![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
The result of the proposal was no consensus. -- BDD ( talk) 23:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Jewish question → Jewish Question – To conform with scholarly literature (see: "Jewish Question" in Google Books with 355,000 results) as well as the titles of the whole series of Wikipedia articles including the Eastern Question posed by the decay of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenian Question about Armenians, and the Polish Question pertaining to the rebirth of Poland. The capitalization is necessary in order to distinguish between any given question posed by Jews, from the one monumental question posed about Jews in world politics. See also Talk:Armenian Question mentioning this. Relisted. BDD ( talk) 16:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC) Poeticbent talk 17:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.Moved response to Hatagalow from survey section:
Here is a book page that will help Smokey Joe understand that he's wrong; it's not a particular debate, but rather a big range of topics. This book also illustrates the fact that a lot of the caps one sees in Google book search in titles and such are followed by lowercase in the text. We don't do caps in titles this way. Dicklyon ( talk) 00:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Moved response to Dicklyon from survey section:
Smokey, if you look more deeply at usage, using n-grams designed to exclude usages in titles and headings and focus on usages likely to be in sentences, that "trend" you hallucinated goes away: [3], [4]. Try others. This term is clearly still not anywhere near the threshold for being treated as a "proper" whatever. It does not name a particular thing. Authors who capitalize it do so to emphasize it as key element of their work, not because it's a proper name of anything. Dicklyon ( talk) 15:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I added a sentence about contemporary use of the shorthand JQ by the alt-right (antisemitic white nationalists). I don't know whether this is considered inappropriate for an article about the historical use of the term, but it seemed relevant. 64.134.233.55 ( talk) 17:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
@ Tadpolegaming: Could you explain your objection to the current wording? GojiBarry ( talk) 04:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the grouping together of anti-semitism, white nationalism and the alt-right is productive, appropriate or factually accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tadpolegaming ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
https://downwithhate.wordpress.com/
Adrien Arcand (1899-1967) was a Canadian political figure who lived through two world wars he attributed to Jewish influence, and who wrote on the issue addressed in this Wikipedia page, the dilemma of integrating anti-Western Jews into the West. Until now, Arcand's work has never been translated into English. The above web site represents one of his books, À Bas La Haine! (Down With Hate!), published in 1965 at the time of a royal commission on "hate propaganda" convened in Canada with two leading Zionist and pro-Communist Jews on the panel, as well as non-Jewish leftists.
In this book, Arcand cites names mostly of Jews, authoritative Jewish authors, Jewish converts to Christianity, Jewish Talmudists, Jewish historians, etc., as well as major western political figures, Churchill, Chamberlain, Popes and others. Arcand takes in a wide range of subject matter relating to the difficulty of fitting the Jewish, anti-Christian, "Oriental" mindset into Christian western countries.
In fact, Arcand viewed this book as a reference work, and it is jam-packed with information analyzed and "reacted" to from the viewpoint of a Western Christian. Arcand ran for office in Quebec, garnered a respectable percentage of the vote, and was appreciated by many for his defense of the rights of French Canadians to be self-governing -- not subject to hostile foreign influence -- in their own hard-won homeland. I would recommend this book as a resource to anyone working on this Wikipedia page, who may be interested in the views of Westerners on this complex topic of Jewish integration into western society. -- 173.177.140.7 ( talk) 23 July 2017
The current article as it now stands makes the use of the phrase 'the Jewish Question' appear either passé - something from the not-so-distant last century, or before - or non-neutral (altho thankfully not quite conferring ownership to the alt right?). This has encouraged frivolous and politically motivated complaints of 'antisemitism' towards those using the phrase in the present century. Could the article be revised to clarify that there is still a neutral usage of the term in this century, or else offer up an alternative?-- 94.119.64.1 ( talk) 10:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Can someone knowledgeable please add a simple statement in the opening of the article explaining what is exactly the question? I've read most of this article, I believe I understood most of the history of the question and different aspects of the debate, but I'm still very confused and unsure what is the question itself. I would expect that to be a basic information to have in this article. From everything that I read, it seems that the question is that jews in the past didn't have their own country, and lived as a nation inside other nations? Was the question "how to assimilate jews"? I'm not sure that's the question trying to be solved... this article is so confusing. It says it "was a wide-ranging debate (...) pertaining to the appropriate status and treatment of Jews in society (...) and dealt with the civil, legal, national and political status of Jews as a minority within society." So the question is how to treat jews in society, as a minority? How were they any different from other minorities, why was there so much debate specifically over this one minority? This article explains what people would discuss, but what exactly is the problem trying to be solved? I don't understand. Please someone who understands it well, write an explanation as if you were talking to someone who had never heard this term and don't have much knowledge of anti-semitism and the like. Thanks! 96.55.240.155 ( talk) 00:01, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 ( talk) 05:28, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Jewish question → Jewish Question – During the late 19th and early 20th centuries -- and even earlier -- the European question "What do we do about the Jews among us?" had become so extensively discussed that it had been reified into an entity, the "Jewish Question". Perhaps somewhat under the influence of German (although discussed throughout Europe, German-speakers were a significant portion of those involved in the controversy) where all nouns are capitalized, the reified entity was almost always capitalized as the "Jewish Question", and was rarely seen as the "Jewish question". For this reason, I believe the article should be moved to the capitalized form. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 00:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
