But...I don't know, I read that article, and the elitism was enough to give me hives. An awful lot of fawning over their social/class rank, don't you think?

I'm not so sure, Macabee. Please don't take this as criticism of their cause, which I think is a good one. But really - I tend to think this is more about cheap PR than anything. (A lot cheaper than standing for social justice!) If I read the article correctly, it's the BMO PR guy pushing the group, and everyone involved seems to be getting some nice product placement for their companies as a result. (I'm not sure from the article whether he is pushing it as an individual involved, or on behalf of the BMO as a corporate PR thing).

So, they've formed a group with their elite friends, based on the vague goal of promoting what is really a motherhood statement (I mean, who besides neo-nazi scum are FOR anti-semitic vandalism?). So, they get together with their Empire Club friends and tsk tsk over anti-semitic incidents over their caviar on toast points, while Liz-Lady-Who-Lunches (I take it from the article that's her role in society since she's identified by her husband's job, rather than as an individual in her own right) holds fundraising balls for the Rosedale Matron set to earn money for the production of that video?

The educational video, by the way, is a good idea in my opinion, if the content isn't TOO terribly full of corporate sloganeering and logos. But I've gotta tell you, Macabee, whenever I see a bunch of filthy rich people getting attention for themselves and product placement for their companies in the media through some latest hobnobbing for charity group, I'm cynical no matter what the cause is. This screams "PR" to me.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

And it's also an illogical argument to say that focusing on anti-semitism is not legitimate because there are worse oppressions out there.

Using that argument, we could never support any cause because there's always "something worse" out there.

I'm cynical about the motivations behind this elite hobnobbing-for-charity deal myself, and I also think that rich dorks like these people will only put themselves out for a cause when it take minimal effort, gives them an opportunity for cheap publicity for themselves and their companies, and gives them an excuse to get together with their jetset friends to show how lovely and progressive they are as long as it doesn't mean they actually have to share their wealth with anyone. But you're going over the top, blind_patriot.

[Edited to replace "No Yards" for "blind_patriot" - sorry again, No Yards!]

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

For a long time many myself included have called on the corporate elite to do some good with their money. For too long the CEOs of this country have pocketed their bonuses and saleries and lived their lives free of the concerns of society.

Well the Compers are to be commended for seeing a need and using thier own time and money to attempt to help with a societal problem.

Are their more problems out there that need money and support? Yes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
For a long time many myself included have called on the corporate elite to do some good with their money. For too long the CEOs of this country have pocketed their bonuses and saleries and lived their lives free of the concerns of society.

---

This project appears to do something. It appears to be educational in nature and the video -- and I agree here with you as long as it is not corporate speak -- but rather aimed at teaching is a good thing.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: johnpauljones ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by josh:
It also sounds vaguely anti-Semitic. But I assume it's used because Arabs are also Semites.

---

Secondly, the argument that Arabs/Muslims are also semites has been dealt with here on Babble. The term anti-Semitism was coined by German Jew-hater Wilhelm Marr to specifically denote hatred of Jews. Those who try to misuse this word for their own ends do so out of negaative purpose.

Here are some dictionary definitions just to be clear:

dictionary 1

dictionary 2

dictionary 3

dictionary 4

There are a lot of other issues that they could have picked that are not specific to one group.

This issue is not sexy, their is limited PR value to it. Hell this is probably one of the few issues that the general public would prefer be swept under the rug and treated with a wink wink nudge nudge attitude.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bubbles:
"......people like the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight. It smacks of the same type of elitism you seem to be condemning." (Macabee)

Those are your words, not mine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Yeah, I'm sure my "elitism" hurts them oh so much. I'm sure they'll be crying in their champagne all night over it.

If it's elitism to criticize the rich for appropriating causes for their own PR gain, then colour me elitist.

---

Is this a typical case of denial? Read your second post from the top.

quote:

---

Macabee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5227
posted 26 May 2005 08:24 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle, yes I agree but it is so rare that we see such individuals devote their personal wealth to a communal cause. That is why Bubbles, I slept well last night. With your attitude people like the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight. It smacks of the same type of elitism you seem to be condemning.

