[noemon]

@Wels I have had some British posters on here tell me that racism is not really the thing in the UK. And there is not really any kind of institutionalized racism. Is that true? I have no idea since I never lived in the UK.

It could be the British are more class conscious than about racial superiority. But for me? The two can't really be divorced from each other.

What is your opinion on the matter?

Or anyone else who would like to explain it to me from the British citizen perspective?

The English are extremely racist, the better off English could be more racist to chavs than to other richer non-English whites or browns but even more racist to poorer brown ones than white ones.

Class comes in at a certain point, giving richer brown people some brownie points but it also works the other way for poorer brown people, giving them more racism for being brown and poor. Double whammy.

All in all the English are possibly one of the most racist people out there but also some of the most fake and hypocritical, so they have learned to hide it well until they don't.

They are also extremely white people, so unlike Meds who contain various colours and hues(from pure white to dark brown) within their own groups, the English are far more homogeneously white.

[pugsville]

The most obvious way to understand Jewish migration away from and into Germany in the 1930's is to see the Jewish population figures and the emigres abroad. This way you can observe those coming in as well. Around 30-40k German Jews fled every year from 1933 onwards with the number reaching 125k seeking visas in the US alone after Kristallnacht in 1938 and over 300k in total seeking to leave Despite these emigres, over 400k remained in 1938 and over 300k remained in 1939(though this now includes Austria and the Sudeten which the Nazis absorbed with referendums and the blessings of the international community) and that despite the fact that nazi-germany was openly and officially accommodating Jewish emigration abroad including in Palestine. Meanwhile, Poland had over 3 million Jewish people that it was sending away in droves years before Hitler started doing the same, while European Russia had 2.5 million and Romania another 3/4 of a million that were being persecuted before the nazis. Several of them finding their way into nazi and near-enough-nazi Germany since 1924.

Antisemitism in Europe



Antisemitism in Germany was not an exception but closer to the rule in western nations at the time(with the notable exception of Italy where it was always low during 1899-1939). For Jews fleeing Poland, Russia, Hungary and Romania, nazi Germany between 1930-1935 might have even seemed a "better place" even.



In 1933, there were 500k Jews in Germany as stated by several sources already posted. In 1939, 1 year after the Kristallnacht there were still 500k Jewish people of the Mosaic faith according to the Nazis and 320k according to non-Nazis, despite all those outflows and the situation having gone to extremes by then.

Even as late as 1943, the international community led by the US & Britain had failed to reach an agreement on Jewish refugees from Germany(at this point almost all of Europe was controlled by Germany) and very limited quotas still remained in place.

More importantly, Hitler was in opposition since 1930 and together with the other 2 fascist parties(DNVP & DVP), the nazi party effectively dominated German politics since 1930.

While the fascist DNVP had been in opposition since 1924 and the DVP was commanding over 10% since 1924 also. Far-right fascist & antisemitic rhetoric had not prevented Jewish refugees from the Soviet domain to enter Germany in droves.



Soviet Jews getting permanent residency status in nazi Germany is even more detrimental to the British case of today.

(1) Number of Jews in Germany 1933-1939

Nazi figures of the numbers of Jews in Germany pre war were heavily exaggeration not suported by atcual statitsics unlike other figires.

"Despite the hostile intent of the Jewish census, the data is, nevertheless, of great value and reveals the patent falsehood of many of the Nazi contentions. Thus the total number of "non-Ayran" Jews cited by Nazi writers was always exaggerated. Dr. Conti, head of the Nazi physicians organization, presented the figures of 300,000 "non-Mosaic" Jews, 750,000 descendants of mixed marriages
(so-called Mischlinge) and 500,000 Jews of the Mosaic faith. The total number of "non-Ayran" Jews, according to Conti, then was 1,550,000.1 The actual figure resulting from the census of 1939 was a total of 318,000."

page 161 - The Jewish Population of Germany 1939-1945 -Bruno Blau - Jewish Social Studies , Apr., 1950, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Apr., 1950), pp. 161-172

The fundamental math of the Jewish population in Germany 1933-1939.

The Jewish population in Germany in 1933 = New Jewish populations acquired (eg Austria) + Known Jewish refuguee migration + Known Jewish population in 1939,

There was no massive Jewish refugee arrival. there is simply not enough Jews in Germany in 1939, you add the acquired populations and known outflows and it it equals the population in 1933.

You have produced zero evidence to support your claims of large influx of Jewish refugees into Nazi Germany.


(2) Anti Semitiism in European nations compared.

Your chart is extremely misleading. It;s percentage of anti Semitic acts that were violent it;s not a comparison of actual numbers. A Earlier table show that Germany was much more antisemitic than Britain France or Italy , though Romania was even worse.

