text:
Forum Index »
Mountaineering & Alpinism »
exploring expedition
In August 2006 we will go to the unknown Kingata Shan to do an exploration expedition with our team. Now we are looking for other climbers to join firstname.lastname@example.com
You must login to post.
MEMBERSHIP IS REQUIRED TO POST: You must be a Forum, Annual or Lifetime Member to post messages in the backpackinglight.com forums.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »
i must be thick............ i've been through all the instruction booklets trying to figure out why this (not long bought) battery pack has stopped working for me?
i use it on my D90 with a nikon EN-EL3e and a 'blumax' equivilent battery.............. the combination worked to begin with but now nothing
is it possible the 'blumax' equivilent has somehow damaged the battery pack?
it charged fine and worked fine prior to being used in the pack
and still charges up, my camera battery info still says its 'young'
can battery packs be repaired for less than they cost?!
I never got my MBD80 to work with third party batteries, so it may be as simple as that.
Is it a genuine Nikon MB-D80 or one of the Chinese clones?
Quote: Is it a genuine Nikon MB-D80 or one of the Chinese clones?
i did dread this................ not sure if i would be able to tell the difference
it came in a authentic nikon box and has authentic nikon booklets, has labels/part numbers and even seems to have the same finish just like my D90...........
Assuming it doesn't work using just the EN3LE alone, it appears to be a fault in the unit. By the way, do both batteries work OK when used dirctly in the camera, it's not quite clear from your original comment..if so that would confirm it I would think.
thanks for replies
both batteries charge and work ok
obviously the EN-EL3e holds its charge for far longer than the 'blumax' equivilent but it always did perform better anyway before i started putting it in a battery pack
is it possible to damage the battery pack unit using non generic batteries?
and does anyone know if its worth or even possible to get it fixed?
hmmmm important lesson learned *only use brand accessories*
It might be worth checking the contacts inside the grip for dirt or corrosion, even if there is nothing obvious it might be worth cleaning them. You can use a proprietory cleaner, or a baby bud dipped in a little isopropyl alcohol and squeezed almost dry. Some people say that at a pinch you can use vodka instead.
Also, clean the contact pins on the top of the grip and make sure they are dry before re-fitting into the camera.
If the grip came in a genuine Nikon box then it is almost certainly Kosher. The clones are quite openly clones and use brand names like Hahnel.
Nikon are getting quite cute at preventing the use of clone batteries. My wife's P7100 cannot operate with clones that do work in the P7000. But I was not aware that this ringfencing technology had been used in the MB-D80. Maybe the first thing to check is that the grip works OK with two genuine Nikon batteries. You should also have an alternative slide that takes normal Duracells or their like, so check if that works.
And, no. I don't think you could damage the grip by using clone batteries (unless they leaked or something like that)
thanks for all replies
sorry for delay in this reply..............
i've got the battery grip working again with one genuine nikon battery! it does not work with the 'clone' blumax battery singularly or in tandem
incidently i recently bought a charger (MH-18a) and it made an audible 'pop' after and hour of being plugged in followed by a smell of burning, now in the process of trying to get my money back........
i'm NEVER buying non- generics off the internet ever again!
i'm NEVER buying non- generics off the internet ever again!
I think you mean "generics".
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.


text:
- Participant
- Donald Trump
The Celebrity Apprentice USA, Series 3 Episode 10 of 11
Duration: 1 hour, 25 minutes
Business competition. Former winners Bill Rancic and Joan Rivers interview the remaining candidates to determine who will make it through to the final.
BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.


text: Blow 'em up with the Maurkice Pouncey Performance Tee by NFL Team Apparel. Made from moisture wicking micro-pique polyester, this cool athletic top is designed to resemble the jersey Maurkice wears on the field. Features include Maurkice's jersey number on the front, back and sleeves, a "Pouncey" name plate on the back and a screened Steelers emblem on the chest. Order yours today from the Official Steelers Online Store and show the world what a true Steelers fan looks like.


text:
Your email has been sent.
Karl Marx: The Greatest Intellectual Fraud of the 19th and 20th Centuries
An impressive new biography looks at the original Jewish leftist—and shines light on the appeal of radical politics for Jews
Cold Case
The Plot Against England
Finally, Marx was a failure as a prophet, in spite of the fact that he inspired revolutions that changed the course of history. His essential idea, influenced by Ricardo, was that capitalism would become less and less profitable and that its downward spiral toward the abyss of deflation—lower prices, lower profits—would be followed by worldwide revolution. Instead, capitalism has become vastly more profitable.
It's important to remember that American communism was hardly a classroom sport. Like today's al-Qaida agents, communists were sworn to overthrow the government on behalf of a foreign enemy in order to usher in a millennial moment of radical social transformation. Yet memories of Jewish communism in America usually come wrapped in the warm, rosy glow of the good old days, when passionate solidarity reigned. In The Romance of American Communism, Vivian Gornick interviewed a hundred veterans of the party, many of them Jews. She quotes Sarah Gordon, who describes communist politics as "rich, warm, energetic, an exciting thickness in which our lives were wrapped. … in us and in all like us lay the exciting, changing world." "The Party was everything," garment worker Ben Saltzman told Gornick. "If I died I would have willed everything I had to the Party. I would have left my wife if necessary." One hears the hard edge of fanaticism in such statements, combined with the softness of a towering naïveté, the sentimental and dangerous belief that if one wills something like the greatness of the Soviet Union to be true, then it must be true. Gornick discounts the insidiousness of all of this, intent on seeing only good will and suffering in the impoverished, aging men and women she interviewed. Suffer they did, but they were nevertheless blind.
