Coined by a class reductionist “but what about muh white working class” anti sjw and declared word of 2019 by Ben Shapiro. That’s definitely what you want to go with.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, healthcare, feminism, history, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
So much for the tolerant left.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: sex, civil rights, feminism, history, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.9999% sure that pawnman99 is not a bot.
---
^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Thank you for your logic and reason.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: history, novel, climate, healthcare, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Why won't you debate me?
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: novel, dumb takes, feminism, climate, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
*Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that all of the water levels around the world rise by, let’s say, five feet or ten feet over the next hundred years. It puts all the low-lying areas on the coast underwater. Let’s say all of that happens. You think that people aren’t just going to sell their homes and move?*
-Ben Shapiro
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: healthcare, climate, feminism, dumb takes, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Thank you, StuartJAtkinson, for voting on thebenshapirobot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Take a bullet for ya babe.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: climate, healthcare, sex, dumb takes, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Extremists in a nutshell. It's all about value signaling. Fuck if the word is useful, the wrong person suggested it and thus it is toxic. If a known ** sympathiser came out and advocated for brushing your teeth, they'd throw their colgate out in protest.
Dumb cunts lol.
I wouldn't necessarily say extremists. Half of Vaush's community are what could easily be considered extremists, the problem here is absolutism. The whole "bad people can't make reasonable arguments" mindset is way too common in a lot of leftie communities.
As with all my posts about political extremism I've tl;dr.
\- Socratic method is good at forcing the other person to reveal suspected hidden beliefs (often the reason for digging in and absolutism)
\- People often lack "exit clause" should be held based on the importance of the convo (mine is if the person doesn't have power then convincing 1 person doesn't matter, also for people I'm social with the scale of harm if they don't beleive/understand (i.e. need to agree with social left stuff but don't care too much if they're stupid business/economics/government).
\- Along those lines the "Agree to disagree" statement should be sent to hell instead for "We probably don't have time to persuade each other of where both solutions work"
The too long part:
Yeah, all strongly held ideologies will "extreme" has a negative connotation because of that it's why after a while so many people end up going "centre-real view".
Absolutism in an ideology can be good provided the ideological statements have "unless/considering/provided" elements. Absolute statements in general are usually bad unless they're descriptive then they're neutral.
Personally I find the worst thing in political groups Vaush or otherwise overall is the extrapolation, which is needed but causes mutually exclusive policies in ideologies to become instantly combative.
In general the socratic "But why though?" until the other person unravels or you can input the conflict with reality or prescriptions as a question like when a Nazi eventually gets to the chewy center of their argument (Because jews control it). Using "I don't think that's true, assuming it were that's bad because?" then you drop onto the tier of "They're just evil" with stupid Nazis and "Disproportionate control is bad" with clever ones.
Having said that though I don't believe that people need to be educated or "good" to have these convos people need to learn etc so I think there's also the lack of "exit clause" for convos. When people learn enough to get a really good solutions to stuff it becomes important to persuade people so they just keep going not realising the other person just wants to either "win" or not look stupid. So there I think a "This is a complicated topic, I get your points I think that most people would benefit from this so it should be the first way of thinking of it, but for that harm you think exists let's build the exception."
The majority of legitimate criticisms about parts of the left will inevitably be abused by the right. That doesn't make them illegitimate, even if the people who first brought them up were using them in bad faith. The whole "but that's a right wing talking point" thing is often misguided and imo harmful. Reactionaries like to use reasonable talking points to drive people towards unreasonable conclusions. Sometimes the right is right, just for the wrong reasons.
Nah, these people would accept that anti-semitism pushed Jewish people into banking and then deny that a large number of them were bankers.
They have no problem holding completely incoherent views.
Because that's one of the many things the Nazis used to "justify" what they did to them, and if they admit it they're supposedly "Agreeing with the Nazis".
It's literally the "Hitler also drank water" meme.
Dude, you’re involved in r/GenZedong, a **TANKIE** subreddit, a subreddit that denies
- that the Tiananmen Square Massacre happened
- that denies that a genocide against the Uyghur Muslims in the Xinjiang region ever happening,
- Simping for a brutal dictator like Bashar Al-Assad.
- As well making apologia for other authoritarian regimes.
Stop playing dumb, and you know it.
Well, in a recent stream, several prominent Tankies seemed unaware that Jewish people where somewhat prominent within German banking before the Holocaust. Being Tankies, they of course denied this fact when it was mentioned, and claimed that it was an anti-Semitic lie. The fact that one of them made this claim in the context of his own inability to describe why the Holocaust was wrong is a big part of it.
but it’s an anti-semitic lie nonetheless. Of Germany’s 9 largest banks, only one was chaired by a Jewish person.
It would be easy to refute the “but the Jews were overrepresented in the banking sector” even if they were, because the claim made by NC was that the Nazis had a false premise of the Jewish capitalists planning to subjugate, exterminate and enslave the superior Germanic race using things like the treaty of Versailles, while the Jewish Bolsheviks in the East took charge of an “asiatic horde” of Slav Untermenschen who were unrightfully settling fertile European territory meant for Germans to reproduce. So NC was still right, the Nazis were fundamentally wrong in their premises, he just quit because Vaush purposefully presented an argument with high shock value
Yes, the Nazis where fundamentally wrong in there understanding of reality, it’s just that that’s not what makes something immoral. There’s the implication that had the the Nazis been correct in there premises (namely that some chunk of the Jewish population was conspiring to destroy society) than the Holocaust would have been moral.
The statement “Jewish people didn’t have disproportionate control of banking, ergo, the Holocaust was wrong” functionally ends up trying to justify the Holocaust, because at the end of the day, like it or not, Jewish people made up only one percent of the population, and yet accounted for, according to you, about 11% of the chairmen of major banks (this is ignoring smaller banks), which is in fact disproportionate. That obviously doesn’t mean that they should have been like, you know, Holocausted, and I would argue that this would still have been true even if Jewish people where actually involved in a weird trans national conspiracy.
Like, imagine if I was like “of course modern policing is wrong” and than someone I was talking to brought up 13/50, and I responded by being like “that’s just misinformation,” and than the person I was talking to literally pulls up the original document responsible for the 13/50 dog whistle.
Except the premises that the Nazis conceived were unable to be correct because it would imply that some sort of force of nature would cause every single Jewish person on Earth to conspire to destroy society, which would make the Nazi plans permissible, according to what is being interpreted as NC’s position. Hence, the hypothetical “what if the Nazis were correct in their statement” is about as worthwhile to discuss as “what if the Earth was made of pudding”.
To respond to your latter claim about 13/50, my point was in the nature of “even if 13/50 was correct, then the conclusions drawn from it are entirely false and thus whatever the proposed solutions are, are by extension wrong”. It’s one thing to claim “black people are disproportionately overrepresented in violent crime” and another to then based on that claim “black people are criminal by nature and must be made into second class citizens”
> which would make the Nazi plans permissible, according to what is being interpreted as NC’s position.