"Figure 1 compares the average number of anti-Semitic acts per million people for the 41-year period across the five countries. According to Figure 1, Great Britain, France, and Italy had rather few anti-Semitic acts: recording less than 0.05 acts per million people. Yet the number of anti-Semitic acts in Germany was more than five times that of Great Britain, France, and Italy, and the number of anti-Semitic acts in Romania was three times that of Germany"

And these figures are from 1899-1939 SO the comparison is Germany in General not just Germany under the Nazis.

[noemon]

Look at this @Tainari88 , I just saw this comment on the DT:

Paul Thompson
1 DAY AGO
Reply to Nick Matheson - view message
Yeah, but you also stated that 1930s Germany accepted more Jewish refugees than Britain did of all stripes in the 2020s.
Germany accepted 20 thousand a year for five years according to the link you provided. Germany is a large country and required large numbers of skilled, law abiding workers.
It's absolutely disgusting to compare these hardworking honest families to the mostly military aged young men entering the UK illegally
Half a million economic migrants have entered the UK in the last year alone. A very large majority claim to be refugees, and a large proportion engage in criminal activity.
Drugs, sexual harassment of schoolgirls, knife and other violent crimes also increased.
We house these people in four star hotels having made most of the staff redundant.
Do you honestly think that there is any comparison between the two groups? Will the illegal immigrants who came to the UK in the last five years with their hands out, be boxed up and sent to a KL like the hard working and honest Jews in the 30s and 40s? No you don't.
You can't compare the two situations, populations or outcomes at all.

NM

Nick Matheson
2 MIN AGO
Reply to Paul Thompson
Message Actions
You can indeed accept the fact that Nazi Germany accepted more Jewish refugees and asylum seekers than modern 2020's Britain accepted of all stripes which you have accepted.
So no need to cry wolf and crocodile tears when modern Britain is actually worse than nazi Germany between 1930-1935 when someone calls it out as such, like Holocaust survivors for example.
Claiming that Jews are superior humans to other refugees is for another discussion, it is quite racist and factually irrelevant. Besides, Jews were supposed to be hated in Germany by nazis at the time more than modern English people hate refugees. But evidently, that is not true either.
Half a million majority illegals you claim? LOL, about 40k actually and only after Patel's & Cruella's policy to shut down legal routes for asylum seekers, thereby raising the illegal crossings from a couple of thousand to 40k within 3 years. EDITED

In an attempt to justify his hate towards brown people, he is openly saying that the nazis saw the Jews as better specimen than he a modern English person sees brown people crossing the channel in the 2020's Britain!!

Nazi figures of the numbers of Jews in Germany pre war were heavily exaggeration not suported by atcual statitsics unlike other figires.
(so-called Mischlinge) and 500,000 Jews of the Mosaic faith. The total number of "non-Ayran" Jews, according to Conti, then was 1,550,000.1 The actual figure resulting from the census of 1939 was a total of 318,000."

I did not use the 1.5 million Nazi figure. I used the 500k and 320k one.

The Jewish population in Germany in 1933 = New Jewish populations acquired (eg Austria) + Known Jewish refuguee migration + Known Jewish population in 1939,

Austria was acquired in 1938/9, not 1933 and had a very small Jewish community according to your previous sources.

There was no massive Jewish refugee arrival. there is simply not enough Jews in Germany in 1939, you add the acquired populations and known outflows and it it equals the population in 1933.

You have produced zero evidence to support your claims of large influx of Jewish refugees into Nazi Germany.

I'm no longer interested to convince you of something because it is evident I am talking to a wall. Massive outflows of German Jews from nazi Germany between 1933-1939, in the orders of tens of thousands per year, yet the Jewish population from 1930-1938 remained largely the same. Either these outflows are totally ghost or were replaced by inflows from those fleeing Poland and Russia where antisemitism was probably even worse and possibly definitely so before 1935(Nuremberg laws) and 1938(Kristallnacht).

Your chart is extremely misleading.

This academic paper by a Jewish academic about anti-Semitism in Europe at the time puts several things into perspective and utterly demolishes the myth that nazi Germany was exceptional, it was the norm actually as most other Europeans countries were the same or even worse.

[Tainari88]

The English are extremely racist, the better off English could be more racist to chavs than to other richer non-English whites or browns but even more racist to poorer brown ones than white ones.

Class comes in at a certain point, giving richer brown people some brownie points but it also works the other way for poorer brown people, giving them more racism for being brown and poor. Double whammy.

All in all the English are possibly one of the most racist people out there but also some of the most fake and hypocritical, so they have learned to hide it well until they don't.

They are also extremely white people, so unlike Meds who contain various colours and hues(from pure white to dark brown) within their own groups, the English are far more homogeneously white.

Wow, that sounds really bad.

Fake and racist but hide it well. Hypocritical.

Hmm. You know @Potemkin is Scottish but he did live some years in Manchester. He does not speak English with a Scottish brogue is it?

Do you speak English like a British native Noemon or an English native? Or do you speak it like a Greek man with a slightly Greek accent on your English?