American communists did some good, particularly when they fought for racial justice. But they did much more bad: David Greenglass and the Rosenbergs helped bring the world close to atomic Armageddon and gave the Soviet Union, as a nuclear-armed power, the might to subject millions to its tyranny. It's hard to reconcile the Rosenbergs' treacherous deeds with the tributes to comradeship and humanity that Gornick gleaned from her interviews. A large majority of Jews chose socialism or liberalism over communism, and they ought to be praised for the suspicion that is a necessary part of democratic responsibility, their refusal to give in to Soviet propaganda. Sperber, for his part, is unable to explain why Marx was so appealing to Lenin and Trotsky, Stalin and Mao—and why his ideas became the basis for a terrifying new social order.
In his biography of Marx, Isaiah Berlin singled out one of this radical thinker's central ideas: that the inner convictions we take to be the ground of moral and religious truth are in fact illusions, myths that need to be demolished so that humanity can be freed from its chains. Our beliefs about right and wrong cannot be taken at face value, Marx argued, because we have been duped into them by our historical circumstances. So, Marx in his March 1850 Address to the Communist League exhorted his followers to "force the democrats to carry out their current terrorist phrases." Speaking of "so-called excesses" like "the people's revenge on hated individuals," he proclaimed that the workers "must not just tolerate such excesses but take over the leadership of them."
Berlin emphasized an aspect of Marx that Sperber largely overlooks: his endorsement of revolutionary violence as a way to push history forward. In Marx's view, history is an inexorable process that cannot be resisted or denied; but it also must be helped along. In its full-fledged version, the Marxist dialectic is a powerful intellectual toolkit for justifying oppression, since whatever the party leaders decide to do expresses the will of history itself.
It is striking that popular culture and the universities alike are fixated on Jewish communism instead of Jewish socialism, reversing the actual historical record, in which socialists early on triumphed over their communist rivals. New York's most influential Yiddish daily, the Forward, was at the heart of the storm. "At the very beginning the Forward was reluctant to criticize the Soviet government, even though they were at war with the local Communists in New York," commented historian Daniel Soyer, co-author of The Emerging Metropolis: New York Jews in the Age of Immigration, in an interview. "They saw the Red Army and the Soviets as a bulwark against anti-Semitism." But by 1922 the split between the socialist Forward and the Communist Party was complete. Jewish communists even tried, without success, to prevent Abraham Cahan, the Forward's anti-Bolshevist editor, from being allowed to visit the Soviet Union in 1927. A Russian Yiddish paper, Emes, lambasted the Forward as a "strikebreaking daily": They called Cahan's paper a brothel with a mezuzah on its door, the mezuzah being its hollow professions of leftist faith. "One thing Cahan said was that the Soviets had gotten it backwards," Soyer remarked to me. "Socialism was supposed to abolish poverty, but the Russians had abolished wealth instead."
As the '20s went on, the prestige of the communist movement declined drastically among American Jews. "In 1929 the Communists just looked ridiculous," Tony Michels, author of A Fire in Their Hearts: Yiddish Socialists in New York, told me in an interview, "when they first condemned the Arab riots in Palestine, and then basically supported them, all on orders from Moscow. They were thoroughly discredited, and there was so much hostility to the Communists, it almost put the Communist paper, the Frayhayt, out of business."
During the Popular Front period of the 1930s, the Communist Party USA famously adopted as its slogan "Communism is twentieth-century Americanism." But for communist Jews, being Red was a way of asserting their radical difference, rather than their right to belong in American society. The party card they carried signaled their disagreement with American racism and American conformity, with the white picket fences that excluded the downtrodden, the ethnic others. Tragically, such a statement of protest meant loyalty to a totalitarian foreign power and to a leadership that manipulated and abused them as a matter of course.
In the 21st century, with communism long dead, Jews still want to express their difference from mainstream America. But they rarely choose revolutionary politics as their means of expression. Instead, religious observance, commitment to Israel, and work for social justice are the main ways that Jews proclaim their identity. Rather than looking backward with yearning toward a true Red past, Jews should rejoice that most of us were free from the illusion that warped so many minds and lives and that America was spared what so many other countries had to endure: the coming to pass of Marx's vision.
Like this article? Sign up for our Daily Digest to get Tablet Magazine's new content in your inbox each morning.
David Mikics is the author, most recently, of Slow Reading in a Hurried Age. He lives in Brooklyn and Houston, where he is John and Rebecca Moores Professor of English at the University of Houston.
Jewish Comedy Has Earned Big Praise, But Is It Time to Stop the Joke-Telling?
Scholar Ruth Wisse likes to laugh as much anyone, but also sees peril when Jews can't seem to quit clowning around. In 'No Joke' she explains why.
I was hoping for more on why Marx was a fraud.
This book Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders – The Golden Age – The Breakdown BY Leszek Kolakowski would be the place to start. It really gives an education. There is a three volume set that goes farther into Communist history but that is more than you need and goes well beyond Marx but into Marxist schools of thought.
Marx is very hard to critique in a small article. He was a shyster but he wasn't stupid by a long shot. His main rhetorical device was to separate the state from the so-called people or society. The state is a repressive instrument while the people are a class with known needs and can be easily led by those with the know-how. When you are arrested by the state it is unjust simply because the state represents an economic system and not the masses. When the identical cops arrest you in Marx's paradise its on behalf of the people and society and automatically just. Animal Farm was an allegory about the process but the outcome is a fixed point. The withering away of the state is not really a reality either. It is simply the belief that as the masses accept things as they are the state simply becomes less psychologically intrusive which is why re-education camps are so necessary and so brutal. No paradise while some are unconvinced they are in paradise.
There's a big difference between being a nasty person (although less so in the context of his time) and intellectually derivative (which he certainly was) and being a fraud.
I don't see any evidence that he presented other's ideas as his own, or fabricated evidence. He speculated, and while his speculations may have had value in stimulating the work of others, in hindsight they were not particularly accurate.