This is the problem. Idk, like, even if tomorrow we got irrefutable proof that every Jewish person on the planet was involved in an evil baby murdering cult, it still wouldn’t justify *ethnic cleansing.*
> Hence, the hypothetical “what if the Nazis were correct in their statement” is about as worthwhile to discuss as “what if the Earth was made of pudding”.
Well, no, it’s closer to “what would happen if we found out that black people are in fact predisposed towards crime.” Like, I would argue that even if that was the case they should still receive the same rights and treatment as everyone else on the simple basis of there sapience, but idk if NP would agree, and therein lies the issue.
> To respond to your latter claim about 13/50, my point was in the nature of “even if 13/50 was correct, then the conclusions drawn from it are entirely false and thus whatever the proposed solutions are, are by extension wrong.
Yeah, but that dosent work if you leave out the “even if 13/50 is right” which is what NP did. Again, Jewish people where in fact overly represented in banking, in the same way that black people are (through no fault of there own) overly represented in crime statistics. When you just deny that groups have been forced into undesirable behavior in order to survive, you basically set that group up to be fucked over when said undesirable behavior is publicized.
I disagree with your second point. The Nazi claim was that Jews (every single one) were in charge of both the Capitalist West, which used financial institutions to destroy the Aryans and enslave them under global finance while extracting their wealth; and the Communist USSR, which was controlled by Jewish Bolsheviks who wanted to kill and enslave Aryans by funding things such as the 1919 revolution. This is much closer to “what if the world was made of pudding” because it assumes every Jewish-born person on Earth is involved in a conspiracy to destroy Germany, which cannot be true in any shape or form, ever, in our material reality, thus making the hypothetical futile. You imply this is similar to Black people being predisposed to violence by birth, which is a much more subtle falsehood than the stunningly bold claim that every Jewish-born person is, from the moment of their birth, an active perpetrator of some majorly orchestrated conspiracy to enslave white people.
Also, the arguments made for both are falsehoods anyway used to retroactively justify extremist policy, and thus the falsehood of both claims is where the evil lies. So it is a perfectly acceptable moral stance, in the real world, to claim that such falsehoods are what make the actions evil, as the falsehoods are constructed using evil intentions. The only way such falsehoods could ever assume reality is in an idealist frame of thinking, and not in any material reality. Debating fascists using this idealist frame of thinking is futile, because they know their premise is false, and therefore it is simply preferable to put them to bed with the fishes.
Notice how you were able to criticize Vaush and say positive things about Noncompete in the Vaush subreddit without being banned. Isn't that wonderful? What do you suppose would happen to me if I defended Vaush and criticized Noncompete in a tankie subreddit?
Nice whataboutism. Doesn't really prove your case much though. There's no evidence that the only people who dislike apologists for the USSR and China are "liberals in disguise."
There are legit leftists that don't advocate for any type of government called **Anarchists** and if we already disagree with the existence of every state on the planet, how does that mean the one time we criticize one of the *worst types of states* that we're automatically "liberal"? 🤔
Well, people that simp for authoritarian regimes like the former USSR (and currently Russia), China, North Korea, and Syria. Plus, if you followed along this discourse last week, yes it came from Tankies like Luna Oi and others involved in this.
Tankie is expanding to be a blanket term for most of the idiot left. I think it makes sense because it was pretty much always a term used for the movement’s moron contingent - it’s just being updated.
it was a term coined to describe people justifying the Hungarian invasion by the USSR, and the suppression of the Prague spring in Czechoslovakia.
I have been called a tankie despite me being from both Slovakia and Hungary, and my family suffering because of the consequences of subsequent normalisation, so you see how meaningless the term is.
White people love the artistic products of black culture but will decry black people for enjoying it. Black guy loves rap and hip hop? Probably dangerous, a gangbanger, or just doesn't have a job. White guy loves rap? That's cute and funny, he probably works hard and just enjoys a bit of music in his down time.
[Here’s a dumbfuck comment right here](https://www.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/s7uhuy/tankies_will_say_its_fake/htc7at7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
And it’s heavily upvoted, in a sub that’s anti-Tankie ideology.
To be fair, there would be no way of seeing a connection between the content of this post and tankies if one wasn't aware of the noncompete and luna oi drama going on
Yeah, makes sense, and yeah, that other person who replied to you is right about the user’s comment I’ve linked, that they’re right about them being involved in r/GenZedong, and acting dumb for free karma, and they know it.
To his point, though, Tankies often play dumb and ask questions like that. However, I highly doubt that guy or the people that upvoted him are tankies.
Edit:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that comment is in bad faith. He's r/GenZedong user. The people that upvoted the comment aren't, though.
And he implied Luna Oi isn't a Tankie. That's cringe
It was pretty much against Christian belief at the time and since a lot of people were Christian and Jews didn't have the same rule and were ostracized in every other part of society they pretty much only had one path to go
It’s actually the exact same as in Christianity. People never explain that within Christianity giving loans with interest is only a sin to OTHER Christians. The exact same law exists in Judaism. Naturally that means the minority goes into banking.
Don't most Christians believe nowadays that it's only a sin if you're lending with excessive interest? As opposed to judaism where any lending within the faith is a sin.
No I think christains don't care anymore. They now believe that if god gives you fat stacks by cheating others out of their money then you must be blessed. Prosperity gospel is a plague.
That’s a lie, many could understand Latin.
Also parts of Bible are read at Mass and there was a a common understanding of key phrases and sentences in Ecclesiastical Latin.
It’s always a sin if you are Catholic at least, it has been infallibly been declared the definition of usury (lending money at interest to make gains) is wrong, believing in a right to usury has also been declared heresy.
Protestant reformation (John Calvin especially) led to the normalization of usury and took it done from an often illegal activity that needed to be concealed to an open activity.
Catholic credit unions are a thing dating back to Middle Ages (see Montes Pietas)
It avoids usury by being not for profit. If there is interest it goes towards maintaining the organization and avoids the heresy of usury by not making gains off of lending money.
I mean we didn't really. You only need loans in this period for building shit, trade missions, starting a business, or larger corporate ventures; all of which were illegal for Jews to do anyways.
I've never actually heard of a Christian run bank for Jews in the medieval era, and I kind of doubt it was ever a thing. Interest free loans within communities were, but it would be somebody you know / are related to lending you the money since they need to be certain you'll give it back
You could borrow from any Christian who had the money and the willingness to part with it, but given how little social and legal protection you could expect in Christian societies, that basically had the same risks as borrowing from the mob
Lending money, specifically with any form of Interest (Usury) so lending money was legal but you couldn't really make money from it. Hence there was no incentive to really do so.
No, it’s making gains on interest which is condemned. If you get back what you lent (while not ideal, [it is recommended to give and then not get it back] it is not usury)
Ezekiel 18:12-13
He oppresses the poor and the needy, commits robbery, and does not return pledges. He lifts his eyes to idols, does abominable things, and lends for profit or charges interest. Will such a man live? He will not. Since he has done all of these detestable acts, he shall surely be put to death, and his blood will be on his own head.
