(I hope I'm not straying onto murky ground here, one way or anther...)
There's a bit of circular (il)logic to the Western antisemitic/money-lender thing, at least in more 'recent' times. Law/custom against 'righteous Christians' lending money in combination with excluding (or biasing heavily against) the Jewish from many other professions tended to reinforce the whole "you need a moneylender, then go talk to the Jew!" sort of thing.
Which then makes a self-reinforcing twofer reason for isolating the local 'sons of Abraham' from the rest of society. Almost 'Untouchable' like the Dalit's in India. And perhaps even exactly for those forced into jobs such as nightsoil-merchants, but then also those "knew where all the money was" (and wasn't... or at least knew all the fine details about who didn't really have the wealth they might otherwise claim to have), probably with a lot of other conspicuously high-tur over business on the side (goldsmithery/jewel-cutting) as either directly having the collaterol to engage in such an above-subsistence sideline or "knowing a Mensch who will help one's brother-in-law". It drives the non-integration, and adds a handy target when things boil over and mere distaste for the 'othered' transforms into jealousy that at least some of those 'others' might be in posession of wealth/power that ...perhaps it would be best that they don't?
(This also moves into the same areas as the seemingly perpetual "anti-outgroup" trope of them being both workshy and "taking our jobs". Both mindless automatons and plotting with a most deviously and insipid cunning. Dogwhistle prejudices that morph to suit the current bugbear and ingroup/outgroup split. Beyond religion: can be ageist, sexist and all forms of nationalist. But the judaic diaspora may well have simultaneously ticked several of those boxes at times, or (dare I say) at times have fallen for the same mental traps in othering the modern Palestinians!)
Now, obviously there was an antiquity basis to the biblical tales from which rose the whole 'Christianity schmutter' from the then mostly accredited Jewish homeland, what with those (by default, Jewish?) temple moneylenders (but, then again "by default, Jewish every profession", give or take other creeds, and whatever layers of differences you ascribe, say, between the levites and samaritans... oh, and all that Roman occupation influence).
And I'm also woefully ignorant about precisely what direction of emphasis the even later fork of the abrahamic family took, save for that it boils down to "if it looks too much like interest, it's haram" and thus any financial instruments must be framed as fully authorised pre-charges or whatever (and clearly must be necessary, for such conceptual contortions to be a regular thing).
I certainly don't doubt that "ultra-anti-antiislamic"[1] Erdogan is not that hot on Judaism, as well. It's at least a 'twofer" reason, right? (Was going to end on a smiley, but it doesn't feel entirely a smiley-worthy conclusion to come to.)
[1] Anything that is not pro-islamic, he seems to be against. Broad secularism included, even/especially that which Ataturk espoused. And "the wrong types of Islam", a la Discworldish "not-a-dwarf"ism. Makes me wonder how much is his true ideology and how much is just political pragmatism in finding the best way to keep his personal popularity jugernaut driving by finding the route ahead through the crowded marketplace that most of 'his' people would actively fheer on.
Author
Topic: TURKISH ELECTIONS ARE... Over. All is lost. (TurkePol Thread?) (Read 21272 times)