Of course, there was never a real world test of his economic theories, since he had predicted that the transition from capitalism to socialism would take place in an advanced capitalistic society like Germany, not a developing feudal society like the Soviet Union.
Converting out doesn't make a Jew a non-Jew. Duh.
What a singularly reductive attempt to grapple with complexity. Oddly, the author of this review (perhaps the book under discussion) evades the profound influence of Marx on the vision of the kibbutz, which accomplished so much and whose relevance may yet endure. And as far as the larger argument about the "triumph" of capitalism, many recognize that it too was a terribly flawed system that wreaks havoc on human life and the planet. And as others here have noted, the strangely formulated assertion of "fraud" remains unproved.
On the Jewish Question – Karl Marx, anti-Semitism and the War against the West by Chuck Morse
Link: http://amzn.com/B00BDFMG30
see http://www.profitandentropy.com
Supply-demand, free marketism is a theory of price stability. It has no theory of profit except as pricing inefficiency, which is the need to spend more currency to make a transaction successful than would simply recover value, which Marx correctly assessed as the cost-to-market of goods or services. The reviewer makes the common mistake of equating value with Buyer worth, which is a subjective estimation. Some products have much value — they are costly to produce — but not much worth to customers (like Microsoft stuff). Apple products succeed because of their perceived worth to customers, much of which has nothing to do with value, because as every ad-person knows, most of product worth is self-esteem, social status enhancement.
Marx's problem was to identify profit as alienating the worker from the fruits of his/her labor, since owners "steal" the profits. The view of profit as evil is held over from medieval religion, which assigned filthy lucre to Jews to manage, leading to Goldman-Sachs, Geitner et al.
At profitandentropy.com, two old Jews try to update the relationship of economics to natural science, which has not changed since 1776. Understanding the relation of profit to increasing entropy makes humane and practical sense of what Marx, not a scientist any more than Adam Smith or Larry Summers, could understand.
A fraud, sort of. Much of the economic theories that he espoused were based on data that was, very early, shown to be flawed.
So, basically, he was comfortable using erroneous information to prove the "correctness" of his doctrines. Whether this is really fraud or self delusion is a question best left to those with more expertise than me.
Is this supposed to be a book review? It does not deliver.
Yes and no. Market value does an excellent job of working the various unseen and to a single individual unknowable inputs that can make up a product. You don't know the price of the components of an Apple Iphone and Apple probably doesn't know anything about the commodity price of the raw materials in the components. Even if they tracked the commodity markets they still wouldn't know at what price a particular raw material in their phones was priced at.
This is the common thread of command economies including liberal socialist ones. They assume they know too much about what value is and in the fluctuating world we live they find they know nothing but their own empty assumptions. Intellectuals see successful businessmen as simply street smart as opposed to the canny evaluators of market condition they often are. In fact economists are not known as particularly good investors, even those who agree with Capitalism.
Well, why not? Converting in certainly does make a non-Jew into a Jew, so it stands to the reason that converting out would have the opposite effect. To go into more detail, I do concede that the convert-out himself might often be a sort of Schroedinger's cat but certainly in the next generation there is not much Jewishness left.
Not sure how this answers the question, but definitely read anything by Kolakowski.
This review conflates many elements of Marx's work with its later interpreters. Because Marxism really can be like a religion, complete with prophet and dogma, it's tempting to dismiss his work in toto. But the work itself is more complex. Marx does a pretty good job of describing the unfettered capitalism of his time. Some of this work can be used to understand the relationship between multinational corporations and governments.
However, his single-minded focus on that expression of capitalism meant that he gave short shrift to other areas. He assume change happens only through conflict and that economics trumps all else. As a result, he more or less skips over the role of government and posits communism as an idea without any flesh on it. And he flat out doesn't get religion–including Judaism and yeah, his work
on Jews is appalling (despite the fact that some of his writing reads
like the Prophets).
I carry no brief for Marx, but neither do I think his entire body of work should be dismissed, but like any thinker of great influence (and he is that–whatever one may think of the nature of that influence), looked at critically.
This so-called review is a piece of adolescent red-baiting trash by some one who
reveals his ignorance of history (especially German and enlightenment history),
economics or recent American political-economic writing. It would appear the
reviewer is in the thralls of another of his youthful teen-age enthusiasms which
he spends so much time telling us about as if this validates his knowledge of
Marx and Marxists. For an intelligent and accurate review of this book one
can turn to the recent review on the London Review of Books [http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n10/richard-j-evans/marx-v-the-rest] by Richard Evans and subsequent
letters in the next three issues.
I also find it offensive in a zine devoted to Jewish culture that you permitted
a previous comment to describe Marx as a "shyster." Would you also allow
someone to refer to a person identified as a Jew as a "Christ-killer?"
Marx tried to explain why human society becomes richer despite of the growth of population, why stocks on average increase their value and so on – something, no other economist even tried to do. He claimed that by using scientific (deterministic) methods he found the underlying reason for inequality and social injustice and how to overcome them. No one (except the reality) was able yet to refute his theory. Therefore his followers claim that his theory is absolutely correct and only its implementations (everywhere: in Russia, China, Cuba, etc) were wrong. Maybe that is why he is still so popular among materialists and "revolutionaries". I wonder why socialists (also big "fighters for the equality and social justice") didn't embrace him.
The problem is that humans are not robots, determinism cannot determine their actions and therefore it is impossible to achieve equality among them and every effort to do that is a fight against the laws of nature which leads to more tragedies and calamities.
Karl Marx a Jew? Hardly. Are we community of blood or faith? Marx, a son of converted Jews had nothing Jewish about him except his ancestry. it is time for us to stop claiming every scoundrel who had some Jewish ancestry. Marxism has failed. Let's get over him once and for all. let him rest in the proverbial Marxist dustbin of History where he belongs.