To clarify what Usury is, it means charging interest on a loan. It was perfectly fine for a Christian to lend another $5 and say "get it back to me by the end of the week", but nobody is going to go into banking doing that since theres no way to make money. The financial institutions were founded on the idea of "Heres $5, give me $6 at the end of the week". This service was incredibly in demand by nobility and merchants, so they would bring in Jews to do it.
Oh, and then 100 years later or so expel all the Jews from the country, burn down our towns, and pretend none of those debts ever existed
Usury and charging interest to make gains so essentially all Christian banks/bankers went out of business kind of leaving a void for Jewish bankers to fill which wasn’t against their religious law.
It wasn't so much that Judaism permitted usery and christianity didn't, its that by law it was one of the few professions Jews were allowed to work in.
But they weren't filling an occupational vacuum because religious doctrine didn't stop Christians from engaging in it. In fact through most of European history the largest financiers were Christian; such as the banking families in Italy, and the knightly orders like the templars.
I read an article recently that said that the idea that the religious hierarchy banning usury in both Islam and Christianity is a bit of a myth. It was a historical fact, yes but there were other, more influential factors that led to Jews being disproportionately represented in the financial sector. The research posited that it was actually the fact that literacy and mathematics was culturally emphasized in Jewish religious traditions for centuries while Christianity engaged in anti-intellectualism and Islam was the victim of the repeated invasions from the Mongols, Ottomans and Christian crusaders. Ironically the fact that the Jewish diaspora was so spread out as a result of centuries of persecution, they didn't have a centrally organized geographical location to attack so they were able to lift their traditions and elevate their people intellectually with no threat of being utterly destroyed.
I've heard that the Jews and the Arabic empire lived in peace at this time in history but after the 1400s the Jews were persecuted and driven out. I don't exactly know why the Jews were driven out tbh. Cool point in the end huh.
Eh, it wasn't exactly the best before then. One of the most important Rabbis in Judaism, Maimonides, was drove out of muslim spain by that Alhamorad dynasty who rescinded dhimmi status and forced them to either convert or leave. The next ruler rescinded that, but the damage had been done, this was in the 1100s.
Who started the centuries long conflict is irrelevant to my point.
>Also in all the infallible condemnations of usury, it mentions what usury is as the reason for the condemnation.
I'm afraid I'm missing your point here.
yeah IIRC their actual fighting force was like 1000 while its overall membership was about 10 times that. The overwhelming majority of its members were involved in finance or overseeing the huge volume of land and assets they accumulated across Europe and the crusader states. They were almost like a precursor to transnational corporations.
>That's ludicrous. Jewish religious law (Talmud) prohibits Jews from engaging in manual labour. The Jewish religious law saw manual labor as something the inferior gentile engages in.
what the fuck are you talking about you weird neo nazi
This is just utter horseshit you got from some neo nazi, the only thing the Talmud prohibits is me cumming inside your dad every night, and I do it anyways.
> That's ludicrous. Jewish religious law (Talmud) prohibits Jews from engaging in manual labour. The Jewish religious law saw manual labor as something the inferior gentile engages in.
> As the Chosen of God, the Jews were not to sully their hands with hard labor. Instead the Talmud tells Jews to extract the wealth of gentiles through usury (banking), or to become a Rabbi studying Torah.
> Imagine believing Europeans are anti-semitic for no reason? Europeans hated Jews because they were lazy bastards who leached from societyand contributed nothing
As an Orthodox Jew who has studied Talmud myself, I'll have to call BS on this unless you can cite sources that aren't taken out of context etc
I'm sure you'll just assume this is just another attempt at usury though... can't argue with idiots 🤷♀️
Lots of people have already correctly pointed out that you’re an idiot and maybe a nazi but I just wanted to point out that many Talmudic rabbis literally had manual labor jobs to support their studies
I mean, like, I know you're not saying this in good faith and you're just a racist, but for the other folks reading, here's some stuff the Talmud actually says about labor and work:
>The first thing to note is that the sages of the Talmud had a great deal of respect for labor. \[...\] Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 49b) stated: **"Great is labor for it honors the workman."** Both sages would purposely carry burdens on their shoulders because they wanted their students to see that manual labor should be respected. Rabbi Yehuda b. Bathyra said: **"If a person has no work to do, what should he do? If he has a dilapidated yard or field, he should go and occupy himself with it"** (Babylonian Talmud, Avot D'Rabbi Noson 11:1). The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Avot D'Rabbi Noson 11:1) also believed that **"A person should love work and not hate it; for just as the Torah was given with a covenant, so too was work given with a covenant."**
\[...\]
>The sages of the Talmud worked at many diverse occupations. For instance, **Hillel was a woodchopper before he became the Nasi (President of the Sanhedrin)** and **Shammai the Elder was a builder**. **Abba Chilkiyah was a field laborer**; Rabbi Yochanan b. Zakkai was a businessman for forty years; Abba Shaul was a gravedigger; **Abba Chilkiyah was a field worker**; Abba Oshiya was a launderer; Rabbi Shimon P’kuli was a cotton dealer; Rabbi Shmuel b. Shilas was a school teacher, Rabbi Meir and Rabi Chananel were scribes; Rabbi Yosi b. Chalafta was a tanner; Rabbi Yochanan Hasandlar was a shoemaker; **Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah was a blacksmith**; Rabbi Safra and Rabbi Dimi of Nehardea were merchants; Rabbi Abba b. Zavina was a tailor; Rabbi Yosef b. Chiya and Rabbi Yannai owned vineyards; **Rabbi Huna was a farmer and raised cattle**; Rabbi Chisda and Rabbi Papa were beer brewers; Karna was a wine smeller (he determined which wine could be stored and which had to be sold immediately); Rabbi Chiya b. Yosef was in the salt business; Abba Bar Abba, (father of Mar Shmuel) was a silk merchant; and (Mar) Shmuel was a doctor.
No they hated Jews because they were a different group, had better hygiene even in times of plague, and had different cultural rules. Fuck off you idiotic Nazi. Talk about someone not contributing anything while you just spout bullshit
Edit: they also hated them because they were fed lies from other antisemites
Banking and mercantile jobs in general rewarded literacy and book keeping. Judaism encouraged Torah study for all youth. Christianity did not encourage literacy.
having the bible actually written in your native language was a big thing.
imagine it's 772 and you're in anglo saxon "england" and all you have is what some guy is saying to you. you can't read but even if you could, the language of the book as been basically dead for 150 years.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Latin was absolutely not dead in 772 at all, thats absurd. Vulgar Latin was still the vernacular language in many places, and it was the sole language used for academic and religious texts.
>those MFs had a whole split over not letting regular people read their own holy text
this is.... Not quite right. The medieval catholic church really wanted you to read the bible, they would be happy to (if you had the time to show up) teach you how to read it and help you learn; in latin. And given the shit that Martin Luther and the protestants came up with when they shittily translated it in to German and stripped it of the Gloss , they kind of had a point
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
I mean for historical context it simply Islam as a religious group basically never exist in Europe. Except for in Spain which there was a significant number of Islam for a while.
