|
Post by Yankel on Oct 22, 2005 22:07:33 GMT -5
No, it was low (.5% per generation). The rate of "outmarriage" may have been significant, but goyim rarely converted and thus were not absorbed. That's why there were a lot of quarter- and eighth-"Jews" during the Nazi era.
Gee, maybe the fact that I would know better than you what German Jews consider themselves?
I meant in terms of ethnicity, doofus.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 22, 2005 22:31:15 GMT -5
Gee, maybe the fact that I would know better than you what German Jews consider themselves?
I don't know what Jews you hang out with. Personal experince doesn't mean much to me since it's limited. On every topic about a specific ethnic group i hear different stories out of mouths of members of those groups.
"No, it was low (.5% per generation). The rate of "outmarriage" may have been significant, but goyim rarely converted and thus were not absorbed. That's why there were a lot of quarter- and eighth-"Jews" during the Nazi era."
I believe in Sowell's "Ethnic America" he mentioned Jewish intermarriage with german gentiles was quite high bewteen during the beginning of the 20th century until Hitler's rise to power. Perhaps it was in other work of his. But I'm pretty sure it was in "Ethnic America." I don't own th ebook so I can't see for sure but I have a pretty good memory.
"Most Jews consider themselves Jewish before anything."
Before ANYTHING.. gee, I wonder what is supposed to come to mind when a person hear's that. If I hear my neighbor claim "I'm a Pole before anything" that means being a Pole comes first. Whether he lives in Poland, Germany or the USA. It's his priority.
doofus... you're either bad at insulting or lazy
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Oct 22, 2005 22:52:51 GMT -5
I've known more Jews in my 20 years than you're likely to meet in your entire life. That's all I'm going to say about that.
Now, about the intermarriage rate: As I said, there were quite a few Jews who assimilated (ie, abandoned their Jewish identity and Judaism), and married into goy families. What you neglected to mention is that intermarriage was illegal until the 20th century. Geneticists have stated that it was extremely low, at >.5% per generation. I couldn't care less what some guy wrote in a book. It's science I'm interested in.
Well, dipshit (is that better?), if I was referring to state loyalty, I would have used "Israeli" instead of "Jewish". Since we were discussing ethnicity, I thought that was pretty obvious. Maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 22, 2005 23:06:16 GMT -5
"I've known more Jews in my 20 years than you're likely to meet in your entire life. That's all I'm going to say about that."
Well, obviosuly. You're Jewish and I'm not. Still doesn't change much. I hear conflicting statements from people from Pakaistan. I'm sure they know more Pakistanis than I do. Just an example.
If you read my post i was speaking of the beginning of the 20th century (we're speaking of Germany, of course. I don't know about other European nations). I never claimed it was common before. You're anger is hurting your reading comprehension. You should try to be as cool as Kim Deal at a block party and it won't happen again.
"Well, dipshit (is that better?), if I was referring to state loyalty, I would have used "Israeli" instead of "Jewish". Since we were discussing ethnicity, I thought that was pretty obvious. Maybe not."
You miss the point completely. I'm not surprised because you're upset so therefore you're not as cool as Kim Deal at a block party. As an American my loyalty is with other Americans and not with people who may share the same ethnicity as myself. Whether Israel existed or not doesn't matter. If you're going to claim they look out for people of their own ethnicity rather than Americans in general (you did say before anything, sir) then I have to wonder whether they can be trusted as a group. It's understandable for immigrants to be close knit and look out for each other but Jews, as well as other ethnic groups, have been in the US for generations. I'm kind of worried now.
dip shit is still lame. You disappoint once again.