People are kind of surprised by my accent Noemon if they hear me on the phone. Because they expect me to have a Spanish accent on my English. I do not. I have a flat accent and it is American and a little bit Californian since that is where I grew up in my youth in San Diego, California. But the Spanish speakers then are surprised I speak Spanish really well and typically very fast. Puerto Rican Spanish is super fast. I speak both as a native speaks it. I just do not know typically British phrases and slang. I never knew many British people at all.

I told Potemkin, that we never really talked about Scotland growing up. I did read English literature and Scottish literature too. But of Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland (the United Kingdom), my favorite literature is Irish by a long long margin. I love that culture a lot. Plus, the Irish are everywhere in South America, the Caribbean islands and Mexico too. It is also a very tragic and difficult history with the English the Irish have.

Potemkin has tried to tell me about Scottish culture and history. He is kind of laconic with me though.

I already loved Greek culture always. All my personal experiences with Greeks have been really wonderful.

I am sorry you had a lot of bad experiences with Latin Americans in England.

Puerto Ricans and Cubans and Dominicans are extremely lively people. And they like telling jokes and dancing and talking a lot.

This song reminds me of Greece but it is sung by a man from Barcelona. The Mediterranean has shaped the character of the people from that part of the world.

Let me see if I can find a translation of the lyrics for that old Joan Manuel Serrat song that I used to sing around the house eh?

https://lyricstranslate.com/es/mediterr ... ranslation

[noemon]

Do you speak English like a British native Noemon or an English native? Or do you speak it like a Greek man with a slightly Greek accent on your English?

I speak Cambridge English like a native but it really depends on the crowd. I revert to Greek English among Balkan and Eastern European people and a mixed Latino-Greek version among Spanish & Portuguese. I sometimes use my Greek accent among certain English on purpose so as to not get confused as a native.

People are kind of surprised by my accent Noemon if they hear me on the phone. Because they expect me to have a Spanish accent on my English. I do not. I have a flat accent and it is American and a little bit Californian since that is where I grew up in my youth in San Diego, California. But the Spanish speakers then are surprised I speak Spanish really well and typically very fast. Puerto Rican Spanish is super fast. I speak both as a native speaks it. I just do not know typically British phrases and slang. I never knew many British people at all.

I'm quite similar in that regard.

I told Potemkin, that we never really talked about Scotland growing up. I did read English literature and Scottish literature too. But of Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland (the United Kingdom), my favorite literature is Irish by a long long margin. I love that culture a lot. Plus, the Irish are everywhere in South America, the Caribbean islands and Mexico too. It is also a very tragic and difficult history with the English the Irish have.

Potemkin has tried to tell me about Scottish culture and history. He is kind of laconic with me though.

The Irish are cool people, Scottish people are laconic & stingy but a good deal of fun when you give them some drink. The English are narcissists & entitled, they believe they can dish it out and you can not even reply to them without offending them.

Cambridge is quite alright because of all the international presence that has rubbed off to the locals who are in the minority and Cambridge attracts very smart people that outdo the locals in pretty much every aspect. This has instilled a quiet humility among the natives because they are usually unsure to whom they are actually talking to. Could that person be a celebrity, a Nobel prize winner, a Cambridge professor who will humorously ridicule me if I say something silly? They are never quite sure. But once you go to Bury St Edmunds, Norwich, Ipswich and Essex, East-Anglo-Central the vast majority are prats regardless of money.

I already loved Greek culture always. All my personal experiences with Greeks have been really wonderful.

Greeks tend to be cool & fun people with loads of humour and openness, especially among foreigners. Greeks consider their hospitality among foreigners as sacred duty and the highest form of morality. 2 things make them specifically stand out from others, the extremities they are willing to go to for strangers in their houses and outside offering their own beds(not guest rooms) as a matter of "Greek honour", feeling like they have to prove their largesse well above what is reasonable and their reverence for the dead. It is the worst thing one can do when near a Greek person, badmouth a dead person, even mass murderers. They just won't stand for it. They will start getting itchy about it no matter who that person may be. They also tend to be jealous, envious and very(and I really mean very) petty among each other. They magically shut down their pettiness among foreigners because they are consciously aware of it and go full opposite as if to specifically convince them how unpetty & large they are. That makes them specially likable & cool with foreigners. I tend to avoid them in England, except for very few cases.

I am sorry you had a lot of bad experiences with Latin Americans in England.

I tend to have a lot of bad experiences with people and tend to attract the wrong kind. What can I say.

I generally enjoy meeting Americans in England, they are so fresh, lively & humble.

Puerto Ricans and Cubans and Dominicans are extremely lively people. And they like telling jokes and dancing and talking a lot.

I only know you and Rancid effectively, so have not had the chance to meet any of them here properly.

