Talk:General Jewish Labor Union
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
| Assessment comments. |
 |
General Jewish Labor Union is within the scope of the Russian History WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian History. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Jewish history. An attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardized and up-to-date resource for all articles related to Jewish history.
If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, also consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Jewish history articles. |
|
Project Jewish history To-do:
|
|
Re "destroyed both its base and, according to (most/some), its ideological validity" I don't want to get into an edit war, so let me explain myself. Jayjg, could you also explain why you feel so strongly about "most"? I'm not disputing that the Bund lost most of its support after the war, I'm disputing that most people think that it lots its ideological validity. They're different things, and I Think that the word "most" here is POV. (Incidentially, there were still Bundist haggadot being published in the US after the war, suggesting enough supporters still around to sustain book publishing.) Serious historians debate the cause the rise of Zionism among Holocaust survivors, but to suggest (as I think the current wording of the article does) that "most" people were liberated from concentration camps and said "oops, I guess the Bund didn't help, I guess I'll go to Israel" is historically inaccurate. -- Remes 15:32, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Note the sentence immediately following the one in question "By 1945 few of the surviving eastern European Jews believed any longer in the Bund's particular vision of socialism or in a future for the Jews in Europe, and most of the survivors emigrated to Israel." If they didn't believe in its vision, and emigrated to Israel, then who was actually supporting its ideological validity, aside from some remnants in the US who weren't directly affected by the Holocaust? Jayjg 16:02, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Well, to be honest, I don't think that sentence is so great either, because it rather flattens a good deal of historical experience and historical debate. But encylopedias flatten; so be it. Saying that most survivors no longer supported the Bund is the same as that they denied its "ideological validity." I disagree with lots of things without saying that they have no ideological validity. To me, that phrase means, if it means anything at all, that the ideology in question was wrong and was always wrong. I don't there's any evidence that says that "most" survivors thought that. Further, I think that in this context "according to most" is a code for "according to the author." I think it's a NPOV-seeming way around being POV, and I think that's how it will be read. Can we compromise and say "according to many"? Remes 04:38, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Sure. Jayjg 01:04, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Done. Incidentially, I just got a new book on Soviet anti-Bund persecution (during the Soviet occupation of Poland during the era of the non-aggression pact), so I might make some additions and changes to this article. It probably won't be for a while though, and I'll post in Talk: if I think anything I'm doing might be controversial. Remes 04:17, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Sure. Jayjg 01:04, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Well, to be honest, I don't think that sentence is so great either, because it rather flattens a good deal of historical experience and historical debate. But encylopedias flatten; so be it. Saying that most survivors no longer supported the Bund is the same as that they denied its "ideological validity." I disagree with lots of things without saying that they have no ideological validity. To me, that phrase means, if it means anything at all, that the ideology in question was wrong and was always wrong. I don't there's any evidence that says that "most" survivors thought that. Further, I think that in this context "according to most" is a code for "according to the author." I think it's a NPOV-seeming way around being POV, and I think that's how it will be read. Can we compromise and say "according to many"? Remes 04:38, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Mistransliterated?
The first paragraph currently starts with "The General Jewish Labour Union of Lithuania, Poland and Russia, in Yiddish the Algemeyner Yidisher Arbeter Bund in Lite, Poyln un Rusland". However the actual Yiddish name that's given in parentheses appears to be "Algemeyner Yidisher Arbitersbund ayn Rusland, Lite, und Poyln." Can someone who (unlike me) actually speaks the language or is familiar with the subject fix this or clarify the discrepancy? Zyqqh 11:45, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- You're right about the discrepancy, but I don't know which one is correct. Jayjg (talk) 15:51, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
There was a long discussion about this when I first wrote this article, in which several editors highly competent in Yiddish got involved. The conclusions were (a) that Yiddish is an unstable language with several regional variants and also no fixed transliteration into the Roman alphabet and (b) that there is no one historically "correct" rendering of the name. The current version is the one they seemed to agree was least objectionable. User:Danny, if he's still around, would be able to tell you more. Adam 22:16, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I think the question was more about the order of the countries listed, rather than the transliteration. Are you saying that the order of the country names in the title changed? Jayjg (talk) 03:44, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hello
Hello, I am looking for people, who can tell my a bout the BUnd in Germany and today in the world --Steve2 11:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC)11:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wasn't the Bundist also pro-Nazi German-American organization of the 1930s?
Thats the 2nd definition, verbatim, on the Merriam Webster online dictionary.
Also, a Nazi is called a good little bundist in the movie Stalag 17.
Sefton: "He's a Nazi, Price is. For all I know his name is Preissinger or Preishoffer. Oh, sure, he lived in Cleveland. But when the war broke out, he came back to the Fatherland like a good little Bundist. He spoke our lingo, so they sent him to spy school and fixed him up with phony dog tags."
- I mean the jewish labor bund in germany
-
- The Stalag 17 reference was to a different "Bund": see German-American Bund. The German word "Bund" means "union", and can be used as a shortcut to all kids of unions. Ahasuerus 02:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bund in germany
No I mean the General Jewish Labor Union in Germany, this Bund was also in Germany active under the jews and i want some informations
[edit] unsourced POV
"The massacre of Polish Jewry during the Holocaust destroyed both its base and, in the eyes of many surviving Polish Jews, its ideological validity."
Somehow I get the impression that a number of Wikipedians are keen to diss on everything progressive and anti-Zionist in the larger Jewish community - even if it's from sixty years ago!
[edit] Bundists in the Spanish Civil War
I think that is very important to talk about the bundism in the spanish civil war, because they some the jew communist an socialists, were in Spain defending the Second Republic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.152.60.87 (talk) 09:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