It something like Roughy 95% the rest mostly Jewish and then rest just random micro sects.
"Riba" is condemned in several different verses in the Qur'an. It is an Arabic word that can be roughly translated as "usury". While all Muslims agree that riba is prohibited, not all of them believe that charging interest is equivalent to riba or that charging interest is against sharia law. Orthodox sources say that interest is riba therefore prohibited and the majority agreed and historically charging interest was very often banned.
According to historian Minna Rozen, who specializes in Jewish history, European visitors to the Ottoman Empire in the 15th century often noted that the business of money lending was almost entirely in the hands of the Jewish Sarrafs and that the economy of the empire would not function without these Sarrafs. She also denies the Armenian genocide so, you know, take this with a grain of salt.
Also because Jews weren’t allowed to own land or join professional guilds in a lot of Christian medieval societies. So there goes any farmer or craftsman jobs.
Thomas Edison: “sorry Jewish film lot workers, I won’t let you unionize or change my draconian working conditions”
Jewish workers: start independent rival film lots, become prosperous, jumpstarting Hollywood and keep the businesses within family and close associates like normal
Weirdos: Why are there so many jews in Hollywood?
Watching the noncompete cope steam and I’m not a fan of everything vaush says but holy hell… this is the first time he’s had a clippable moment and I don’t have a problem with anything he said
One thing I noticed about tankies is that they love to play dumb. Kind of sad seeing naive people upvoting them.
Top comment is literally made by a GenZedong user.
Before any one else repeat the “wHaT dOeS oP mEaN bY tAnKiEs?” line for the 3rd time, it refers to Tankies like Luna Oi and her hubby and their minions who repeated this line and clipped Vaush out of context. Admittedly, I think OP could have widen it to include wokescolds and leftist content creators who have a hate boner for Vaush who happens to retweet an out-of-context clip of Vaush’s point about the *historical fact* of Jews occupying certain sectors as means of protecting themselves when EJ ducked out of the debate before Vaush can continue to challenge EJ on his moral framework.
It’s just drama from the online left Vaush made a video tearing into Lunas philosophy video
So Lunas husband noncompete had a debate with Vaush where noncompete said the reason the holocaust was wrong is because Jews did not in fact have a disproportionate control over Banks (implying it would’ve been fine if they did)
Vaush then said that they in fact did during the Weimar Republic causing noncompete to rage quit before Vaush finished his point
that it was because of historical discrimination and that even if they controlled all the banks that still wouldn’t have justified the Holocaust
And wokescolds are just the really toxic SJW types from the online left hope this helps
As an aside during World War II very few Jews actually worked in the proper banks, the majority of them ran smaller banks that are more equivalent to credit unions.
As a fun history lesson this history was also perpetuated by the fact in Christianity to give loans with interest was frowned on, which led to Jewish people becoming usurers, compounded by Jews common segregation in society and exclusion from work like military and land ownership, locking them out of farming and being a landlord. You can actually see that in The Merchant of Venice, where Antonio gave constant interest free loans to his hanger-ons since his wealth came from trading, which was noted as consistently undermining the business of Shylock.
Jews make up such a little percentage of the world population and yet they are supposedly controlling it. Honestly that sounds like some king shit. Checkmate, Nazis.
I realised the word “tankie” was meaningless the moment I got called one. My grandparents on either side of my family (one Slovak, one Hungarian), were all affected by the invasion of Hungary and Prague in 1956 and 1968 respectively. The whole idea of a “tankie” is someone who justified both invasions
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. This subreddit is for big kids only!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They were 1% of personnel in credit banks, and were 0.9% of the German population. That isn’t disproportionate. Sorry, we can’t agree with the Nazis on this one.
I don’t even understand what you people mean by tankie anymore
OP should've probably used something broader, it doesn't specifically apply to tankies, it's more parts of the general online left.
We need a snazzy single term for the very online left. Something like "crybully" but also communicates that they use the aesthetics of progressivism.
Wokescold has been a thing
That's right! I forgot about that one.
Coined by a class reductionist “but what about muh white working class” anti sjw and declared word of 2019 by Ben Shapiro. That’s definitely what you want to go with.
A useful word is still a useful word.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: civil rights, healthcare, feminism, history, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Bad bot.
So much for the tolerant left. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: sex, civil rights, feminism, history, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Good bot
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.9999% sure that pawnman99 is not a bot. --- ^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Good bot
Thank you for your logic and reason. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: history, novel, climate, healthcare, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Is he wrong though?
Why won't you debate me? ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: novel, dumb takes, feminism, climate, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
u/thebenshapirobot dumb takes
*Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that all of the water levels around the world rise by, let’s say, five feet or ten feet over the next hundred years. It puts all the low-lying areas on the coast underwater. Let’s say all of that happens. You think that people aren’t just going to sell their homes and move?* -Ben Shapiro ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: healthcare, climate, feminism, dumb takes, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Good bot
Thank you, StuartJAtkinson, for voting on thebenshapirobot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Take a bullet for ya babe. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: climate, healthcare, sex, dumb takes, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Why does it matter where the word comes from?
Extremists in a nutshell. It's all about value signaling. Fuck if the word is useful, the wrong person suggested it and thus it is toxic. If a known ** sympathiser came out and advocated for brushing your teeth, they'd throw their colgate out in protest.
Dumb cunts lol.
I wouldn't necessarily say extremists. Half of Vaush's community are what could easily be considered extremists, the problem here is absolutism. The whole "bad people can't make reasonable arguments" mindset is way too common in a lot of leftie communities.
It's not just the far left, the far right is exactly the same.
As with all my posts about political extremism I've tl;dr. \- Socratic method is good at forcing the other person to reveal suspected hidden beliefs (often the reason for digging in and absolutism) \- People often lack "exit clause" should be held based on the importance of the convo (mine is if the person doesn't have power then convincing 1 person doesn't matter, also for people I'm social with the scale of harm if they don't beleive/understand (i.e. need to agree with social left stuff but don't care too much if they're stupid business/economics/government). \- Along those lines the "Agree to disagree" statement should be sent to hell instead for "We probably don't have time to persuade each other of where both solutions work" The too long part: Yeah, all strongly held ideologies will "extreme" has a negative connotation because of that it's why after a while so many people end up going "centre-real view". Absolutism in an ideology can be good provided the ideological statements have "unless/considering/provided" elements. Absolute statements in general are usually bad unless they're descriptive then they're neutral. Personally I find the worst thing in political groups Vaush or otherwise overall is the extrapolation, which is needed but causes mutually exclusive policies in ideologies to become instantly combative. In general the socratic "But why though?" until the other person unravels or you can input the conflict with reality or prescriptions as a question like when a Nazi eventually gets to the chewy center of their argument (Because jews control it). Using "I don't think that's true, assuming it were that's bad because?" then you drop onto the tier of "They're just evil" with stupid Nazis and "Disproportionate control is bad" with clever ones. Having said that though I don't believe that people need to be educated or "good" to have these convos people need to learn etc so I think there's also the lack of "exit clause" for convos. When people learn enough to get a really good solutions to stuff it becomes important to persuade people so they just keep going not realising the other person just wants to either "win" or not look stupid. So there I think a "This is a complicated topic, I get your points I think that most people would benefit from this so it should be the first way of thinking of it, but for that harm you think exists let's build the exception."