[Unthinking Majority]

@Unthinking Majority

1. Yes, I also read the statscan page, and I still say that there is no evidence of correlation, but I will simply assume that you and I have different evidentiary standards and leave it at that.

2. Refugees are often not permanent residents either.

3. Having said that, there are hordes of Ukrainian refugees in Edmonton right now. How long should we let them stay before we means-test them and kick the poor ones out?

1. Ok.

2. I've worked with refugees in Canada, a lot of them. My understanding is that any refugee whose refugee claim is processed and approved is granted permanent resident status. Of course, they can leave and go back to their home country if they choose once becoming a PR. They can't be permanent residents until their claim is investigated and approved obviously, and until then they're given a work permit and/or study permit and a health card and are a temporary resident, similar to someone coming to Canada on a temporary work or study visa.

In Canada a refugee claimant also can't leave the country until their claim is approved unless they want to cancel their claim or apply for a temporary travel document since the CBSA confiscates their passport upon making a claim and returns it to them when their claim is approved or denied. This is to prevent refugee claim "shopping" within different safe countries. They obviously also aren't allowed to go back to their home country until their claim is processed.

3. I don't know. In the short-term, the most important thing is that they're safe. Long-term settlement is different than short-term protection. I'd assume they'd rather be resettled in another country even if it might be not as rich as Canada (ie in some other post-Soviet country) than be sent back to their original country. People who desperately need something should be satisfied with what they get even if it is not exactly what they wanted, as long as its reasonable, fair, and safe for them.

[Potemkin]

Wow, that sounds really bad.

Fake and racist but hide it well. Hypocritical.

@noemon is really talking about the middle-class and upper-class English here. They tend to hide their real feelings and thoughts beneath a veneer of politeness. And they often say the opposite of what they actually mean, while expecting their interlocutor to understand that they mean the opposite of what they are saying. For example, when you’re telling them all about your last skiing holiday and they respond with, “Oh really, how interesting!” They don’t mean that they actually find you or your story interesting, they actually mean, “You’re boring the tits off me. Fuck off and find somebody else to bore to death!” And they expect you to get the message. That’s your cue to wrap it up and move away. Lol.

Hmm. You know @Potemkin is Scottish but he did live some years in Manchester. He does not speak English with a Scottish brogue is it?

Do you speak English like a British native Noemon or an English native? Or do you speak it like a Greek man with a slightly Greek accent on your English?

People are kind of surprised by my accent Noemon if they hear me on the phone. Because they expect me to have a Spanish accent on my English. I do not. I have a flat accent and it is American and a little bit Californian since that is where I grew up in my youth in San Diego, California. But the Spanish speakers then are surprised I speak Spanish really well and typically very fast. Puerto Rican Spanish is super fast. I speak both as a native speaks it. I just do not know typically British phrases and slang. I never knew many British people at all.

A bit of New York comes through every so often in your speech too, querida. I love that.

I told Potemkin, that we never really talked about Scotland growing up. I did read English literature and Scottish literature too. But of Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland (the United Kingdom), my favorite literature is Irish by a long long margin. I love that culture a lot. Plus, the Irish are everywhere in South America, the Caribbean islands and Mexico too. It is also a very tragic and difficult history with the English the Irish have.

Potemkin has tried to tell me about Scottish culture and history. He is kind of laconic with me though.

These two short documentary films tell you everything you need to know about Scottish culture and history querida….

Pretty much sums it up really.

[pugsville]

I'm no longer interested to convince you of something because it is evident I am talking to a wall. Massive outflows of German Jews from nazi Germany between 1933-1939, in the orders of tens of thousands per year, yet the Jewish population from 1930-1938 remained largely the same. Either these outflows are totally ghost or were replaced by inflows from those fleeing Poland and Russia where antisemitism was probably even worse and possibly definitely so before 1935(Nuremberg laws) and 1938(Kristallnacht).
.

You have no produced any evidence what so ever. The numbers did not support your claims. The Jewish population dropped by a primd half, the statistics clearly show that. I have produced references with statistics to support my claims you ave produced nothing which actually support your claims.

"In the fifty years between 1871 and 1925 the Jewish population of Germany increased from 383,000 to 564,000, or 41 percent. On the other hand, in the eight years between 1925 and 1933 it decreased by 11.5 percent. During the first six years of the Nazi regime (1933-1939) there was a further loss of 280,000, or 56 percent, so that at the outbreak of the present war the figure stood at about 200,000."

page 235- Trends of the Jewish Population in Germany, 1910-39: Erich Rosenthal : Jewish Social Studies , Jul., 1944, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1944), pp. 233-274

This academic paper by a Jewish academic about anti-Semitism in Europe at the time puts several things into perspective and utterly demolishes the myth that nazi Germany was exceptional, it was the norm actually as most other Europeans countries were the same or even worse.

No it clearly states Germany was many times worse.