The Jewish question has been thoroughly debunked as anti-semitic. Therefore I think we should label it as such rather - like we do on the article QAnon - rather than use 'debate' 78.150.129.45 ( talk) 18:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Section #3 Karl Marx – On the Jewish Question includes "can the Jews become politically emancipated?". The reference leads to https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/index.htm but I don't see the quote on that page. Mcljlm ( talk) 16:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Surprised Anti-Semite and Jew 1944, by Sartre isn't discussed in the article. Jimhoward72 ( talk) 17:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
From around 1860, the term was used with an increasingly antisemitic tendency: Jews were described under this term as a stumbling block to the identity and cohesion of the German nation and as enemies within the Germans' own country. Antisemites such as Wilhelm Marr, Karl Eugen Dühring, Theodor Fritsch, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Paul de Lagarde and others declared it a racial problem insoluble through integration. They stressed this in order to strengthen their demands to "de-jewify" the press, education, culture, state and economy. They also proposed to condemn inter-marriage between Jews and non-Jews. They used this term to oust the Jews from their supposedly socially dominant positions. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Seems like the least wiki could do is not spread lies. If you don't have time to do that, you need to reduce the number of pages. Duh. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Marx concluded that while individuals can be 'politically' free in a secular state, they were still bound to material constraints on freedom by economic inequality, an "ASSUMPTION" (sic) that would later form the basis of his critiques of capitalism
What part of that is in question? Economic inequality is a FACT. The physical restrictions on "freedom" due to economic inequality is again, a FACT. So I changed this to situation. Observation may be better fitting.
2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
??? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 11:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
The result of the proposal was no consensus. -- BDD ( talk) 23:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Jewish question → Jewish Question – To conform with scholarly literature (see: "Jewish Question" in Google Books with 355,000 results) as well as the titles of the whole series of Wikipedia articles including the Eastern Question posed by the decay of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenian Question about Armenians, and the Polish Question pertaining to the rebirth of Poland. The capitalization is necessary in order to distinguish between any given question posed by Jews, from the one monumental question posed about Jews in world politics. See also Talk:Armenian Question mentioning this. Relisted. BDD ( talk) 16:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC) Poeticbent talk 17:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.Moved response to Hatagalow from survey section:
Here is a book page that will help Smokey Joe understand that he's wrong; it's not a particular debate, but rather a big range of topics. This book also illustrates the fact that a lot of the caps one sees in Google book search in titles and such are followed by lowercase in the text. We don't do caps in titles this way. Dicklyon ( talk) 00:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Moved response to Dicklyon from survey section:
Smokey, if you look more deeply at usage, using n-grams designed to exclude usages in titles and headings and focus on usages likely to be in sentences, that "trend" you hallucinated goes away: [3], [4]. Try others. This term is clearly still not anywhere near the threshold for being treated as a "proper" whatever. It does not name a particular thing. Authors who capitalize it do so to emphasize it as key element of their work, not because it's a proper name of anything. Dicklyon ( talk) 15:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I added a sentence about contemporary use of the shorthand JQ by the alt-right (antisemitic white nationalists). I don't know whether this is considered inappropriate for an article about the historical use of the term, but it seemed relevant. 64.134.233.55 ( talk) 17:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
@ Tadpolegaming: Could you explain your objection to the current wording? GojiBarry ( talk) 04:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the grouping together of anti-semitism, white nationalism and the alt-right is productive, appropriate or factually accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tadpolegaming ( talk • contribs) 17:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
https://downwithhate.wordpress.com/
Adrien Arcand (1899-1967) was a Canadian political figure who lived through two world wars he attributed to Jewish influence, and who wrote on the issue addressed in this Wikipedia page, the dilemma of integrating anti-Western Jews into the West. Until now, Arcand's work has never been translated into English. The above web site represents one of his books, À Bas La Haine! (Down With Hate!), published in 1965 at the time of a royal commission on "hate propaganda" convened in Canada with two leading Zionist and pro-Communist Jews on the panel, as well as non-Jewish leftists.