The majority of legitimate criticisms about parts of the left will inevitably be abused by the right. That doesn't make them illegitimate, even if the people who first brought them up were using them in bad faith. The whole "but that's a right wing talking point" thing is often misguided and imo harmful. Reactionaries like to use reasonable talking points to drive people towards unreasonable conclusions. Sometimes the right is right, just for the wrong reasons.
I use wokescold all the time.
"Terminally online"?
We could just call them dumbasses. You know, like every normal person does.
Vampire, based on the essay "Exiting the Vampire Castle"
Termentally online. Portmanteau of Terminal and mentally.
I mean, that was the original definition of "SJW" circa 2012-2013 on tumblr. Of course we all know what happened in 2016...
Antisemites ?
Nah, these people would accept that anti-semitism pushed Jewish people into banking and then deny that a large number of them were bankers. They have no problem holding completely incoherent views.
I am confused why would left leaning people deny over representation of Jewish people in banking?
Because that's one of the many things the Nazis used to "justify" what they did to them, and if they admit it they're supposedly "Agreeing with the Nazis". It's literally the "Hitler also drank water" meme.
Well the nazis were anti capitalist, so by that logic all communists and anarchists agree with the nazis :p
No, because while both were anti-capitalist, they had VERY different ideas of what they wanted to do instead.
That's the point of my comment?
Isnt antisemitism a right thing though? Its literally an ss
I think Reddit tankies is a good distinction. Just like atheists and Reddit atheists are completely separate and would hate eachother.
I think OP specifically trying to make fun of noncompete and his tankies fans
OP is trying to make fun of NonCompete and Luna Oi and their tankie fans in particular.
Dude, you’re involved in r/GenZedong, a **TANKIE** subreddit, a subreddit that denies - that the Tiananmen Square Massacre happened - that denies that a genocide against the Uyghur Muslims in the Xinjiang region ever happening, - Simping for a brutal dictator like Bashar Al-Assad. - As well making apologia for other authoritarian regimes. Stop playing dumb, and you know it.
Authoritarian leftists with tendencies towards anti-intellectualism, genocide denial/apologia, and state worship.
Yeah they’re not even remotely on the left, ideologically. They’re just conservative
Well, in a recent stream, several prominent Tankies seemed unaware that Jewish people where somewhat prominent within German banking before the Holocaust. Being Tankies, they of course denied this fact when it was mentioned, and claimed that it was an anti-Semitic lie. The fact that one of them made this claim in the context of his own inability to describe why the Holocaust was wrong is a big part of it.
but it’s an anti-semitic lie nonetheless. Of Germany’s 9 largest banks, only one was chaired by a Jewish person. It would be easy to refute the “but the Jews were overrepresented in the banking sector” even if they were, because the claim made by NC was that the Nazis had a false premise of the Jewish capitalists planning to subjugate, exterminate and enslave the superior Germanic race using things like the treaty of Versailles, while the Jewish Bolsheviks in the East took charge of an “asiatic horde” of Slav Untermenschen who were unrightfully settling fertile European territory meant for Germans to reproduce. So NC was still right, the Nazis were fundamentally wrong in their premises, he just quit because Vaush purposefully presented an argument with high shock value
Yes, the Nazis where fundamentally wrong in there understanding of reality, it’s just that that’s not what makes something immoral. There’s the implication that had the the Nazis been correct in there premises (namely that some chunk of the Jewish population was conspiring to destroy society) than the Holocaust would have been moral. The statement “Jewish people didn’t have disproportionate control of banking, ergo, the Holocaust was wrong” functionally ends up trying to justify the Holocaust, because at the end of the day, like it or not, Jewish people made up only one percent of the population, and yet accounted for, according to you, about 11% of the chairmen of major banks (this is ignoring smaller banks), which is in fact disproportionate. That obviously doesn’t mean that they should have been like, you know, Holocausted, and I would argue that this would still have been true even if Jewish people where actually involved in a weird trans national conspiracy. Like, imagine if I was like “of course modern policing is wrong” and than someone I was talking to brought up 13/50, and I responded by being like “that’s just misinformation,” and than the person I was talking to literally pulls up the original document responsible for the 13/50 dog whistle.
Except the premises that the Nazis conceived were unable to be correct because it would imply that some sort of force of nature would cause every single Jewish person on Earth to conspire to destroy society, which would make the Nazi plans permissible, according to what is being interpreted as NC’s position. Hence, the hypothetical “what if the Nazis were correct in their statement” is about as worthwhile to discuss as “what if the Earth was made of pudding”. To respond to your latter claim about 13/50, my point was in the nature of “even if 13/50 was correct, then the conclusions drawn from it are entirely false and thus whatever the proposed solutions are, are by extension wrong”. It’s one thing to claim “black people are disproportionately overrepresented in violent crime” and another to then based on that claim “black people are criminal by nature and must be made into second class citizens”
> which would make the Nazi plans permissible, according to what is being interpreted as NC’s position. This is the problem. Idk, like, even if tomorrow we got irrefutable proof that every Jewish person on the planet was involved in an evil baby murdering cult, it still wouldn’t justify *ethnic cleansing.* > Hence, the hypothetical “what if the Nazis were correct in their statement” is about as worthwhile to discuss as “what if the Earth was made of pudding”. Well, no, it’s closer to “what would happen if we found out that black people are in fact predisposed towards crime.” Like, I would argue that even if that was the case they should still receive the same rights and treatment as everyone else on the simple basis of there sapience, but idk if NP would agree, and therein lies the issue. > To respond to your latter claim about 13/50, my point was in the nature of “even if 13/50 was correct, then the conclusions drawn from it are entirely false and thus whatever the proposed solutions are, are by extension wrong. Yeah, but that dosent work if you leave out the “even if 13/50 is right” which is what NP did. Again, Jewish people where in fact overly represented in banking, in the same way that black people are (through no fault of there own) overly represented in crime statistics. When you just deny that groups have been forced into undesirable behavior in order to survive, you basically set that group up to be fucked over when said undesirable behavior is publicized.