[Tainari88]

I speak Cambridge English like a native but it really depends on the crowd. I revert to Greek English among Balkan and Eastern European people and a mixed Latino-Greek version among Spanish & Portuguese. I sometimes use my Greek accent among certain English on purpose so as to not get confused as a native.



I'm quite similar in that regard.



The Irish are cool people, Scottish people are laconic & stingy but a good deal of fun when you give them some drink. The English are narcissists & entitled, they believe they can dish it out and you can not even reply to them without offending them.

Cambridge is quite alright because of all the international presence that has rubbed off to the locals who are in the minority and Cambridge attracts very smart people that outdo the locals in pretty much every aspect. This has instilled a quiet humility among the natives because they are usually unsure to whom they are actually talking to. Could that person be a celebrity, a Nobel prize winner, a Cambridge professor who will humorously ridicule me if I say something silly? They are never quite sure. But once you go to Bury St Edmunds, Norwich, Ipswich and Essex, East-Anglo-Central the vast majority are prats regardless of money.



Greeks tend to be cool & fun people with loads of humour and openness, especially among foreigners. They also tend to be jealous, envious and very(and I really mean very) petty among each other. They magically shut down their pettiness among foreigners because they are consciously aware of it and go full opposite as if to specifically convince them how unpetty & large they are. That makes them specially likable & cool with foreigners. I tend to avoid them in England, except for very few cases.



I tend to have a lot of bad experiences with people and tend to attract the wrong kind. What can I say.

I generally enjoy meeting Americans in England, they are so fresh, lively & humble.



I only know you and Rancid effectively, so have not had the chance to meet any of them here properly.

You sound like a very language oriented person then. If you like to change things up according to the crowd. I make people laugh a lot because I am a chameleon. My father was too. He could imitate all kinds of accents, registers and was a great impressionist. He wrote plays and short stories and dialogue all the time. So he got into his characters and he was always playing with language. I do that as well. I think if I listened to the Cambridge crowd there for a bit I could perfect that accent and sound very much like them in a short amount of time. Adaptation is a lot of fun.

Ipswich? England has interesting sounding towns. It sounds like a made up word from some J.K. Rowling novel. Though the USA has extremely strange sounding towns and cities too. Here? The towns in Mayan are tongue twisters Noemon. They defy pronounciation and I find it a real challenge to pronounce them. Like the town where the meteor hit 65 million years ago is spelled, Chicxulub...it should be pronounced Chick-soo--loob. I never remember. Another site near Mérida is Dzibilchaltún. Don't even ask me how it is pronounced. I need to work on my Mayan. It is a challenging language to learn.

One woman called me p'ijil ants. It means wise woman in Mayan. Ants is woman in Mayan. Not in English. But in Mayan it means woman. And you pronounce that first word as p--ee--hill aantzz. Wise woman.

How do I feel about my own ethnic group? Puerto Ricans are loud, lively, and informal. They are also very warm and friendly and open like the sky above you. They will be just easy to get to know. I love the way we are as a nation. Friendly, and artistic and musical and just emotionally beautiful. But I also love many other cultures.

As a culture Puerto Ricans are family oriented people and tend to be very warm in the extreme. Easy to get to know, and share a lot. Thoughts, and everything else. Something extremely human about them. But the truth is one kind of loves individuals of all different backgrounds. The nationality or ethnicity really does not have much weight. You get to know people as individuals. But culture does play a role. Just as sex, and tiny little details like preferences and things that are about just that person and no one else. I think you know what I am getting at.

I wish I knew more about the UK and many other nations. I am lucky I get to read so many opinions on this platform.

If ever you want to discuss music someday with me I will be very happy to do so. I listen to everything in the world. Very eclectic taste. I always have been that way.

Interestingly you have a fair amount of Latin people in this place. Spaniard, Dominican, Cuban, Chilean and Puerto Rican (me)....lol. I know most of them.

I love humans. That is why I studied a subject that was all about Anthropos. Humans.

Mucho amor.

[noemon]

You have no produced any evidence what so ever. The numbers did not support your claims. The Jewish population dropped by a primd half, the statistics clearly show that. I have produced references with statistics to support my claims you ave produced nothing which actually support your claims.

You are hallucinating.

300k Jews left or tried to leave after Kristallnacht just in 1938 alone, 40-60k German Jews were leaving every year as 'German nationals' since 1933 and still there were 330k-500k Jews in 1939 out of 500k in 1933. How is that even possible in your brain to calculate without inflows? No available source states the amount of Jewish people in Germany in 1937 or 1936. But sources do state that in 1933 there were 100k Soviet Jewish refugees in nazi Germany that were even granted permanent residency status. Sources also do state explicitly that things had been quite dire for Jews in Soviet Poland, Russia, Romania and Hungary between 1899-1939. The sources also state that Britain, US, France and others refused to accept Jews well into 1943. They turned back ships with 900 people in them and Britain only accepted a few Jewish children in 1939.

