as the myriad of eastern religions, which progressed along a different path. My knowledge of these topics is somewhat less, however, I will take a shot a delineating Islam in the same manner:

    Religious Incarnation #5: Monotheism part 4

    Islam emerged in the second half of the first millenia A.D. in an effort to reconcile jewish and christian beliefs under one roof, reverse the socio-empirical effects that influenced christianity, and to unwind the twisted leaps of logic brought about by the council of nicea.

    The Good: By maintaining the validity of Islamic, Jewish, and Christian Prophets, but segregating them from divinity, Islam attempted to combine the best of both worlds and appeal to followers of other faiths.

    The Bad: The birth of Islam was too near that of Christianity, chronologically speaking, and the progess of civilization and historical record keeping made it difficult to justify. In addition, after the tumultuous religous variegation in the past few centuries, the desire to maintain its idealogical base precipitated the concepts of Apostacy and the dire consequences imposed on anyone who defected from Islam.

    The Ugly: Due to the timing of its introduction, and the lack of an emprical mandate, Islam had to fight for its existence, and hence has a significantly more militant structure. This, combined with a even more dogmatic approach and devout following, has resulted in zealotry on an unprecendented scale. In addition, the fact that it did not permeate through a well developed political structure meant that Islam was able to subsume governmental functions.
  15. Mystical Sadhu Registered Member

    So much of history is contained within the myopia of the story tellers. For example, the whole world existed, even at the time of "Alexander", yet he was known as the conquerer of the world, despite that attribution having been limited to the perimeters of the claimants' perspective of the world. Similarly for Ghenghis Kahn, and on it goes. Similarly, there is much of history that is ignored by people, often because they have been underinformed by predecessors. Monotheism has thrived in many different parts of the world and done so "successfully", truly.

    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
  16. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Some truth here. It appears this factor, or its unevitable percievement, was a recipe for disaster. The Jews were given, or came to believe they were given such a command, which guaranteed them to be hated, and they had no options: laws commanding Jews not to eat or drink or dress as others is a sure fire recipe of causing others to be insulted. If there is a method in this seeming madness is a question which is not related to Jews.
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2010
  17. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Sorry to burst anyone's bubbles, but A/S predates Islam, Christianity, Rome, Greece, Babylon, Egypt and Canaan. This was told to Abraham before the nation of Israel existed or can be accused of any sins or crimes:


    This factor of a prophesy before any crimes are commited casts a whole new slant. Israel was born after Isaac, whereby Jabob's name was changed to Israel. There was no Jewish nation before this time.
  18. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    I agree that monotheism, like human speech, is inherent in all humanity. Yet we also have ways which distance us from this truth and it is denied in various forms, even via science and politics.
  19. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    the jews typically were "the other" and "the other" typically doesn't do very well. bad time just intensify this.
  20. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    actually most of the german jewry spoke german it was in poland that they mainly spoke yiddish and hebrew.
  21. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    You forgot to retract your Ahmedinajab genocidically inclined but false statement Jews are not a nation - I gave you factual, written proof you are wrong.
  22. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    And the Hebrew portion says where the German Jews came from. Muslims dumped a mosque on the German Jews' homeland and now deny it in their sermons and Madarassas. It does not anything good about anything which comes from liers posing as a religion, does it?
  23. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    well I agree their not they a religion.
    No you posted religious propaganda and I ignored.

Share This Page