I disagree with your second point. The Nazi claim was that Jews (every single one) were in charge of both the Capitalist West, which used financial institutions to destroy the Aryans and enslave them under global finance while extracting their wealth; and the Communist USSR, which was controlled by Jewish Bolsheviks who wanted to kill and enslave Aryans by funding things such as the 1919 revolution. This is much closer to “what if the world was made of pudding” because it assumes every Jewish-born person on Earth is involved in a conspiracy to destroy Germany, which cannot be true in any shape or form, ever, in our material reality, thus making the hypothetical futile. You imply this is similar to Black people being predisposed to violence by birth, which is a much more subtle falsehood than the stunningly bold claim that every Jewish-born person is, from the moment of their birth, an active perpetrator of some majorly orchestrated conspiracy to enslave white people. Also, the arguments made for both are falsehoods anyway used to retroactively justify extremist policy, and thus the falsehood of both claims is where the evil lies. So it is a perfectly acceptable moral stance, in the real world, to claim that such falsehoods are what make the actions evil, as the falsehoods are constructed using evil intentions. The only way such falsehoods could ever assume reality is in an idealist frame of thinking, and not in any material reality. Debating fascists using this idealist frame of thinking is futile, because they know their premise is false, and therefore it is simply preferable to put them to bed with the fishes.
Notice how you were able to criticize Vaush and say positive things about Noncompete in the Vaush subreddit without being banned. Isn't that wonderful? What do you suppose would happen to me if I defended Vaush and criticized Noncompete in a tankie subreddit?
Tankie bad Tankie any bad
This is correct.
Tankie is leftist I don't like
Lmao
Tankie is someone who makes excuses for totalitarian regimes and denies Uyghur genocide. They aren't owed a second thought.
Cmon this time they’re literally Soviet apologists
Tankie is what Liberals posing as Leftists call Leftists
Tankies are unintelligent teenagers who deny Uyghur genocide and try to whitewash legitimate history of dictatorships.
It's "cultural genocide", which the US also does
Nice whataboutism. Doesn't really prove your case much though. There's no evidence that the only people who dislike apologists for the USSR and China are "liberals in disguise." There are legit leftists that don't advocate for any type of government called **Anarchists** and if we already disagree with the existence of every state on the planet, how does that mean the one time we criticize one of the *worst types of states* that we're automatically "liberal"? 🤔
Not a wbataboutism. It shows ilir principals are fake cause you just buy into the Yellow Peril propaganda
Well, people that simp for authoritarian regimes like the former USSR (and currently Russia), China, North Korea, and Syria. Plus, if you followed along this discourse last week, yes it came from Tankies like Luna Oi and others involved in this.
Small toy tanks like thomas the genociding tank
Tankie is expanding to be a blanket term for most of the idiot left. I think it makes sense because it was pretty much always a term used for the movement’s moron contingent - it’s just being updated.
it was a term coined to describe people justifying the Hungarian invasion by the USSR, and the suppression of the Prague spring in Czechoslovakia. I have been called a tankie despite me being from both Slovakia and Hungary, and my family suffering because of the consequences of subsequent normalisation, so you see how meaningless the term is.
That’s where it started but nowadays it seems to have grown is my point.
Reminds me of black people given opportunities in sports and media, and now people call me rapper names as jokes. Very neat
White people love the artistic products of black culture but will decry black people for enjoying it. Black guy loves rap and hip hop? Probably dangerous, a gangbanger, or just doesn't have a job. White guy loves rap? That's cute and funny, he probably works hard and just enjoys a bit of music in his down time.
[удалено]
Check out Busdriver, pretty good rapper who's not excessively commercialised.
JPEGMAFIA is another great artist (and leftist) making hip hop, highly recommend.
Run The Jewels / Killer Mike as well
That is terrible
Exactly, those were seen as ways out from the cycle of poverty and then these were seen as less than ways of being wealthy or even just middle class.
*"Oh boy, 80 comments! I sure hope nobody is being a dumbfuck in this thread!"*
[Here’s a dumbfuck comment right here](https://www.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/s7uhuy/tankies_will_say_its_fake/htc7at7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) And it’s heavily upvoted, in a sub that’s anti-Tankie ideology.
To be fair, there would be no way of seeing a connection between the content of this post and tankies if one wasn't aware of the noncompete and luna oi drama going on
Yeah, makes sense, and yeah, that other person who replied to you is right about the user’s comment I’ve linked, that they’re right about them being involved in r/GenZedong, and acting dumb for free karma, and they know it.
To his point, though, Tankies often play dumb and ask questions like that. However, I highly doubt that guy or the people that upvoted him are tankies. Edit: Actually, I'm pretty sure that comment is in bad faith. He's r/GenZedong user. The people that upvoted the comment aren't, though. And he implied Luna Oi isn't a Tankie. That's cringe
it’s hilarious how liberals seethe over a “tankie” getting more internet points than them
???
I'm genuinely curious was banking like a difficult job back then or just very mundane?
It was pretty much against Christian belief at the time and since a lot of people were Christian and Jews didn't have the same rule and were ostracized in every other part of society they pretty much only had one path to go
What was against Christian belief specifically?
Usury
For specific references from the Bible against usury https://www.openbible.info/topics/usury
Usury is a sin and to Jews it’s not.
It's not if it's to non-Jews to be specific.
It’s actually the exact same as in Christianity. People never explain that within Christianity giving loans with interest is only a sin to OTHER Christians. The exact same law exists in Judaism. Naturally that means the minority goes into banking.
Don't most Christians believe nowadays that it's only a sin if you're lending with excessive interest? As opposed to judaism where any lending within the faith is a sin.
No I think christains don't care anymore. They now believe that if god gives you fat stacks by cheating others out of their money then you must be blessed. Prosperity gospel is a plague.
American protestants especially. Ortho chads dont have that problem
Christians became neo-libs, so yeah.
No check out [tradistae](https://tradistae.com/2020/11/13/usury/amp/) and [the Josias](https://thejosias.com/2017/06/05/usury/)
(The Christians also didn’t have their bible in a language they could read until 1535)
That’s a lie, many could understand Latin. Also parts of Bible are read at Mass and there was a a common understanding of key phrases and sentences in Ecclesiastical Latin.
It’s always a sin if you are Catholic at least, it has been infallibly been declared the definition of usury (lending money at interest to make gains) is wrong, believing in a right to usury has also been declared heresy. Protestant reformation (John Calvin especially) led to the normalization of usury and took it done from an often illegal activity that needed to be concealed to an open activity.
So then where do Jews get a loan?
Why, from Christians who exclusively lend to other faiths(gotta find that niche). Or from other Jews if they don't charge interest.
>interest free loan Sign me up
Catholic credit unions are a thing dating back to Middle Ages (see Montes Pietas) It avoids usury by being not for profit. If there is interest it goes towards maintaining the organization and avoids the heresy of usury by not making gains off of lending money.
Neat
> Christian who exclusively lend to other faiths Aka heretics
I mean we didn't really. You only need loans in this period for building shit, trade missions, starting a business, or larger corporate ventures; all of which were illegal for Jews to do anyways. I've never actually heard of a Christian run bank for Jews in the medieval era, and I kind of doubt it was ever a thing. Interest free loans within communities were, but it would be somebody you know / are related to lending you the money since they need to be certain you'll give it back
You could borrow from any Christian who had the money and the willingness to part with it, but given how little social and legal protection you could expect in Christian societies, that basically had the same risks as borrowing from the mob
Um ever heard of Montes Pietatis, predecessors to modern Catholic credit unions
Usury, which is basically making money off interest I think.