Yes and yes. I was referring to products that robots deliver, or to financial instruments that magnify profits without providing any cost-recovery, as having Buyer worth but no economic value. The reviewer blurs worth and value, as we see it at profitandentropy.com. I regret Habbgun is suspicious of intellectuals, but really it helps to be broadly educated especially in the sciences when dealing with broad issues. Canny evaluation is intuition, but intelligence requires reflection and deliberate thought.
Kolakowski never has a chapter specifically saying that Marx is a fraud but he does outline the clever ways Marx would show intellectual and "scientific" underpinnings to his work but purposefully squelch any opportunities for debate about his work. It was automatically established "truth". It is the single outstanding point of Marxists even today. Marx would do this against both Capitalist writers and more importantly socialist ones that he considered competitors.
For instance most socialist schools of thought did not think socialism was historically inevitable but it was desirable. Therefore they believed in experimental communities, etc. Science is the systematic use of experiment and trial and error to achieve verifiable results. In this sense these schools were really scientific.
Marx merely asserted his socialism was inevitable due to his use of Hegel's ideas (which are scientifically unprovable) and called his socialism, scientific and all other socialisms unscientific and therefore unrealistic and unworkable. Marxists only consider non-Marxist socialism a convenient way-station but without any more legitimacy than that.
Arguments of any kind against Marxism are never legitimate criticisms. They are anti-revolutionary agitprop and on and on and on. You can never isolate a single workable idea from Marxism and use it. It is always circular. Marxism is inevitable. For Marxism to work though Marxism must be fully put in place by revolutionaries (who are somehow not real people with free will but inevitable revolutionaries, unless we are not in a revolutionary period due to counter-revolutionary lies and agitprop) who will bring about the Marxist state that was inevitable anyway.
Marxists are designed to be impervious to facts. Stalin's atrocities were well documented but until the USSR Itself admitted to it Communists all over the world considered it as if it didn't exist and then went into intellectual crisis mode after the party made those facts "official". Outside influences are wiped out in favor of the idea and the individual is continually purged of bad thoughts. As they say its a feature not a bug.
Also Marx realized that he was a philosopher pretending to be an economist so he went to the London School of Economics to build up his economic credibility. At that point Marxism became an even greater pseudo-science. Economic theories are proposed and disposed as needed and when proven unworkable Marxism suddenly becomes a philosophy again with those who don't abide by Marxist theories being labeled counter-revolutionaries and not legitimate critics and so on.
Marxism means never having to say you're sorry. You always get to say its your fault my ideas suck.
What an intellectually shallow piece of redbaiting drivel. This has all the trite tropes of the genre (à la http://www.newrepublic.com/article/books/the-deadly-jester): Marx was a vicious anti-Semite (obtuse reading, and relevant how?); I was a flaming Marxist in my youth (i.e. socialism = a youthful, idealistic, immature Weltanschauung); Trotsky and the Bolsheviks killed millions of people (a cheap, if implicit, assumption of the moral high ground); and leftist academics are charlatans (again, how is this relevant? If he has observed a few seminar leaders incoherently spew random bits of Zizek-Badiou and speak without any competence about the crises of capitalism, how does that discredit the theory/theorists themselves?)
Communism was a failure because economic system was (and is) a failure. Any Jew who has been close to Israel over the years knows that when Israel abandoned socialism its economy soared. The same can be said for Russia, China, India and eastern Europe. While most economies have not totally abandoned all their socialist parts (including the US), we have seen great strides where capitalism has replaced socialism. What the world needs is even freer economies.
The Modern State of Israel was established by Labor Zionists, Socialists and Communists, all influenced by the writings of Marx and others.
Marx was born as a Protestant. He didn't convert. His parents did and he was never raised as a Jew. He had no Jewish characteristics whatsoever, and did not share our faith which is the central tenet of being a Jew.
It may stand to reason, in your opinion, but it doesn't work that way. Jewishness is something else entirely. I know a lot of people who are Jewish whose Jewishness is pretty meh, but it doesn't change the fact that they're Jews. If your mother was Jewish or you had a valid conversion to Judaism, you are Jewish. You can become pope, and it doesn't change that.
Judaism is Judaism, and being Jewish is being Jewish. "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave." A Jew who converts out remains Jewish.
I agree. Had Marx realized that, he may have embraced his Jewish heritage and may have not gone off of the derech. Too many Jews are given the misconception that we are not a people and that G-d's covenant promise does not remain. D'varim 32:8-9 quite specifically states that we are a people, and the covenant to Ya'akov remains to this day.
Marx was born a Jew, and his parents were Anusim.
Marx was a very-misguided man who was trying to find answers in the midst of rampant Anti Semitism and worker exploitation in the Industrial Revolution. David Mikics, I think, is trying to explain that Marx put himself on the wrong path–inventing a worldview instead of looking in answers in one that endured for good reason (be it, e.g., Judaism or true–i.e., Jewish–Christianity) did not help Marx.
Well, if you think that we are bounded by the Jewish faith then you must believe in Torah. And Torah states that G-d made an agreement not only with those who were present at that time at Sinai but with all their descendants as well. In other words, if you think that we are bounded by our faith then you must to accept that we are bounded by our blood even more.
It doesn't matter what you think. Jews are chosen by G-d people. Humans have no power to become Jews or non-Jews on their own will.
I have to say a big thank you to the previous commenters, who have, for the most part, articulated more effectively than I can how disturbing I find this article. It's as much a mistake to demonize Marx (a "fraud"? really?) as it is to make him into a saint. I am not as well-educated on Marxism as many of the other commentators (I'm the child of Republicans), but at the risk of sounding dumb I will say that part of the reason I chose Jewish identity was because of the proud lineage of leftists, rabble-rousers and activists who were and are Jewish. And, Communism bad for America? What about Emma Goldman?