The numbers never lie, but people like you do.

No it clearly states Germany was many times worse.

Totally false:

Delegates from 32 countries met in the French resort town of Evian-les-Bains between 6 July and 14 July 1938 to discuss ways to help Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi Third Reich. In the months following Nazi Germany’s annexation of Austria in March 1938, Nazi persecution of Jews in the Third Reich reached horrifying dimensions. Nazi Germany had offered its Jews to the world. Many delegates attending the Evian Conference publicly professed their sympathies for the Jewish refugees. However, most countries, including the USA, Great Britain, and Australia, offered excuses for why they could not accept more refugees. The official delegates from Romania, Hungary, and Poland proposed that their countries also be relieved of their Jews. Only the representatives of the Dominican Republic, and later Costa Rica, agreed to increase their quotas. That the world seemed to turn its back on the German and Austrian Jewish refugees, not surprisingly, provided the Nazi regime’s anti-Semitic campaign with a propaganda bonanza (Morse, 1968:214; Weiss, 1996: 331; Friedlaender, 1997: 248–50; Marrus, 1985: 167–9). The failure of the delegates at the Evian Conference to aid European Jewry was not exceptional as an example of worldwide indifference to the fate of European Jews on the eve of the Holocaust. For in the aftermath of the Evian Conference, indifference to the fate of Europe’s Jews included the following: the unwillingness
of Hungary and Czechoslovakia to give refuge to the expelled Sudetenland Jews; the American failure to pass the Wagner-Rogers Child Refugee Bill that would have admitted to the USA 20,000 Jewish refugee children from Europe and the US refusal to admit the 936 German-Jewish refugees aboard the ill-fated ship, the St. Louis; Great Britain’s decision to close off Palestine to Jewish immigration; and the reneging on pledges made by Argentina and Brazil to Papal authorities to accept baptized Jews into their countries (Friedlaender, 1997: 265–6, 299–300; Mosse, 1985: 231; Marrus, 1985: 285–9).

These examples of insensitivity toward persecuted European Jews on the eve of the Holocaust raise a number of important questions regarding anti-Semitism. It is commonly accepted that the years 1899–1939 are a highpoint in anti-Semitism in western societies (Weinberg, 1986; Bernstein, 1996). What factors account for the wave of extraordinary anti-Semitism after 1899? Was the rise of anti-Semitism between 1899 and the Holocaust steady or uneven? Did popular anti-Semitism vary in content and intensity across societies? If so, why? Did ordinary Germans embrace anti-Semitism in a way that ordinary Americans, British, French, Polish, and Romanian citizens did not, as has been suggested in a number of recent works on German anti-Semitism (Goldhagen, 1996; Weiss, 1996)?1 How does antiSemitism differ from other forms of religious, racial, or ethnic prejudice? With one notable exception (Fein, 1979), scholars have given minimal attention to a systematic and empirically based national comparison of popular anti-Semitism before 1945. The scholarly literature on anti-Semitism typically involves an examination of anti-Semitism within a particular nation

Antisemitism in Germany was not an exception but closer to the rule in western nations at the time(with the notable exception of Italy where it was always low during 1899-1939). For Jews fleeing Poland, Russia, Hungary and Romania, nazi Germany between 1930-1935 might have even seemed a "better place" even.

[pugsville]

You are hallucinating.

My claims are supported your are not.

300k Jews left or tried to leave after Kristallnacht just in 1938 alone and still there were 330k Jews in 1939 out of 500k in 1933.

There were 190,000 Jews added from Austria in 1938.
https://www.claimscon.org/our-work/nego ... community/

So out of the 690,000 in Germany/Austria in 1933 more than half had left.

No available source states the amount of Jewish people in Germany in 1937 or 1936. But sources do state that in 1933 there were 100k Soviet Jewish refugees in nazi Germany that were even granted permanent residency status.

Produce the source. You have never have. These claims are bogus. In 1933 there were about 100,000 non citizen Jews in Germany but there were more than that in 1925. and around 40,0000 of the 100,00 were actually born in Germany,.

see Page 241-242
Trends of the Jewish Population in Germany, 1910-39: Erich Rosenthal ,Jewish Social Studies , Jul., 1944, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1944), pp. 233-274

The numbers never lie, but people like you do.

I have produced supporting references you have not.

Totally false:

Produce the evidence to support your claims. I have shown with evidence that your claims are preposterous, not even remotely reasonable.

Antisemitism in Germany was not an exception but closer to the rule in western nations at the time(with the notable exception of Italy where it was always low during 1899-1939). For Jews fleeing Poland, Russia, Hungary and Romania, nazi Germany between 1930-1935 might have even seemed a "better place" even.