---

My analogy goes like this. It's like giving only Jews a cure or vaccine for the Flu.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote :Blind Patriot: If you want to actually be specific, and not potentially insulting, I often use the term "anti-Jewish racism" - simply because I refuse to get into the semantic battles that distract from the issue at hand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
All I'm saying is, racism is a disease that has no borders. It effects everybody no matter what race or religion you are.

My analogy goes like this. It's like giving only Jews a cure or vaccine for the Flu.

Thanks Coyote. I still will distigiush the difference between race and religion. A Semite is a race, is a race, is a race. Judaism is a religion, is a religion, is a religion. So keeping in mind what you have said. I will call it Anti-Jewish Bigotry. Because that's what it is. A worthy cause to battle against, but if you have the cure, you should share it with everybody or else it will creep up again.

---

Look at it this way: People who hate Jews qua Jews do not care if they attend a synagogue or not. The semantics game is just not on.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: Coyote ]

In French, the expression "judéophobie" (Judeophobia) is often used nowadays - it has no anti-semitic tinge as "Jew-hatred" might.

Macabee, I certainly agree with you about the origin of the term "anti-semitism" - it was an attempt, typical of the "Scientific Racism" of the day, to dress up bigotry as science. Henry Ford notoriously wrote about "philosemites" - people fighting such bigotry.

But there are common elements in the stereotyping of Jewish and Arab semites (for good and bad), and those go back a long time. Remember the description of "Rebecca the beautiful (and wise) Jewess" in Scott's Ivanhoe. Or Karl Marx, "the Moor". Similar comments were made about Disraeli.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabee:
Quite true Coyote, what is sadly and tragically clear is that Hitler never made any distinction between Jews who idendified themselves by faith, secular Jews, lapsed Jews, agnostic Jews, atheist Jews. They all were destined for the gas chambers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
In the Hitler days this was labelled anti-Semitism. That kind of hatred is should be tied to that era.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
Why am I so confused? A Christian in someone of the Christian faith. A Muslim is someone of the Islamic faith and a Jew is someone of the Jewish Faith. To me this has nothing to do with race. In the Hitler days this was labelled anti-Semitism. That kind of hatred is should be tied to that era. Semites come in different varioations and religion. Is a persons Jewishness a racial label?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabee:
Uh ya it is YOUR attitude Im talking about. You make it appear as though it is mine!!!!

---

Macabee, if this is a response to Bubbles, I don't understand what you are doing.

Bubbles quoted you directly; you angrily denied that you had written what he quoted; so then he requoted.

At least you have to admit that you were mistaken in accusing him of making the quote up the first time he used it -- either that, or you are being unjust now.

I don't understand this.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

It is an important historical distinction.

In some places such as many Eastern European countries "Jews" were a distinct ethnic group, speaking a different language, often dressing differently, etc. In Germany the Jews were utterly German - perhaps tending to be a bit darker in hair, eyes and skin colour than the "Nordic" stereotype, and in Italy there was no difference whatsoever, cultural or "somatic". When Primo Levi was sent the long way home through devastated Russia in his second book "La Tregua" (The Truce, sometimes translated into English as "The Awakening") he met Yiddish-speaking Russian-Jewish girls who couldn't believe he and his friend Cesare were Jews as they didn't speak Yiddish and looked and behaved like all the non-Jewish Italian refugees.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
Why am I so confused? A Christian in someone of the Christian faith. A Muslim is someone of the Islamic faith and a Jew is someone of the Jewish Faith. To me this has nothing to do with race. In the Hitler days this was labelled anti-Semitism. That kind of hatred is should be tied to that era. Semites come in different varioations and religion. Is a persons Jewishness a racial label?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:

Blind_Patriot: Are you suggesting that the racism commonly referred to as anti-semetism only occured from 1933-1945 and only at the hands of the Nazis?