This means that nobody can become a Jew by conversion. Do you really mean it?
Care to give examples?
That would be interesting – do you have evidence for that?
Fine, like I've said before, a convert-out certainly retains part of his Jewish identity. But what about his children? His grand-children? Their grand-children? Wouldn't you agree that at some point down the line the Jewishness is just no longer there? Here's an example – was Esau Jewish? His children? His grand-children? Were the Edomites, his descendants, Jewish?
Ruth's ethnicity didn't change, for example, did it? She became a gerah tzedekah but not an Ethnic Israelite/Jew.
Google it–Herschel "Heinrich Marx" Mordechai could not become a lawyer unless he became Protestant. In fact, at around the same time, my maternal grandmother's Siedenburg-Mueller great-great-grandparents had their daughter (Elizabetha "Betha" Mueller, later Elizabeth Pundt) baptized; Abraham Mendelssohn had his children baptized, and (in England) Isaac Disraeli had his children (including Benjamin) baptized. There are more examples that I could give (and ones that I don't even know about, though I know that they're out there). Keep in mind that the clime in Europe at the time was heavily Anti Semitic and Pseudo Christian, and that many Jews chose to become Anusim for the sake of assimilation–not because they were Messianic at all, although there was a growing Hebrew Christian movement at the time as well.
Maybe he didn't believe that the data was flawed, though. Some people, even when one shows them evidence of what's the truth of a matter, just can't be convinced of anything but what they'd like to believe. Marx could be comparable to some of those those who honestly believe that, for example, that 9/11 was an inside job–just like some people honestly (for whatever reason) can't believe like that were and are sick and perverse human beings like Usama bin Laden and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (yemach shemam), Marx could not be convinced that free marketeerism wasn't evil in of itself.
What does "ethnicity" mean anyway a biblical context? (It's a 19th century construct). Ruth accepted Naomi's God and Naomi's people – what more could or should she have done to change her ethnicity?
And what about her children? Did they become "Ethnic Jews"? What about a certain great-grandson? I hope at least he was ethnic…
Then how come there's Jewish DNA, even a Cohen Modal Haplotype? One doesn't have to be religiously or spiritually Jewish in order to be ethnically/physically Jewish. Besides, if a Jew doesn't remain a Jew, then there's no reason for G-d to have threatened to cut off (kill or exile) anyone who worships other gods, and even those who worshiped or have worshiped other gods–from Moloch and Asherah, to Vishnu and Krishna–still have had mercy promised on them and/or their descendants, and the promise that G-d would bring them back to Him and cleanse their iniquities. In fact, Ezekiel prophesied, "Then shall ye remember your evil ways, and your doings that were not good; and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations. Not for your sake do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you; be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel. Thus saith the Lord GOD: In the day that I cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will cause the cities to be inhabited, and the waste places shall be builded. And the land that was desolate shall be tilled, whereas it was a desolation in the sight of all that passed by. "
Alex Jones, for example–he's an example of a "truther", and he unfortunately has plenty of followers.
Perhaps we have different definitions of Anusim – I assumed you meant Jews who converted under duress but secretly maintained some Jewish traditions and returned to Judaism when conditions allowed it (possibly after some generations).
What I've googled so far shows no evidence for Marx's family fitting this definition: they converted under duress of a kind, but what traditions did they preseve? In what way did some member of the family return to Judaism? If you can produce positive answers to these two questions, you've proved they were Anusim. Otherwise, as far as I can tell they were just run-of-the-mill converts-out.
What wikipedia says about Marx's father is:
"Heinrich Marx became a passionate Prussian patriot and monarchist who educated his family as liberal Lutherans." This is given on no lesser authority than I.Berlin so I won't be holding my breath very strongly for the evidence I've asked for. But perhaps – who knows?
"Ethnos" is actually an ancient Greek word meaning "people" or "nation". By the way, I recommend J.R. Wilheim's "The Truth About Matrilineal Descent". While I myself think that Matrilineal Descent is just as Biblically valid, J.R. Wilhelm rightly points out, "Deuteronomy 7:3-4 most likely expresses no concern over a non-Israelite woman's turning "your son" away not because such a child is not Jewish but because such a child is unquestionably Jewish." and "There is no clear reason that Judaism has to be matrilineal, except that it has been so for many centuries." In Biblical times, societies were mainly patriarchal. Also, man (Adam) came first and determines the gender of a child–so, as one could argue, Ruth's ethnicity would not have mattered at all as to whether Oved, Yishai, and David were Jewish.
1. Ain't no such thing as Jewish DNA (or Russian DNA or French DNA, for that matter). As wikipedia makes clear: "One source of early confusion was a widespread popular notion that only
Cohens or only Jews could have the Cohen Modal Haplotype. It is now
clear that this is not the case." To be sure, I'm not saying that haplotypes are bogus or irrelevant – they do indicate that the Jewish people was not "invented" as some would have it. But beyond that, haplotypes are best left out of such discussions – they can't prove anything about a particular person and not all Jews and even not all priests have them.
2. Your second argument is interesting but I don't think it's conclusive. We cannot second-guess God's will and intentions. Had He wanted to lay down the rule that converted-out Jews and their descendants remain Jews forever, this rule would have been explicitly given.
3. Your third argument, from Ezekiel, is apparently an attemt to locate jsut such an explicit rule in the Tanakh but imho you overinterpret this passage. It clearly addresses Jews as a collective, a people, and so cannot be applied automatically to a single person.
What about the Edomites? Are they Jews or not?
Mr. Mikics, for over-rated hateful anti-Semitic intellectual, please don't forget Noam Chomsky. He's a one-man synthesis of Nazism, Holocaust denial and Communism.
Actually I was asking Mike for examples of Marx knowingly using false data.
