Talk:The Thirteenth Tribe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Ironically... 2 middle-eastern genetic testing 3 The Thirteenth Tribe 4 Content moved from article page 5 Redirect to A Tribe Called Quest

[edit] Ironically...

"Ironically, Koestler's thesis that Ashkenazi Jews are not Semitic has become an important claim of many anti-Semitic groups."

This does not count as very scientific or factual sentence. If we paraphrase it somewhat then it amounts to demagoguery saying that if some jews are not semites, the the antisemites have won :P --Magabund 14:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• Hm. Maybe we're parsing the sentence differently. It is a fact that many (or at least some) anti-Semitic groups (as well as individuals) have seized upon Koestler's thesis to try to use to their advantage. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

May I suggest using the term "anti-Jewish" instead of anti-Semitic here? --MacRusgail 21:01, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Why? (I actually prefer "anti-Jewish" or, more precisely in the case of the groups being referred to here, "Jew-hating", in general; but why in this particular case?) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 21:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

As Magabund says, there is a contradiction in the sentence. If the hate groups are anti-Ashkenazi, and are actually trying to deny their ?Semiticity, then they still hate the Jewish Ashkenazi, but not for being Semitic, as they don't believe that they actually are! Personally I think the Arabs are ironically more Semitic in ancestry and culture, having retained the language, having Judaean ancestry, and probably mixed less with European peoples. Koestler was not really anti-Jewish, I don't think, in this book... in fact, some say he was actually trying to undermine anti-Semitism. --MacRusgail 21:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, there's still no contradiction. "Anti-semitism", "antisemitism", however you want to spell it, isn't about hatred of Semites -- it's about hatred of Jews, regardless of origin; and the groups that use the Khazar theme don't like Jews who are Ashkenazi, even if they aren't of middle eastern descent, any more than they like Jews who are of middle eastern descent. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

There might also be anti-ashkenazi jews who use this book.

I think the proper term should be "anti-Jewish". You do find phrases like "sons of Shem" in older anti-Jewish tracts though. The term anti-semitic is very misused. --MacRusgail 19:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

MacRusgail got an idea what I was talking about. I would like to see the list of "many" or "some" antisemitic groups who use this thesis. Could Palestinians be described as antisemitic group? Here it seems it has been connected, because consecutive sentences attribute its usage to antisemites and then Palestinians. --Magabund 04:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] middle-eastern genetic testing

The article says: "while there has been mixing with various European populations by Ashkenazi Jews over the centuries, there remains a clearly identifiable Middle Eastern genetic element in virtually all Ashkenazim."

Isn't Turkey part of the middle east and wouldn't Khazars also be middle eastern? This part needs clarification.

Turkey is BOTH Europe and the Middle East. In fact, it's the original "Asia", although most Americans don't seem aware of that. --MacRusgail 19:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. The 2. research paper uses even wider term "near east". Of course one genetic study does not "disprove" anything, it "contradicts". If some next study finds that Ashkenazim have some "Khazar genes" would it "prove" Koestler's thesis? No, it would only "support" it.. --Magabund 22:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Thirteenth Tribe

It's a quarter of a century since I read the book, but I thought the point Koestler was making was that it was absurd and ironic to persecute people as a race when they weren't one! I am a socialist who has always thought there was only one race - the human race - and found this a congenial viewpoint. It may also be a peculiarly British viewpoint to note that we seem to be able to think up any number of ways of separating ourselves out into groups and that race is just one of the more tedious and persistent variations. 80.168.173.211 23:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

If there is only one "race" there is ergo, no race. Humans are a species, not a race. Race is a subdivision of a single species. I think it's a particularly "British" viewpoint to think that the Brits are a nation, and use imperialism to justify that viewpoint within the UK, but there you go. --MacRusgail 21:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you brought rather more baggage to that than you read in it. As I distantly recall, Koestler thought "nation" was quite a good word for Jews collectively. In my view "nations" are just a chosen identity. Sweet dreams.

I do not think that the Jews are a race or a nation, but "religion" doesn't quite cover their position either. You chose to be a "Brit" eh? I think you're rather naive to believe that. You are probably more conditioned than you'd like to admit, like everyone else, especially in how you buy into "Britishness" which is essentially an identity which comes out of an empire. Oh, but you're not British are you? You're a citizen of the world. Guess what? So am I. I'm a citizen of the world and NOT British. :) Good night... --MacRusgail 19:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

No wonder the Celts got their arses kicked by the Romans. Speaking of Celts, where they a nation or a religion? Ah, neither, they were a culture ... like the Jews are today. The Romans were even the same enemy. So what's all the fuss? Jcchat66 23:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

A stupid simplistic view of history. The usual definition of Celts these days, by the way, is neither by religion nor nation, but ties to certain languages. Oh, and by the way, if you actually read history, you would know that the Gauls actually invaded the city of Rome at one point - not to mention that large areas of "Celtic" territory which were never conquered by them, e.g. Ireland. --MacRusgail 09:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Content moved from article page

The following non-article text was at the top of the article page:

The article as it stands is strongly biased. Following are suggestions for a re-write... and a bit of deconstruction. Nowhere is there a discussion of the book's general contents and their merit as history. The author has made the Wikipedia definition into a polemic, rather than a discussion or definition.

in para 2:

(THIS IS AN OPINION. Branding a group "anti-Semitic" because it does not conform to Zionist pedagogy is intellectually indefensible. The term "Anti-semitic" has become the strongest propaganda tool of Zionist idealogues. It's meaning has been prostituted to such a degree it is no longer meaningful. This is not an objective statement).

Moves by --AlisonW 20:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect to A Tribe Called Quest

Just kidding. ;)