You fundamentally misunderstand this table. It;s the percentage of acts in that country that were violent, so 15% in Britain 9% in Germany, but the number of acts in Germany were 5 time greater (this research use acts per million Jews residing in the country, so in absolute numbers the difference is even greater) , so X in Britain times 0.15 violent acts, but in Germany its 5X times 0.9. German was Much more violent towards Jews than Britain and much more antisemitic, 5 times by the measures of this author.

Nope the evidence shown the incidents were 5 times greater in Germany (adjusted for Jewish population size)


"Figure 1 compares the average number of anti-Semitic acts per million people for the 41-year period across the five countries. According to Figure 1, Great Britain, France, and Italy had rather few anti-Semitic acts: recording less than 0.05 acts per million people. Yet the number of anti-Semitic acts in Germany was more than five times that of Great Britain, France, and Italy, and the number of anti-Semitic acts in Romania was three times that of Germany"

page 43.

Anti-Semitism in Europe Before the Holocaust
WILLIAM I. BRUSTEIN AND RYAN D. KING
International Political Science Review (2004), Vol 25, No. 1, 35–53

[noemon]

There were 190,000 Jews added from Austria in 1938.
https://www.claimscon.org/our-work/nego ... community/

So out of the 690,000 in Germany/Austria in 1933 more than half had left.

This entire half or 300k which is about half left only after Kristallnacht in 1938, not before.

What happened between 1933-1938, when 40-60k German Jews were leaving per year as German nationals? How does it compute in your brain?

You cannot escape the figures with huffing and puffing.

Produce the source. You have never have.

Stop lying. https://journey.holocaust.org.uk/topic/ ... s-germany/

Polish and Russian Jewish immigrants
In contrast to this group there were about 100,000 Jewish immigrants from Poland and Russia without German citizenship. Most of them worked in crafts and industries and held orthodox religious convictions.

Source is in the OP and posted several times.

Produce the evidence to support your claims. I have shown with evidence that your claims are preposterous, not even remotely reasonable.

The fact that you keep repeating this assertion is more evidence of trying to convince yourself rather than anyone else.

Nope the evidence shown the incidents were 5 times greater in Germany (adjusted for Jewish population size)
....Germany was more than five times that of Great Britain, France, and Italy, and the number of anti-Semitic acts in Romania was three times that of Germany

And in Romania 3 times more than in Germany. In Soviet Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia as in Romania anti-Semitic pogroms were habitual and these countries contained the vast majority of Jews in Europe more than 7 million in fact out of a total estimate of 9 million in the whole of Europe before these events, while Germany is on the road to whatever when leaving them. You know that air travel was not available right? and almost all of these countries are totally land-locked while those few with ports had no actual port connections to elsewhere? Germany even nazi Germany in the 30's prior to Kristallnacht in 1938 was a destination.

[Tainari88]

@noemon is really talking about the middle-class and upper-class English here. They tend to hide their real feelings and thoughts beneath a veneer of politeness. And they often say the opposite of what they actually mean, while expecting their interlocutor to understand that they mean the opposite of what they are saying. For example, when you’re telling them all about your last skiing holiday and they respond with, “Oh really, how interesting!” They don’t mean that they actually find you or your story interesting, they actually mean, “You’re boring the tits off me. Fuck off and find somebody else to bore to death!” And they expect you to get the message. That’s your cue to wrap it up and move away. Lol.


A bit of New York comes through every so often in your speech too, querida. I love that.


These two short documentary films tell you everything you need to know about Scottish culture and history querida….

Pretty much sums it up really.

Lol. Come on Potemkin, the Scottish are that ironic eh?

Puerto Rican humor is very funny. Mostly being teasing and at the same time, being outrageous.

But the main characteristic of Puerto Ricans are being free and not giving a damn about repressed behavior. Not one ounce of repressed behavior. It is all being open and emotional and zero sense of inhibition. Without needing a drink either.

https://youtube.com/shorts/8_AE8ljxP7M?feature=share

I am going to live my life and I will laugh, I will dance and have fun. Like the lyrics say in that video above. That is what it is about in our culture.

Nakedness is not a big deal either. Lol.

Here it is for you to practice Potemkin! Machine gun Spanish for you to figure out....

Lol. That man is very Puerto Rican and his speed is very fast. Figure it out. You had me having to work hard with those sketches and that Scottish culture summed up. I am getting my revenge!

[pugsville]

This entire half or 300k which is about half left only after Kristallnacht in 1938, not before.

What happened between 1933-1938, when 40-60k German Jews were leaving per year as German nationals? How does it compute in your brain?

1933-1939 6 times 50k = 300k. Yup the decline in the Jewish population matches the immigration. Therefore there is NO excess population of Jewish refugees arriving. The Math is very consistent.

You cannot escape the figures with huffing and puffing.

Logic, references, math.

Stop lying. https://journey.holocaust.org.uk/topic/ ... s-germany/

Arrived a long time before 1933. It does not say anything about them arriving AFTER 1933.
The source does not support your claims at all.

Source is in the OP and posted several times.