Communists didn't do a thing for Israel. Zionists come from Theodor Herzl, not Karl Marx. To say they were influenced by an openly anti-Semitic imbecile like Marx is false and ridiculous.
The State of Israel does not consider a Christian to be a Jew. Your argument is nonsense.
You're now just arguing with Tanakh (cf. e.g., Deuteronomy 32:8-9, Ezekiel 36:31-34) and science at this point. Even gentile descents of Jews can have the CMH. We don't have to like that Marx was Jewish and a Self-Hating Jew; and we can't change Tanakh or science whether or not we want to do so.
Well, I don't accept genelevit's argument but it takes more than an appeal to the authority of the State of Israel (of which I am a proud citizien) to refute that argument.
In other words: the State, with all dues respect, is not qualified to arbitrate sich questions. It makes laws to regulate the practical questions but these laws cannot be cited as religious arguments.
Try Communism and Islamism and see if they're better than capitalism.
Anusim! That's a lie. No one forced them to convert. You've been remarkable on this site for the evil lies your spread.
Sorry about that. I misread.
Not for the state of Israel. Not for a rabbi. Not for most Jews.
Ahm, I am arguing with your interpretation of the Tanakh and of science – as you are with mine. Perhaps we will eventually reach agreement.
Deuteronomy 32 is a general praise of God for creating various peoples – it says nothing about conversion between them. As for the Ezekiel passage, I've already said that with all due respect you are probably misinterpreting it. I suggest you look up the Hebrew original http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t1236.htm – it's written in the plural (a point lost in English translation). Therefore it's much more likely to be a statement about the Jewish people as a whole rather than an indivudal admonishment.
As for science – haplotypes are far from the rock-solid science you take them to be. It's a new science, it's in flux, and its findings are hotly argued. Anyway – what about those Jews who don't have the CHM? Are they fake Jews?
And I'd really love to know what's your take on the Edomites – are they Jews or not?
No problem, happens to me at times too :)
Oh dear, another one of those "not to be a socialist at 20″ types – and one who spend too much time on Trotsky to make it even worse.
However, these kind of articles do remind me to be careful to be too sure of myself, or too smother myself by only looking at one point of view only.
The link gives a "page not found" error. Could you give the title of the NR article?
Paul Johnson, in his History of the Jewish People, pp. 346-55, despite highly dubious claims about Marx's "rabbinical" modes of thought, nevertheless argues much more persuasively and with many examples that Marx's Communism grew out of his antisemitism and Jewish self-hatred; the "Capitalist" was the "Jew" generalized, in Marx's worldview, and "Capitalism" was, as his first major essay in economic theory put it, simply "Judaism." Eliminate one, and you eliminate the other. But there were plenty of other self-refuting aspects of his thought, says Johnson (I would call them "fraudulent," but Johnson does not use the term). He never set foot in a factory, and actually despised the Proletariate he praised in his books as the necessary tools of the historical dialectical overthrow of the Capitalist order. However, the Proletariate had to be led to redemption by a hard and determined intellectual elite, people like Marx himself; the workers were merely the "men without substance," the means to a higher end, and "scientifically," the ends are what justify the means.
Although he spent all his time in the library amassing "scientific facts" and data, his Dickensian exaggerations and descriptions of British capitalism applied to a generation or more before his own time. His Das Kapital describes, and caricatures, a Britain that no longer existed. It was a Britain that had decades before his book came out passed laws against the child labor, bad working conditions, etc., that Marx revelled in as a present reality; it was a Britain that had opened up the middle class to millions of the poor. This reminds us that, fatefully, Marx never understood the democratic system any more than he understood religion or society generally. All of these were mere phoney puppets of the exploiting classes, he thought, even as, inspired by social and religious norms mainstream Britain passed him by and through democratic reforms made all dreams of cataclysm and revolution impossible of realization.
But this removal from empirical reality and actual investigation is not accidental. Johnson says: "(H)e was quite incapable of conducting objective, empirical research. He simply went through any likely material to furnish 'proof' of conclusions he had already reached … " Karl Jaspers is quoted as saying that, unlike genuinely scientific researchers, "(H)e does not quote examples or adduce facts which run counter to his own theory … the whole approach is one of vindication, not investigation …" This attitude, precisely, was his real lasting contribution to Communism: the fanaticism that could ignore that contrary to Marx's own "historical determinism" there were no spontaneously erupting Communist Revolutions in the advanced industrialized countries — they only erupted in the poorly developed and mostly agricultural countries, and demanded the tacit overthrow of all Marx's own prescriptions for the pre-revolutionary phase of history.
Yes, he was a fraud.
" I don't accept genelevit's argument" Why – not? If you are a religious man then your "blood" makes you a Jew since these are not my words but Torah's. And if you are not a religious man then you can be a Jew only by blood. Either way the blood and not religion defines who is a Jew.
It means just what i said: G-d chooses who is a Jew. Long time ago he chose us to be "Jews" because he made a bris with our ancestors. As to all other individuals – that is up to him: if he chooses one to be "a Jew" then that person might become a Jew by "conversion". Otherwise he won't.
(There are many instances when people became "Jews" without formal "conversion" and there are instances of the opposite nature as well.)
I don't accept your argument because it seems to imply that gerim are not Jews – a flat-out contradiction. If you can square that, please explain how.
And generally speaking, I tend to balk at the fetishization of "blood", be it Jewish or otherwise…
Communists didn't do much, agreed. But I see you conveniently forgot the Labor Zionists… Which is not right, as for all their faults, they've actually built Israel.
So what is Jewishness?
The State of Israel doesn't determine Jewish law. They don't say that a Jew who has become Christian isn't a Jew, though; just that he isn't eligible for citizenship under the Law of Return.
And yes, for any Orthodox rabbi. And most Jews don't know the first thing about Jewish law.