---

According to what has been mentioned here, the definition of anti-semitism came from the Hitler era. As Macabee pointed out, it encompassed all Jews "Jews who idendified themselves by faith, secular Jews, lapsed Jews, agnostic Jews, atheist Jews".

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blind_Patriot:
According to what has been mentioned here, the definition of anti-semitism came from the Hitler era.

---

That is not what was mentioned here what was mentioned by Mac was Wilhelm Marr.

According to Wikipedia Marh was born in 1819- and died in 1904. He died 30 years before Hitler rose to power.

quote:

---

According to him, the struggle between Jews and Germans would only be resolved by the victory of one and the ultimate death of the other. A Jewish victory, he concluded, would result in finis Germaniae (the end of the German people). To prevent this from happening, in 1879 Marr founded the League of Anti-Semites (Antisemiten-Liga), the first German organization committed specifically to combatting the alleged threat to Germany posed by the Jews and advocating their forced removal from the country.

---

William Marh

edited to add:

maybe this project is as needed as thought since we being people on this thread can not even agree with what to call racism directed against Jews which historically has accuratley been referred to as anti-semetism

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: johnpauljones ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coyote:
No, it would not. It is race-hatred, like any kind of race-hatred.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:

Macabee, if this is a response to Bubbles, I don't understand what you are doing.

Bubbles quoted you directly; you angrily denied that you had written what he quoted; so then he requoted.

At least you have to admit that you were mistaken in accusing him of making the quote up the first time he used it -- either that, or you are being unjust now.

I don't understand this.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

---

quote:

---

Michelle, yes I agree but it is so rare that we see such individuals devote their personal wealth to a communal cause. That is why Bubbles, I slept well last night. With your attitude people like the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight. It smacks of the same type of elitism you seem to be condemning.

---

I understood Bubbles to accuse me of claiming that I felt the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight. I was suggesting that this was Bubble's attitude.

Remember when Bubbles started my quote with ... it gave an appearance that she was quoting me:

quote:

---

posted 26 May 2005 11:40 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"......people like the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight. It smacks of the same type of elitism you seem to be condemning." (Macabee)
Those are your words, not mine.

---

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: Macabee ]

You are technically correct that it is not a "race" in the strictest of terms, but then, most of what we consider races are very weak definitions to begin with from a biological standpoint. Western and Northern Europe as well as the caucasus are home to "the caucasian race", yet for some reason Spain is considered to have its own race.

In short:

Judaism is both a religion and a community.

This is a good initiative. It might just help educate people about what anti-semetism is. Why it is called anti-semetism and how anti-semetism still exists in Canada today.

Cabana i am not sure why you are addressing my in your posts. I for one do not have real differences with what you have written. Of course the religion and community interseed. For example one could use the word tradition for what you are saying.

Although i think your figures for the number of jewish families is low. I assume you are referring to a world wide figure. For example there are roughly 350,000 Jews in Canada.

All of that being said i am not sure where you think their is disagreement with facts.

[ 26 May 2005: Message edited by: johnpauljones ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabee:
I never said any such thing. What the hell are you babbling about????

---

Further, when Bubbles quoted your words back at you, Bubbles was objecting to having your words put in Bubbles' mouth. That is certainly a fair objection.

You write it; you wear it, not Bubbles.

[ 27 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

Macabee's originally posted this:

quote:

---

With your attitude people like the Compers should just stay in their homes and ignore societies plight.

---

On the one hand, who could object in the abstract to any initiative to combat anti-semitism, or racism or prejudice generally? On the other, it's fair to have concerns about private and perhaps politicized groups inserting themselves into the public school system without careful vetting.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Yes, back to the topic: I guess I would want to see the DVD before I praised it.

On the one hand, who could object in the abstract to any initiative to combat anti-semitism, or racism or prejudice generally? On the other, it's fair to have concerns about private and perhaps politicized groups inserting themselves into the public school system without careful vetting.