|
|
|
Post by yigal on Oct 22, 2005 23:19:28 GMT -5
lol how about this Ashkenazim = Eastern European and Central European jews Sephardim = Western European jews btw u have it backwards in europe its Sephardim and Western Ashkenazim(german,dutch ashkenazim) who thought Eastern ashknazim backwards and stupid, and did not marry with them altho Sephardim and Western Ashkenazim did especially in places like Holland and South france,where both populations where present I thought the Sephardim were originally the Jews who were expelled from Spain after the Conquistadores pushed the Moors out of the Iberian peninsula. I wouldn't call them Western-European Jews. More like North African. Ashekenazi refers to European Jews, or Jews that could pass for White. how exactly (with the exception of morrocans,which are sephardic but mixed) are sephardim "north african" they come from places like Holland,Hamburg,Thessalonika,England, the former yugoslavia,bulgaria etc with only Morroco and Algeria being the only extra european sephardic country,but they also had anative "berber-JEw" population
|
|
|
Post by yigal on Oct 22, 2005 23:22:40 GMT -5
"I've known more Jews in my 20 years than you're likely to meet in your entire life. That's all I'm going to say about that." Well, obviosuly. You're Jewish and I'm not. Still doesn't change much. I hear conflicting statements from people from Pakaistan. I'm sure they know more Pakistanis than I do. Just an example. If you read my post i was speaking of the beginning of the 20th century (we're speaking of Germany, of course. I don't know about other European nations). I never claimed it was common before. You're anger is hurting your reading comprehension. You should try to be as cool as Kim Deal at a block party and it won't happen again. "Well, dipshit (is that better?), if I was referring to state loyalty, I would have used "Israeli" instead of "Jewish". Since we were discussing ethnicity, I thought that was pretty obvious. Maybe not." You miss the point completely. I'm not surprised because you're upset so therefore you're not as cool as Kim Deal at a block party. As an American my loyalty is with other Americans and not with people who may share the same ethnicity as myself. Whether Israel existed or not doesn't matter. If you're going to claim they look out for people of their own ethnicity rather than Americans in general (you did say before anything, sir) then I have to wonder whether they can be trusted as a group. It's understandable for immigrants to be close knit and look out for each other but Jews, as well as other ethnic groups, have been in the US for generations. I'm kind of worried now. dip shit is still lame. You disappoint once again. those sourcess may be true but those "intermarried" never converted for the most part thus mostly did not get absorbed into the gene pool (which is the opisite from america where because of the reform movement which states u can be intermarried,u can eat pork and shrimp and do what u want, many of those get absorbed essentially creating sorta non jewish jew)
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 22, 2005 23:31:50 GMT -5
"those sourcess may be true but those "intermarried" never converted for the most part thus mostly did not get absorbed into the gene pool."
But what about their children? Lets say they keep their faith, like Hans Eysenck's step father, but their children would more than likely to marry a German girl.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Oct 22, 2005 23:34:40 GMT -5
Whether Israel existed or not doesn't matter. If you're going to claim they look out for people of their own ethnicity rather than Americans in general (you did say before anything, sir) then I have to wonder whether they can be trusted as a group. You criticize my reading comprehension skills, yet I never claimed anything remotely close to that. I did say, in an ethnic sense, Jews consider themselves Jewish before anything (i.e., Russian, German, French or whatever country they may have lived in prior to immigration). Let's be honest, though. You knew exactly what I meant. You're simply using a straw man to attack me because I corrected you on several points.
|
|
|
Post by yigal on Oct 22, 2005 23:39:15 GMT -5
"those sourcess may be true but those "intermarried" never converted for the most part thus mostly did not get absorbed into the gene pool." But what about their children? Lets say they keep their faith, like Hans Eysenck's step father, but their children would more than likely to marry a German girl. ok lets assume that its German Man/Jewish woman(because thats the only way the child would be jewish) even if they marry a german girl like u say, that would be end of jewish line, so they wouldnt get absorbed into the genepool instead ude get somebodys whos "1/4 Jewish" ie a nonjew
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 22, 2005 23:46:03 GMT -5
"did say, in an ethnic sense, Jews consider themselves Jewish before anything (i.e., Russian, German, French or whatever country they may have lived in prior to immigration). "
hmm... you really didn't correct me on anything and we're really back at the same point. Jews consider themselves Jewish before anything, as you said. We were talking about Germany and jews before Hitler's rise, correct? Now, if was living in Berlin in 1924 and you told me jews consider themselves jewish before anything I'd have to wonder whether your loyalty is to the nation of Germany or to your own people. Meaning you'd put your own ethnic group ahead of your fellow countrymen.