There is no point. There may be a point where we don't know, but that doesn't change the fact. Esau was not Jewish. No one was born Jewish prior to Sinai. It wasn't a thing. Everyone chose their own path. Esau chose the wrong one. After Sinai, you're born either Jewish or not.
No, but neither was Esau, so your point is no point.
Keep flogging that horse…
They weren't Anusim. They were Minim.
"You can't be a lawyer if you're a Jew" is very different from "You have to leave or die if you're a Jew". It doesn't make a person an Anus. A Meshumad, perhaps.
Wrong. Without proper conversion, a non-Jew remains a non-Jew. But there is such a thing as proper conversion, and God gave us the laws regarding that.
Giyoret tzedek. And I don't know what you mean by "ethnic". I don't know if there was such a thing back then. Either way, she was born a non-Jew and became a Jew.
What is intelligence? What is athleticness? Jewishness is something like "ethnicity" as mentioned above. It's subjective. Lenny Bruce put it this way: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD6Oi2kySSU
I don't see any contradiction. It is similar of having nationality. If your parents are Americans then you also are an American. But even if your parents are not Americans you still can become an American. However, in this case, not your personal will but an American law will determine your eligibility.
As to the "blood"… Those who went to the "auto-da-fe" or to crematorium probably had even bigger desire that their religion and not their "blood" would determine their identity. We have been chosen and can do nothing about it.
What makes Marx a "fraud?" He was a serious intellectual whose theories are subject to criticism. Not based on fraud, but on their merits.
He was not a Jew because he was not raised as a Jew, didn't consider himself a Jew and had a father who converted from Judaism to Lutheranism and a mother who was not Jewish.
His essay "On the Jewish Question" is highly objectionable, although it was actually meant as an argument for the civic emancipation of Jews. What bothers me most as that Marx never revisited this essay even though a Jewish working class had grown up right before his eyes in England.
I do not doubt, however, that he would have opposed any form of poitical or racist anti-Semitism, as did Engels after Marx's death.
Thank you for correcting my Hebrew. I did not have the privilege of learning any Hebrew when I was growing up.
The definition of Anusim extended to those who converted due to economic sanctions, and the Wikipedia article even stated that Herschel Marx was in trouble with the law several times.
He wasn't a Christian. He was an Atheist whose parents became Anusim in order for Heinrich Marx to be able to become a lawyer and live well enough (e.g., without law enforcement persecuting him) in Prussia.
Most people here ignore Tanakh, from what I gather. When G-d promises to make the descendants of Avraham, Yitzhak, and Ya'akov a special people, He (at least to me) means it.
That's where, I think, we get caught up in being afraid of our Jewish heritage. Instead of being proud that we survived even the Holocaust and that G-d kept his promise to return us to our land, we let the Nazis rob us of our heritage and use it in a perverse way.
In case your history is lacking, you may want to read up on David ben Gurion, Moshe Dayan, Golda Meir, and Ze'ev Jabotinsky. All were involved with Socialism and/or Communism. Again, we don't have to like history, but we can't change it.
Socialists, I think, try to find a balance between Capitalism and Communism.
You don't have to be so rude. I understand that you subscribe to Orthodox halakhah very much, but you are missing a key part of halakhah: "'What is hateful to you, do not to your neighbour: that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it.'"
Firstly, "Ancestrally Ashkenazi Jewish, his maternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi, while his paternal line had supplied Trier's rabbis since 1723, a role taken by his grandfather Meier Halevi Marx" (Wikipedia) In fact, "Henrietta Pressburg, was a semi-literate Dutch Jew who claimed to suffer from "excessive mother love", devoting much time to her family and insisting on cleanliness within her home. Retaining her Jewish faith, her beliefs would have some influence on her children." (ibid.) So, his mother was Jewish. Secondly, even though Marx was a Self-Hating Jew who tried to disown his Jewishness, he was still Jewish. Thirdly, keep in mind that he was growing up in a time in which ", after Napoleon's defeat, Jews lost the rights of citizenship in several countries. Many Jews became Christian to retain those rights." (JewishVirtualLibrary) So, Marx may have been less Self Hating more dreadful of the unfair repercussions that his heritage could bring on him.
Oh, dear God. Economic sanctions doesn't mean you can't be a doctor or a lawyer. It means you can't get a job, period. It means no one will do business with you. Being barred from certain professions is something Jews have dealt with throughout our history, and someone who converts to get a leg up and have a lucrative income isn't an Anus; he's a traitor.
While I adamantly disagreed with much of Marx's ideas when I first became acquainted with them many years ago, this article throws the baby out with the bathwater. Never once does it describe the dialectic process, which was not a Marxian concept but an Hegalian concept which Marx adopted for his purpose. I happen to disagree that the dialectic is a good analytic tool, but that is its purpose in philosophy. While Hegel was a dialectical idealist, Marx proposed the dialectic as a material tool. Today, the argument between material and ideal have become obsolescent by dint of modern science, which the Soviets didn't realize until it impeded their development. Turning an idea into a dogma, the Lysenko fiasco in agriculture was another defeat for the dialectic method.
Its application to the running of the state created an inefficient operation where, at a place where the wheel hits the road, created its own classes that owned dachas and chauffered them around in top-of-the-line luxury automobiles while the vast majority of the working class rode public transportation to work, and those lucky enough to have a number low enough got to purchase vehicles which were rudimentary compared to autos made in the U.S. or Europe.
Marx was a product of the nineteenth century at a time when he could believe that a philosophical system could be created that would cover all of mankind's behavior from horizon to horizon. By the 20th century, theorists realized that society, economics, politics, etc., could not be covered by a one-size-fits-all philosophy or approach. What Marx did was make a great prognosis of capitalism. His criticism of capitalism can be exemplified by following the trends of growing disparity, particularly in countries where free enterprize is iconised.