As a socialist, I don't have a lot of patience with so-called philanthropy, and I can't follow Mac's arguments above about that being some form of elitism. It is a legitimate and principled position for most social democrats and socialists, whose focus is on a just distribution of wealth, not on the unpredictable vanity projects of the already wealthy.

---

It's true that we often feel like gagging when we watch the wealthy plump up their own egos by patting other people on the head. I mean, for the rich donor to feel good, someone else has to be feeling pretty bad in the first place.

It's also true, though, that people -- just people in general -- often genuinely want to do good and don't care whether anyone knows or not. And even if we had a just distribution of wealth, I still think it would be a good thing for individuals to make individual contributions, voluntarily (and ideally, anonymously), because it keeps us connected; it keeps us close to what is happening to others; it keeps us on the alert for injustice and caring about others' troubles.

“……..Bubbles would have made it much clearer what he meant if he'd quoted Macabee's entire sentence instead of leaving off the first few words. It would've worked just as well, and there wouldn't have been any confusion.” (Michelle)

Sorry to have convused you. I had abbreviated the quote to keep my post short. By putting the dots in front I thought it would be clear that it was part of a bigger text. Also I had directed it to Macabee, and figured that she/he would remember her/his own words.

I certainly have nothing against anyone wanting to reduce discrimination, bullying. Although the way the article was written , Power couple….., fighting……, Empire club…., struck me as funny, arcane. Also the idea that big institutional interests want to educate our kids raises my guard. They are quick with dispensing attitudes but nowhere to be found when there are bad consequences as a result of their ideas. Also the term “Anti-semitism’ is way to brought and tends to include a lot of things that have nothing to do racism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Yes, back to the topic: I guess I would want to see the DVD before I praised it.

On the one hand, who could object in the abstract to any initiative to combat anti-semitism, or racism or prejudice generally? On the other, it's fair to have concerns about private and perhaps politicized groups inserting themselves into the public school system without careful vetting.

As a socialist, I don't have a lot of patience with so-called philanthropy, and I can't follow Mac's arguments above about that being some form of elitism. It is a legitimate and principled position for most social democrats and socialists, whose focus is on a just distribution of wealth, not on the unpredictable vanity projects of the already wealthy.

---

1. We really dont know how the DVD is beig put together, Seeing the glass as half full you would hope that school curricula people are in the loop.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabee:
Word such as "tend" are very loaded. How do you REALLY know whwere and how much the rich contribute to charities? You dont. You only rely on guesses, bias and assumptions.

---

But I think it's more important to look at what gets funded and what struggles. We have many horrible social problems in this country about which the wealthy appear not to give a damn. I don't know whether the Compers know how much, eg, a person on a disability pension in Ontario survives on per month, but it's hard to see that anyone of their class is agitating on that problem. And so on.

The point is, this doesn't have to be personalized. In fact, it shouldn't be personalized. Decent citizens would be supporting governments that made sure to address our worst social problems, and they would be willing to pay fairly for such policies, sexy or not, without asking that their names be attached or that those relieved of their misery go through humiliating exercises in public gratitude to the Lords and Ladies Bountiful.

We seem unable to get the upper classes to move much in that direction, though. No glittering balls in that sort of giving. Pity, eh wot?

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
Well, "anti-semitism" was a racist construct based on an imagined "Semitic" race. ...

Many of the most lethal racisms can be such constructs. The supposed racial difference between Hutus and Tutsis is a more recent example.

---

And then there are the
Falashas to consider. They make it difficult for anyone to speak of a "Jewish Race."

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Well, I know where I see their names and where I don't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:

And then there are the
Falashas to consider. They make it difficult for anyone to speak of a "Jewish Race."

Wouldn't it be nice if we could do without the idea of "races" altogether?

---

quote:

---

Persecution. Judaic Ethiopians are known in Ethiopia as "Falasha," a derogatory term. They have traditionally practiced low-status artisan occupations and have been periodically persecuted over a period of several centuries.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Macabee:

Really? Perhaps you can enlighten us who have not checked with Revenue Canada.

