Bertrand Russell on Israeli Policy

"We are frequently told that we must sympathize with Israel because of the suffering of the Jews in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. ... What Israel is doing today cannot be condoned, and to invoke the horrors of the past to justify those of the present is gross hypocrisy."

Now if you're a mathematics/logic junkie you'll certainly believe Bertrand Russell's character as one of the foremost public intellectuals of the early and mid 20th Century. What he says here would be defined as anti-semitic because he holds that the history of the holocaust should never be exploited to perform gruesome and hypocritical ends.

The second half of your post looks like it was written by a retard.

>>2

BAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWW Zionist.

It's perfectly rational to oppose Israel and Jews.

>>4

Which is why Bertrand Russell's respectable character as a logician and philosopher makes his words all the more potent.

>>5
Agreed, and if you do some reasearch almost all the greatest non-Jewish intellectuals have been "anti-Semitic" to some extent. Copypasta from a site:

The Jewish philosopher Wittgenstien said that "Even the greatest of Jewish thinkers is no more than talented". [30] He said that Jews lack creative power, as did the Jewish philosopher Otto Weininger. [31] Weininger recognized that his work would be seen as anti-Semitic [32] but said that the greatest of genius 'have nearly always been anti-semites". [33] He listed Tacitus, Voltaire, Pascal, Herder, Goethe, Kant, Jean Paul, Schopenhauer, Grillparzer, and Wagner. A longer list would name: St Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, Francis Bacon, Ludwig von Beethoven, Hillaire Belloc, Johannes Brahms, Giordano Bruno, Jakob Burckhardt, Sir Richard Francis Burton, Robert Burton, Samuel Butler, Lord Byron, Thomas Carlyle, Geoffrey Chaucer, Anton Chekov, St. John Chrysostom, St. Justin Martyr, Cicero, William Cobbett, Samuel T. Coleridge, Constantine, Diderot, Diogenes, Laertius, John Donne, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, John Dryden, Eugen Duhring, George Eliot, T.S. Eliot, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Euphrates, Ferdinand I, Ludwig Feuerbach, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Charles Fourier, Charles de Gaulle, Edward Gibbon, Nickolai Gogol, Graham Greene, Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, Lord Harrington, Georg W. Hegel, Victor Hugo, David Hume, Thomas Huxley, Thomas Jefferson, D.H. Lawrence, Franz Liszt, Martin Luther, Christopher Marlowe, Moliére, Montesquieu, Nickolai I (Tsar of Russia), Origenes, Peter the Great, Petronius, Pliny the Elder, Plutarch, Alexander Pope, Posidonius, Pierre Proudhon, Johann von Schiller, Seneca, William Shakespeare, George Bernard Shaw, Percy B. Shelley, Frederick Soddy, Aleksandr Solzhentisyn, Georges Sorel, Jonathan Swift, Tertullian, Alphonse Toussanel, Tritheim of Wurzburg, Mark Twain and H.G. Wells. All would be prosecuted today under Canadian, French, German and Australian race hate legislation.

http://www.alor.org/Race,%20Culture%20and%20Nation/Jewish%20Intellectual%20Supremacism%20-%20%20A%20Refutation.htm

>>6

Strange that Sartre is listed as anti-semitic, he converted to Judaism while he was dying... or so they say.

Maybe he thought that he could use their position of authority and victimhood to popularize his works?

No, he is not anti-Semitic, he is anti-nutjob Zionists who think it is okay to exploit the Holocaust to colonize land that is not theirs. Russell never once said he hated Jews, just what the Zionists were doing.

>>4
i can understand opposing israel but why all jews?

>>9
But he is not hating all Jews, just the ones who want to exploit suffering for their own gain, which is very wrong.

>>10
right but >>4 said and i quote "It's perfectly rational to oppose Israel and Jews." so i have to asume that >>4 is talking about all jews...now i do not agree with the exploitation of others suffering for personal gain i dont think its right, but its also not right of >>4 to assume all jews are like that.

>>11
Just like it's perfectly rational to oppose paedophiles, it's perfectly rational to oppose Jews. What's wrong with his statement?

>>12
Depends what you mean by "oppose jews".

It isn't rational to oppose all Jews all the time on every issue as Jews are not wrong about everything.
It is rational to oppose certain Jews on certain issues if there is a rational reason to.

>>13
Maybe he meant it as a religion/general-morality rather than a racial group? I've seen how people said they oppose Christians aswell.

Also, if he indeed sees them as not being morally diverse -- and it's true, most Jews are highly ethno-centric -- maybe he opposes just that morality. So how can opposing his sole perception of Jews be wrong? It's still opposing something.