It does not support your claims. Read what it says.

The fact that you keep repeating this assertion is more evidence of trying to convince yourself rather than anyone else.

It clearly shows your are utterly wrong.

And in Romania 3 times more than in Germany. In Soviet Poland, Ukraine, Russia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia as in Romania anti-Semitic pogroms were habitual and these countries contained the vast majority of Jews in Europe more than 7 million in fact out of a total estimate of 9 million in the whole of Europe before these events, while Germany is on the road to whatever when leaving them. You know that air travel was not available right? and almost all of these countries are totally land-locked while those few with ports had no actual port connections to elsewhere? Germany even nazi Germany in the 30's prior to Kristallnacht in 1938 was a destination.

Fail at geography here are many routes, sea travel on the Baltic or black seas, Czechoslovakia and Balkans.

Again you have produced nothing which supports your claims. Not one that talks of Jewish refugees arriving in Germany after 1933.

[noemon]

1933-1939 6 times 50k = 300k. Yup the decline in the Jewish population matches the immigration. Therefore there is NO excess population of Jewish refugees arriving. The Math is very consistent.

This entire half or 300k which is about half left only after Kristallnacht in 1938, not before.

Plus another 300k that left before that as you just said means that by 1939 there should only be 90k, but are between 350k-500k instead.

How is that mathematically possible?

Fail at geography here are many routes, sea travel on the Baltic or black seas, Czechoslovakia and Balkans.
Again you have produced nothing which supports your claims. Not one that talks of Jewish refugees arriving in Germany after 1933.

Czechoslovakia is landlocked, the Balkans had only 2 port connected, Athens and Constantinople and even those 2 were not properly connected for passengers at the time and there is no evidence all these millions of people used Athens or Turkey to leave. Greece was totally closed to Soviets and Yugoslavs, regardless. Hamburg is what they used.

You believe the west was taking millions of Soviet Jewish refugees arriving from Soviet ports? when she would not even take German nationals up to 1943?

Your logic does not work.

[Rich]

So as far as I can make out the group that was responsible for getting Lineker suspended was "Lawyers for Israel", And I believe this isn't the first time they've taken a pop (legally) at him. Now I might actually sympathise with some of their views, I'm guessing they like me supported the annexations of East Jerusalem and the Golan, where as I could be wrong but I suspect that Lineker was less than enthusiastic about those development. But is it not a just a little bit sinister having a group called "Lawyers for Israel" going around trying to stifle free speech. If there was a group called "Lawyers for Russia" I'm not sure the Liberals would be so easy going about it.

[Patrickov]

It is absurd to compare the policies with Nazi Germany so arbitrarily.

Back in the 19th century or even the 1930's, the British do not have to deport immigrants, mainly because they are everywhere, and there is no point (although some leftards may claim that those people have no means instead) for, say, Africans under their rule to move to Great Britain in the first place.

The problem is undoubted exacerbated by the wave of inferior countries' independence after World War II.

Revert the World (politically) to the early 20th Century will solve most problems we now face. Both socialism and universal equal nationalism have failed and their application in inferior countries have to be reverted.

[noemon]

It's not an exaggeration at all.

This country is failing at all levels and is blaming refugees and asylum seekers in a bid to distract from its enormous failings.

Precisely like the Nazis started doing in the 30's and Germany as a whole was doing since 1918. The fascist DNVP was opposition in Germany since 1924.

It's the smallest contributor to the Ukraine war effort, yet everyone in this country believes otherwise. It is breaking up the western alliance for its own petty politics with Ireland, the EU, vaccines, AUKUS and for nothing. It has not gained anything, not even the manufacturing of a single part. Even AstraZeneca has now left for Ireland. Its economy is collapsing, the roads, trains and buses are not working, it's raising taxes to WW2 levels. The NHS has collapsed, its banks have collapsed and even the life-science sector the only thing left is picking up its bags and leaving led by AZ. Car manufacturing has fallen 2/3's since 2016. It's one & only battery plant went bankrupt last month. It has lost more than half of its high-net-worth individuals since 2016, despite all the Hong Kongers coming in it still is at no7 of countries in the world losing rich people abroad, just a notch above Ukraine who is at war.

And among all these issues, what does it do? It breaks the ECHR and UN conventions to punish the handful of refugees that are coming in, the lowest amount of any country in Europe in actual fact.

If that is not full scapegoating like the nazis, then I don't know what is.

[Patrickov]

This country is failing at all levels and is blaming refugees and asylum seekers in a bid to distract from its failings.

This point is itself wrong of course, but the real issue is Britain let go of its dominions too quickly in the first place.

Return the people, but at the same time, send some of their own and take over.

[noemon]

It did not let anything go out of its own free will. It was too weak to hold it and couldn't and is now turning into a pathetic little country that blames a handful of foreigners for its own failures.

Even Scotland and N.Ireland have elected majorities that wish to leave.