---

Um, Revenue Canada would not be the relevant federal department. They just collect taxes and supervise the deductions.

The Finance Department would be the relevant department. They decide who gets taxed, how much, and they also decide that large donations will earn deductions at a higher rate than small ones, clearly in defiance of the story of the widow's mite. They also decide where money will be spent.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Well, I know where I see their names and where I don't.

---

I also see their names backing tax-cutting initiatives by the government, at the cost of social services.

I *don't* see their names making demands to end poverty and homelessness, or supporting progressive political parties.

I also see their names in articles like this one, where charity is presented as a strategic use of money to improve (in this case banks') images.

I don't see them on the front lines of the struggle for social justice, which inevitably means a just redistribution of income.

Although I believe in the original meaning of caritas and the wonders it can work in us all, I have very little time for the vulgar and degenerate redefinition of "charity" that the wealthy so self-servingly support. That kind of charity has never had a notable impact on any of the social problems that plague us, and it never will.

[ 28 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aRoused:
I see their names on things like the I.H.Asper School of Business.

I also see their names backing tax-cutting initiatives by the government, at the cost of social services.

I *don't* see their names making demands to end poverty and homelessness, or supporting progressive political parties.

I also see their names in articles like this one, where charity is presented as a strategic use of money to improve (in this case banks') images.

Should you wish, the Asper Foundation has a website where they list their charitable works.

---

Secondly you have checked all charities dealing with poverty so you can say categorically that the Compers do not support such causes? Im impressed

And can you point me to where you see Elizabeth Comper's name backing tax-cutting initiatives. She is after all a person in her own right is she not?

[ 28 May 2005: Message edited by: Macabee ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
I don't see them agitating for the homeless, for people on disability pensions, eg. I don't see them confronting Mr Smitherman or the Finance minister over our underfunded and understaffed healthcare systems (although I see their names on the wings of a number of our crumbly hospitals). I don't see them fighting for better funding for our public schools.

I don't see them on the front lines of the struggle for social justice, which inevitably means a just redistribution of income.

Although I believe in the original meaning of caritas and the wonders it can work in us all, I have very little time for the vulgar and degenerate redefinition of "charity" that the wealthy so self-servingly support. That kind of charity has never had a notable impact on any of the social problems that plague us, and it never will.

[ 28 May 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aRoused:
I never said the Aspers were bad. How dare you put words in my mouth. The fact that you immediately think that any reference to the Asper family from a babbler is automatically negative is sad and telling droneyammerdronebleah.

---

There's really no point, is there. I can explicitly reject the whole notion of "charity" as Mac is promoting it here, and he will still come back and say that I am "demanding" that rich people be "charitable." I can make a clear distinction between "charity" and a political vision that addresses social issues seriously, and Mac will continue to refer to those social issues as "causes," as though people could fight for social justice by throwing yet another extravagant ball.

But it does exist. Racism exists from coast to coast to coast in Canada. Minorities feel threatened across Canada -- whether they be a minoritity based upon race, creed or sexual orientation.

Anti-Semetism does exist in Toronto, it exists in Ontario, it exists in Canada and it exists around the world.

Governments across Canada do not do enough to fight racism generally and anti-semetism specifically.

If government is not doing enough, if society is not doing enough. Then someone must step up to the plate to do something.

Well then I am glad that some are willing to put the money were their mouths are.

Maybe this will show governments, school boards and citizens the need to take back the fight against racism. Maybe they will see that all forms of racism must be fought and maybe they will see that when fighting racism one must also fight anti-semetism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
[QB]I think that's a bad argument no matter where it's made, blind_patriot. Right-wingers, racists, and anti-feminists (no, I'm not saying you're any of those) use that argument all the time. "Why do those women's groups only focus on feminism when there are so many other worthy causes out there?" "Why does the NAACP only focus on black people? Why don't they defend other people too? Single issue group!"

It's a specious argument.[QB]

---

Or they say: "Why do those human rights activists focus on Israel when there are so many other violent racist states?"