Has there ever been antisemitic Communists in history?

submitted by radicalcentristNational Centrism from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]FoxySDTWhite Nationalist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Marx and his views on jews are quite (in)famous. Stalin didn't want his daughter to marry a jew. You would probably found other examples if you tried.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Marx was a Jew himself, not really the best example of antisemitism.

As for Stalin, I believe the man was very egocentric and hated everyone. Yet despite this, Stalin is on record condemning anti-Judaism and even made it a death penalty to question them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin_and_antisemitism#Stalin's_1931_condemnation_of_antisemitism

On 12 January 1931, Stalin gave the following answer to an inquiry on the subject of the Soviet attitude toward antisemitism from the Jewish News Agency in the United States: National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism. Anti-semitism is of advantage to the exploiters as a lightning conductor that deflects the blows aimed by the working people at capitalism. Anti-semitism is dangerous for the working people as being a false path that leads them off the right road and lands them in the jungle. Hence Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable, sworn enemies of anti-semitism. In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.[8]

And unless Hitler is a liar, he invaded the USSR because it represented Jewish Bolshevism. Wouldn't Stalin have come out and refute this?

Edit: And how could I forget. Stalin supported Israel and was their first ally, even before America.

https://canadafreepress.com/article/israels-allies-in-1948-the-ussr-czechoslovakia-american-mainline-churches-a

The struggle of the Jewish community in Palestine was endorsed completely by what was then called “enlightened public opinion,” above all by the political Left. Andrei Gromyko, at the UN, asserted the right of “the Jews of the whole world to the creation of a state of their own”, something no official of the U.S. State Department has ever acknowledged. Soviet support in the U.N. for partition brought along an additional two votes (the Ukrainian and Byelorussian Republics within the USSR and the entire Soviet dominated block of East European states. Taking (as always) their lead from Moscow, the (hitherto anti-Zionist) Palestinian communist organizations merged their separate Arab and Jewish divisions in October, 1948, giving unconditional support to the Israeli war effort and urging the Israel Defense Forces to “drive on toward the Suez Canal and hand British Imperialism a stinging defeat”!

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As for Stalin, I believe the man was very egocentric and hated everyone.

Actually, Stalin resisted his own cult of personality, he only came to embrace it in his last years. The Jewish agitator Lion Feuchtwanger had the opportunity of seeing it up close during his 1937 visit to Moscow. He observed that Stalin was merely a tangible stand-in, an idol, for the abstract communist system Russians were supposedly grateful for. In Christianity, the Virgin Mary was provided as a substitute for the Holy Spirit conception. How could the latter on its own excite devout feeling?

This North Korean propaganda video does a good job showcasing the communist mentality: the featured girl repeatedly turns down an interview, conveying that it's not about her, and it's otherwise unimportant that she's rewarded for her labour. Much like the angels in Christianity declining people's worship and directing them to god. They were sent to the person, not for the person. It's not about the messenger, about delivering a message. The writer is merely the pen.

Since Stalin was merely an abstract representation, like a reflection in the mirror, misdeeds could be perpetuated under his name without nearly as much repercussions than if Stalin alone had come out. In this way, the system is shielded from being discredited, Stalin could be scapegoated or assassinated, and it wouldn't change its course. In the same way, the writer can neutralize moralistic-journalistic calumny by attributing his words to a deceased writer, as Plato did with the personality of Sokrates.

What prompted Nixon to warn against communism in a 1960 speech? He indicated that the communists in their collective subjectivity viewed themselves as necessary forces of history itself, which would emerge triumphant no matter how things turned out.

"One of the fundamentals of the Communist philosophy is a belief that societies pass inevitably through certain stages... there is nothing men can do to change the inflexible sequence which history imposes. It is a part of this philosophy that, as society moves along its predestined way, each stage of development is dominated by a particular class."

Seen from a religious angle: in Life of Apollonios, when Titus declined honors for his feat (the destruction of Jerusalem's Temple and the massacre of rebels), saying that he had merely lent his hand to his deity, he was identifying himself as a force of history, as an agent of destiny.

Stalin is on record condemning anti-Judaism and even made it a death penalty to question them.

Molotov furnishes a credible explanation for Stalin's recruitment of the Jewish element. Molotov indirectly indicted the Jews as hotheaded social agitators, men of action. Eventually, Stalin removed some of them from their positions, since their unbroken solidarity with Jewish capitalists was becoming all too apparent.

And unless Hitler is a liar, he invaded the USSR because it represented Jewish Bolshevism. Wouldn't Stalin have come out and refute this?

If the Table Talk is taken as reliable, he perceived the USSR as a threat because it represented pan-Slavism. Goebbels also saw Stalin as a heir of the Tsars. Bolshevism was merely Stalin's pretext and justification for assimilating the eastern territories, and eventually, a hypothetical expansion into the West. On the other hand, Hitler differentiated between Slavic creative ability and Bolshevik destructive wantonness, and by all accounts, he firmly declined promptings from his advisors to reconcile with Soviet Russia, insisting that he couldn't bring himself to align with them so long as it was still dominated by a Jewish intelligentsia.

Stalin supported Israel and was their first ally, even before America.

Molotov's excuse was that he and Stalin supported "international freedom". It seems they had to at least keep up appearances for appearance's sake. Internationalism requires good intentions. What's important to realize is that the ruling caste in a communist society fundamentally views itself as a force of good, much like the Catholic Church. The shared defect of these organizations is their belief that the masses cannot decide for themselves and that a clique of powerful individuals decides what is truth and lie, "what is funny, or not", and that we're expected to conform to their designs without protest. A communist user wrote me regarding Stalin while championing his legacy: "He underestimated the masses, he viewed them as the leading but blind force who needed guidance."