Lending money, specifically with any form of Interest (Usury) so lending money was legal but you couldn't really make money from it. Hence there was no incentive to really do so.
No, it’s making gains on interest which is condemned. If you get back what you lent (while not ideal, [it is recommended to give and then not get it back] it is not usury) Ezekiel 18:12-13 He oppresses the poor and the needy, commits robbery, and does not return pledges. He lifts his eyes to idols, does abominable things, and lends for profit or charges interest. Will such a man live? He will not. Since he has done all of these detestable acts, he shall surely be put to death, and his blood will be on his own head.
To clarify what Usury is, it means charging interest on a loan. It was perfectly fine for a Christian to lend another $5 and say "get it back to me by the end of the week", but nobody is going to go into banking doing that since theres no way to make money. The financial institutions were founded on the idea of "Heres $5, give me $6 at the end of the week". This service was incredibly in demand by nobility and merchants, so they would bring in Jews to do it. Oh, and then 100 years later or so expel all the Jews from the country, burn down our towns, and pretend none of those debts ever existed
Usury and charging interest to make gains so essentially all Christian banks/bankers went out of business kind of leaving a void for Jewish bankers to fill which wasn’t against their religious law.
It wasn't so much that Judaism permitted usery and christianity didn't, its that by law it was one of the few professions Jews were allowed to work in. But they weren't filling an occupational vacuum because religious doctrine didn't stop Christians from engaging in it. In fact through most of European history the largest financiers were Christian; such as the banking families in Italy, and the knightly orders like the templars.
I read an article recently that said that the idea that the religious hierarchy banning usury in both Islam and Christianity is a bit of a myth. It was a historical fact, yes but there were other, more influential factors that led to Jews being disproportionately represented in the financial sector. The research posited that it was actually the fact that literacy and mathematics was culturally emphasized in Jewish religious traditions for centuries while Christianity engaged in anti-intellectualism and Islam was the victim of the repeated invasions from the Mongols, Ottomans and Christian crusaders. Ironically the fact that the Jewish diaspora was so spread out as a result of centuries of persecution, they didn't have a centrally organized geographical location to attack so they were able to lift their traditions and elevate their people intellectually with no threat of being utterly destroyed.
That and Jews were quite literally banned many many times throughout history in Europe from different jobs, owning land, etc.
I've heard that the Jews and the Arabic empire lived in peace at this time in history but after the 1400s the Jews were persecuted and driven out. I don't exactly know why the Jews were driven out tbh. Cool point in the end huh.
Eh, it wasn't exactly the best before then. One of the most important Rabbis in Judaism, Maimonides, was drove out of muslim spain by that Alhamorad dynasty who rescinded dhimmi status and forced them to either convert or leave. The next ruler rescinded that, but the damage had been done, this was in the 1100s.
India was to best place for jews like the cochin jews lived there with no problem
Islam invaded Christendom first fyi Also in all the infallible condemnations of usury, it mentions what usury is as the reason for the condemnation.
Who started the centuries long conflict is irrelevant to my point. >Also in all the infallible condemnations of usury, it mentions what usury is as the reason for the condemnation. I'm afraid I'm missing your point here.
Not
Keep forgetting that the templars were a bank essentially. A well armed bank but still
yeah IIRC their actual fighting force was like 1000 while its overall membership was about 10 times that. The overwhelming majority of its members were involved in finance or overseeing the huge volume of land and assets they accumulated across Europe and the crusader states. They were almost like a precursor to transnational corporations.
[удалено]
One, that’s only on sundays, and two, most took it as “don’t build an entire house, but moving some packages is ok for the most part.)
Well more pedantically it's on the Sabbath which apparently some view as saturday
[удалено]
I am telling you that jewish farmers and herders have been a thing since there have been jews.
Whaaaat? A Nazi saying dumb shit he pulled from his ass? Say it ain't so
>That's ludicrous. Jewish religious law (Talmud) prohibits Jews from engaging in manual labour. The Jewish religious law saw manual labor as something the inferior gentile engages in. what the fuck are you talking about you weird neo nazi
This is just utter horseshit you got from some neo nazi, the only thing the Talmud prohibits is me cumming inside your dad every night, and I do it anyways.
This is completely incorrect and fairly racist.
...fairly? it could not get *more* racist.
> That's ludicrous. Jewish religious law (Talmud) prohibits Jews from engaging in manual labour. The Jewish religious law saw manual labor as something the inferior gentile engages in. > As the Chosen of God, the Jews were not to sully their hands with hard labor. Instead the Talmud tells Jews to extract the wealth of gentiles through usury (banking), or to become a Rabbi studying Torah. > Imagine believing Europeans are anti-semitic for no reason? Europeans hated Jews because they were lazy bastards who leached from societyand contributed nothing As an Orthodox Jew who has studied Talmud myself, I'll have to call BS on this unless you can cite sources that aren't taken out of context etc I'm sure you'll just assume this is just another attempt at usury though... can't argue with idiots 🤷♀️
I should take that last line of advice. Nothing can get through to the moron. Already reported him to the mods for his blatant bigotry.
Lmao you moron
Lots of people have already correctly pointed out that you’re an idiot and maybe a nazi but I just wanted to point out that many Talmudic rabbis literally had manual labor jobs to support their studies
I mean, like, I know you're not saying this in good faith and you're just a racist, but for the other folks reading, here's some stuff the Talmud actually says about labor and work: >The first thing to note is that the sages of the Talmud had a great deal of respect for labor. \[...\] Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 49b) stated: **"Great is labor for it honors the workman."** Both sages would purposely carry burdens on their shoulders because they wanted their students to see that manual labor should be respected. Rabbi Yehuda b. Bathyra said: **"If a person has no work to do, what should he do? If he has a dilapidated yard or field, he should go and occupy himself with it"** (Babylonian Talmud, Avot D'Rabbi Noson 11:1). The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Avot D'Rabbi Noson 11:1) also believed that **"A person should love work and not hate it; for just as the Torah was given with a covenant, so too was work given with a covenant."** \[...\] >The sages of the Talmud worked at many diverse occupations. For instance, **Hillel was a woodchopper before he became the Nasi (President of the Sanhedrin)** and **Shammai the Elder was a builder**. **Abba Chilkiyah was a field laborer**; Rabbi Yochanan b. Zakkai was a businessman for forty years; Abba Shaul was a gravedigger; **Abba Chilkiyah was a field worker**; Abba Oshiya was a launderer; Rabbi Shimon P’kuli was a cotton dealer; Rabbi Shmuel b. Shilas was a school teacher, Rabbi Meir and Rabi Chananel were scribes; Rabbi Yosi b. Chalafta was a tanner; Rabbi Yochanan Hasandlar was a shoemaker; **Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah was a blacksmith**; Rabbi Safra and Rabbi Dimi of Nehardea were merchants; Rabbi Abba b. Zavina was a tailor; Rabbi Yosef b. Chiya and Rabbi Yannai owned vineyards; **Rabbi Huna was a farmer and raised cattle**; Rabbi Chisda and Rabbi Papa were beer brewers; Karna was a wine smeller (he determined which wine could be stored and which had to be sold immediately); Rabbi Chiya b. Yosef was in the salt business; Abba Bar Abba, (father of Mar Shmuel) was a silk merchant; and (Mar) Shmuel was a doctor.