In this book, Arcand cites names mostly of Jews, authoritative Jewish authors, Jewish converts to Christianity, Jewish Talmudists, Jewish historians, etc., as well as major western political figures, Churchill, Chamberlain, Popes and others. Arcand takes in a wide range of subject matter relating to the difficulty of fitting the Jewish, anti-Christian, "Oriental" mindset into Christian western countries.
In fact, Arcand viewed this book as a reference work, and it is jam-packed with information analyzed and "reacted" to from the viewpoint of a Western Christian. Arcand ran for office in Quebec, garnered a respectable percentage of the vote, and was appreciated by many for his defense of the rights of French Canadians to be self-governing -- not subject to hostile foreign influence -- in their own hard-won homeland. I would recommend this book as a resource to anyone working on this Wikipedia page, who may be interested in the views of Westerners on this complex topic of Jewish integration into western society. -- 173.177.140.7 ( talk) 23 July 2017
The current article as it now stands makes the use of the phrase 'the Jewish Question' appear either passé - something from the not-so-distant last century, or before - or non-neutral (altho thankfully not quite conferring ownership to the alt right?). This has encouraged frivolous and politically motivated complaints of 'antisemitism' towards those using the phrase in the present century. Could the article be revised to clarify that there is still a neutral usage of the term in this century, or else offer up an alternative?-- 94.119.64.1 ( talk) 10:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Can someone knowledgeable please add a simple statement in the opening of the article explaining what is exactly the question? I've read most of this article, I believe I understood most of the history of the question and different aspects of the debate, but I'm still very confused and unsure what is the question itself. I would expect that to be a basic information to have in this article. From everything that I read, it seems that the question is that jews in the past didn't have their own country, and lived as a nation inside other nations? Was the question "how to assimilate jews"? I'm not sure that's the question trying to be solved... this article is so confusing. It says it "was a wide-ranging debate (...) pertaining to the appropriate status and treatment of Jews in society (...) and dealt with the civil, legal, national and political status of Jews as a minority within society." So the question is how to treat jews in society, as a minority? How were they any different from other minorities, why was there so much debate specifically over this one minority? This article explains what people would discuss, but what exactly is the problem trying to be solved? I don't understand. Please someone who understands it well, write an explanation as if you were talking to someone who had never heard this term and don't have much knowledge of anti-semitism and the like. Thanks! 96.55.240.155 ( talk) 00:01, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved ( closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 ( talk) 05:28, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Jewish question → Jewish Question – During the late 19th and early 20th centuries -- and even earlier -- the European question "What do we do about the Jews among us?" had become so extensively discussed that it had been reified into an entity, the "Jewish Question". Perhaps somewhat under the influence of German (although discussed throughout Europe, German-speakers were a significant portion of those involved in the controversy) where all nouns are capitalized, the reified entity was almost always capitalized as the "Jewish Question", and was rarely seen as the "Jewish question". For this reason, I believe the article should be moved to the capitalized form. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 00:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
The Jewish question has been thoroughly debunked as anti-semitic. Therefore I think we should label it as such rather - like we do on the article QAnon - rather than use 'debate' 78.150.129.45 ( talk) 18:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Section #3 Karl Marx – On the Jewish Question includes "can the Jews become politically emancipated?". The reference leads to https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/index.htm but I don't see the quote on that page. Mcljlm ( talk) 16:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Surprised Anti-Semite and Jew 1944, by Sartre isn't discussed in the article. Jimhoward72 ( talk) 17:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
From around 1860, the term was used with an increasingly antisemitic tendency: Jews were described under this term as a stumbling block to the identity and cohesion of the German nation and as enemies within the Germans' own country. Antisemites such as Wilhelm Marr, Karl Eugen Dühring, Theodor Fritsch, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Paul de Lagarde and others declared it a racial problem insoluble through integration. They stressed this in order to strengthen their demands to "de-jewify" the press, education, culture, state and economy. They also proposed to condemn inter-marriage between Jews and non-Jews. They used this term to oust the Jews from their supposedly socially dominant positions. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Seems like the least wiki could do is not spread lies. If you don't have time to do that, you need to reduce the number of pages. Duh. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Marx concluded that while individuals can be 'politically' free in a secular state, they were still bound to material constraints on freedom by economic inequality, an "ASSUMPTION" (sic) that would later form the basis of his critiques of capitalism
What part of that is in question? Economic inequality is a FACT. The physical restrictions on "freedom" due to economic inequality is again, a FACT. So I changed this to situation. Observation may be better fitting.
2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 10:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
??? 2604:3D09:D78:1000:C149:7FD0:EC31:824E ( talk) 11:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)