By stating jews think of themselves as jewish before anything you're admiting they look out for their own since a German jew would be more loyal to a fellow jew in England than his fellow countryman.
|
|
|
Post by Yankel on Oct 23, 2005 0:05:25 GMT -5
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I never said anything about looking out for one another. I didn't even allude to it. And if I did somehow inadvertantly imply it, I've already clarified my position. If you want to pretend I did, though, and that I didn't clarify, that's fine. You're hopeless.
I did correct you, though. It's a fact that intermarriage rates were extremely low. And the truth is that most ethnic Jews see themselves as Jews, regardless of their religious status. So, a Jew who resides in America would be an American Jew, because one's US citizenship has little to do with one's ethnicity. That's a completely separate and irrelevant discussion.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 23, 2005 0:43:11 GMT -5
"If you want to pretend I did, though, and that I didn't clarify, that's fine. You're hopeless."
I don't pretend anything. You made the claim that jews think of themselves as jewish beyond anything. If an arab had said the same thing, subsituting Jew for Arab, what do you think the response would be here in the states? Second of all, what did you clarify? you said if you had meant loyalty to Israel you would have have said Israel. Well, Israel never crossed my mind. I was thinking the same as you: ethnicity. The (sub topic, i suppose you can call) was Jews in Germany at the turn of the century and before the rise of Hitler and whether a portion of the population of the Jewish population was marrying outside the group. Then you made your statement that Jews think of themselves as Jewish beyond anything. So being Jewish comes first overall. And since being Jewish comes first then all Jews come first over other ethnic groups. So German Jews would be loyal to other Jews rather than Germany. An American Jews would be loyal Jews in in other nations rather than their own. Now if this is a mentality of most of that group (and I’m sure it isn’t) then it’s understandable why someone would be suspicious of that group.
"I did correct you, though. It's a fact that intermarriage rates were extremely low. And the truth is that most ethnic Jews see themselves as Jews, regardless of their religious status. So, a Jew who resides in America would be an American Jew, because one's US citizenship has little to do with one's ethnicity. That's a completely separate and irrelevant discussion"
Well, it's not a fact that Jews intermarriage at the turn of the 20th century and before the rise of Hitler was extremely low. You just restated the view. You didn't actually show me any facts. If you have link then link me up. I mentioned an author but I don't have the book so I can't give a page number or anything so to be fair I haven't proven anything either.
"So, a Jew who resides in America would be an American Jew, because one's US citizenship has little to do with one's ethnicity. That's a completely separate and irrelevant discussion."
Well, if a particular group feels being "jewish is beyong anything" then obviously American citizenship plays second fiddle. Once again, imagine an Arab stating the same thing. Lets say the Arab claims "being Muslim is beyong anything" and he's sitting next to you at a very hip coffee shop. I think you'd wonder a bit.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Oct 23, 2005 0:48:18 GMT -5
"its German Man/Jewish woman(because thats the only way the child would be jewish) even if they marry a german girl like u say, that would be end of jewish line, so they wouldnt get absorbed into the genepool instead ude get somebodys whos "1/4 Jewish" ie a nonjew "
Yeah, he gets absorbed into the German population.
|
|
|
Post by oslonor on Oct 23, 2005 4:38:56 GMT -5
Interesting. I will investigate this. Autosomally, Iranians cluster with European rather than Near Eastern populations. At least according to Cavalli-Sforza. Yes. Persians cluster with Europeans. I explain this in my blog. Persians and Hollywood oslonor.blogspot.com
|
|
|
Post by oslonor on Oct 23, 2005 5:25:40 GMT -5
|
|