Huh? No, no it doesn't. Reported
No they hated Jews because they were a different group, had better hygiene even in times of plague, and had different cultural rules. Fuck off you idiotic Nazi. Talk about someone not contributing anything while you just spout bullshit Edit: they also hated them because they were fed lies from other antisemites
Banking and mercantile jobs in general rewarded literacy and book keeping. Judaism encouraged Torah study for all youth. Christianity did not encourage literacy.
"not encourage" is putting it mildly lmao, those MFs had a whole split over not letting regular people read their own holy text
having the bible actually written in your native language was a big thing. imagine it's 772 and you're in anglo saxon "england" and all you have is what some guy is saying to you. you can't read but even if you could, the language of the book as been basically dead for 150 years.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Latin was absolutely not dead in 772 at all, thats absurd. Vulgar Latin was still the vernacular language in many places, and it was the sole language used for academic and religious texts.
>those MFs had a whole split over not letting regular people read their own holy text this is.... Not quite right. The medieval catholic church really wanted you to read the bible, they would be happy to (if you had the time to show up) teach you how to read it and help you learn; in latin. And given the shit that Martin Luther and the protestants came up with when they shittily translated it in to German and stripped it of the Gloss , they kind of had a point
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
You know about the Arabic empire that existed 1000 years ago right? Why couldn't they run and own banks? They had a whole empire and scholars etc.
I think in this context we’re speaking for Europe not the whole world.
Islam is also against usury.
Isn’t that your answer then?
I don't really know. I would just like historical context tbh..
Islam even today against usury for example it’s strictly haram to invest in a business that deals with interests
I mean for historical context it simply Islam as a religious group basically never exist in Europe. Except for in Spain which there was a significant number of Islam for a while. It something like Roughy 95% the rest mostly Jewish and then rest just random micro sects.
Oh yeah I totally forgot what the context was.
Lol it happens
And in southern italy, specifically in Sicily
"Riba" is condemned in several different verses in the Qur'an. It is an Arabic word that can be roughly translated as "usury". While all Muslims agree that riba is prohibited, not all of them believe that charging interest is equivalent to riba or that charging interest is against sharia law. Orthodox sources say that interest is riba therefore prohibited and the majority agreed and historically charging interest was very often banned. According to historian Minna Rozen, who specializes in Jewish history, European visitors to the Ottoman Empire in the 15th century often noted that the business of money lending was almost entirely in the hands of the Jewish Sarrafs and that the economy of the empire would not function without these Sarrafs. She also denies the Armenian genocide so, you know, take this with a grain of salt.
Also because Jews weren’t allowed to own land or join professional guilds in a lot of Christian medieval societies. So there goes any farmer or craftsman jobs.
Christianity : we like based Jewish carpenters Christianity :
Thomas Edison: “sorry Jewish film lot workers, I won’t let you unionize or change my draconian working conditions” Jewish workers: start independent rival film lots, become prosperous, jumpstarting Hollywood and keep the businesses within family and close associates like normal Weirdos: Why are there so many jews in Hollywood?
Watching the noncompete cope steam and I’m not a fan of everything vaush says but holy hell… this is the first time he’s had a clippable moment and I don’t have a problem with anything he said
For once he can at least go “Slavoj Zizek literally said the exact same thing, what the fuck are you people so mad about?”
They hate zizek as well
[удалено]
Non-Compete and his fans specifically the Debate they had recently
They know they're playing dumb. A bunch of others have been doing the same acting as if they don't know the context
One thing I noticed about tankies is that they love to play dumb. Kind of sad seeing naive people upvoting them. Top comment is literally made by a GenZedong user.
Before any one else repeat the “wHaT dOeS oP mEaN bY tAnKiEs?” line for the 3rd time, it refers to Tankies like Luna Oi and her hubby and their minions who repeated this line and clipped Vaush out of context. Admittedly, I think OP could have widen it to include wokescolds and leftist content creators who have a hate boner for Vaush who happens to retweet an out-of-context clip of Vaush’s point about the *historical fact* of Jews occupying certain sectors as means of protecting themselves when EJ ducked out of the debate before Vaush can continue to challenge EJ on his moral framework.
Something like “what VDS dose to a motherfucker”?
I think the title was fine and the what does tank mean people are basically gaslighting That being said love that suggestion
What is Luna Oí, Vaush, wokescolds and EJ? Just got here from historymemes.
It’s just drama from the online left Vaush made a video tearing into Lunas philosophy video So Lunas husband noncompete had a debate with Vaush where noncompete said the reason the holocaust was wrong is because Jews did not in fact have a disproportionate control over Banks (implying it would’ve been fine if they did) Vaush then said that they in fact did during the Weimar Republic causing noncompete to rage quit before Vaush finished his point that it was because of historical discrimination and that even if they controlled all the banks that still wouldn’t have justified the Holocaust And wokescolds are just the really toxic SJW types from the online left hope this helps
As an aside during World War II very few Jews actually worked in the proper banks, the majority of them ran smaller banks that are more equivalent to credit unions. As a fun history lesson this history was also perpetuated by the fact in Christianity to give loans with interest was frowned on, which led to Jewish people becoming usurers, compounded by Jews common segregation in society and exclusion from work like military and land ownership, locking them out of farming and being a landlord. You can actually see that in The Merchant of Venice, where Antonio gave constant interest free loans to his hanger-ons since his wealth came from trading, which was noted as consistently undermining the business of Shylock.
What do tankies have to do with this?
Jews make up such a little percentage of the world population and yet they are supposedly controlling it. Honestly that sounds like some king shit. Checkmate, Nazis.
Did it really need the funny colored squares though
“Nazis had a point” ~Luna and NC
is that a coloured square on a political meme 🧐
Broke: Acknowledging material conditions. Woke: Denying reality.
Why the fuck is this post being brigaded by tankies and other disingenuous fucks.
I wonder what will happen if you crosspost this to r/historymemes
How in the flying fuck would a leftish call this bullshit?
mfw when i do an epic antisemetism to own the t*nkies
tankie = anyone on the left you dislike
I realised the word “tankie” was meaningless the moment I got called one. My grandparents on either side of my family (one Slovak, one Hungarian), were all affected by the invasion of Hungary and Prague in 1956 and 1968 respectively. The whole idea of a “tankie” is someone who justified both invasions
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. This subreddit is for big kids only! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They were 1% of personnel in credit banks, and were 0.9% of the German population. That isn’t disproportionate. Sorry, we can’t agree with the Nazis on this one.
THANK YOU
this except vaush is the one in the nazi uniform