My mistake. Yes mother was Jewish. Sorry. But he was not raised Jewish and he married a non-Jewish woman and did not raise his children Jewish.
He converted to Lutheranism and completely rejected his Jewish background.
get your facts right, Chomsky is an anarchist not a communist, he has never denied the holocaust. If you don't like the truth, then don't listen, but don't try to change reality with your closed minded rubbish.
What an incredibly uninformed article, e.g. "On the Jewish Question" is not an Essay, but a review of a book of said title. In this review Marx quotes the book discussed extensively, which doesn't make the quotes his own. In fact he was very critical of the book. So why is this "essay" (which ain't one in the first place) "infamous"? Your tales about being a student red are probably meant to assert a certain expertise on the field – which you clearly lack.
But our faith includes all those who have converted to Judaism, starting with the hundreds of converts Abraham brought into the fold and their descendants, and the "mixed multitude" of other slaves and free Egyptians who joined the Exodus and became Jews at Sinai itself, the Canaanites who converted in subsequent generations making the entire population "Jewish" by the time of the Babylonian Exile, and all later converts from all races who have joined us, so it is not a matter of blood and never was. The Jewish family lineage back to Abraham, as well as that back to Sinai, is a metaphorical family that encloses all believing Jews of whatever background.
If we halakhically inherit our Jewish status from our mother at birth, as I imagine you would say in response, we equally importantly do not do so from our father — so even here "blood" is not the decisive factor. Moreover, even if our mother is Jewish and we are not (by religious faith, i.e., in terms of affirming our Torah), we may indeed have some Jewish identity still, but this is not the case in the next generation nor forever down the female line — such descendants have to go through the formal conversion process to our religion to be properly "Jewish" in halakhic terms.
What would you expect him to have done; starve?
Natan, I don't know where to begin. For you to post the statement that you did truly reveals your lack of knowledge of Israeli history and that of the Jewish people. You need to learn the past 150 years of Jewish history to understand the role Jews played in left politics, Labor Zionism and other progressive movements. Your statement is practically a form of cultural genocide since it denies so much of who we were/are today. Pick up something on Herman Hess, the Second Aliyah, Labor Zionism, Union Organizing in Eastern Europe and New York during the late 1800s through mid 1900s and our engagement in Civil Rights Movements here and elsewhere.
Get a freaking job. Work in a shop. "I demand to be a member of a very high class profession, and if I can't do it while staying Jewish, then by damn, I'm not going to be Jewish!" That's pathetic.
Moses Hess not Herman. *)*
Do we really need another rehash of Irving Kristol and Norman Podoretz? WIth this article, TABLET sinks farther into its parochial, neo-con irrelevance. For an interesting and actually informative discussion of this book and of Marx, see the second-to-last issue of THE LONDON REVIEW OF BOOKS. Marx was a lousy prophet, to be sure, but a good analyst of power relations in a society organized around a capitalist economy. His critique seems especially cogent in these days in which the present and easily predictable crisis in neo-liberalism has shown clearly how the false the prophets of the free market have shown themselves to be. But of course the vicious crimes perpetrated by the would-be engineers of human souls in Argentina and Chile, as they instituted their market reforms are duly forgotten in discussions such as these. Mikics is a smart literary critic. Pity he had to write this.
This is brilliant. The comments have fallen into an argument about who is a Jew, rather than a discussion of the relative merits of Mikics's article and the relative worth of Marx's ideas. What a waste.
At the beginning of Mikics's attempt at a hatchet job on Derrida, he claims he was once an avid student of the man. At the beginning of this oddly ill-informed article on Marx, he once again claims he was a student of the object of his resentment. Mikics seems to make a habit of becoming strongly disaffected and to enjoy the self-righteousness of public recantation. I'm assuming that as Mikics went to Yale, he was a student of Bloom. There is much to be said here about both anxiety and influence, though to be honest, this piece is about thirty years out of date, and probably does really bear that much scrutiny.
Bizarre reading of the notion of the withering away of the state which comes from Hegel's theory of right. And remarkably ignorant about Marx's actual prognostications (he doesn't describe the Communist future) which attributes to Marx Lenin's theory of the vanguard party.
Astonishingly bizarre posting. LSE was founded in 1895. No way Marx went there. You are entitled to your ill-informed opinions but not your so-called "facts."
Surely you jest. The socialist parts of the US? Oh, you must be one of those true believers–like the old Reds who differentiated between "actual existing socialism" with all its failures and the bright communist future–who thinks that the vicious crisis we are in is the product not of too much freedom in the markets, but too little. Don't let the facts get in the way of your utopian beliefs.
Two of the biggest culprits of the current mess were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac along with a government policy that it should make home ownership easier. Our schools, government owned and operated, ie socialist, are a disgrace. We waste billions on the government rail system, Amtrak, that exists because passenger rail is obsolete. These are just a few of the socialist partsof the US we would better off without.
You are right sir!!!! I remembered wrong. He went to London to study the latest available economic theories but did not formally study in a university. Good get!!!
True enough again sir!!! Well done. I am not an expert I have read what I could by the experts and always need correcting. Thank you sensei !!!
You still have some problems though. Lenin is an accurate reflection of Marx. He would not have been the leader of the first Communist nation if he was not. Lenin had the problem of turning theory into reality and we all know Marx wrote scientifically. The withering away of the state is inevitable because things like Hegel's theory of right says so. Engineers apply Newtonian principles successfully all the time because Newton was right. Saying the practitioners of Marx have failed the master is a cop out.
In fact you are arguing in a classic Marxist style. It is called citing the master. You correct information about the master but never allow the master to be challenged BUT FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY your goal is to prevent people from reading the far more authoritative writings refuting Marx.
Van Mises, Kolakowski, etc. provide detailed explanations and refutations. I don't pretend to be a resource at all. I know my own ignorance . I just know of a few good ones to refer and I keep them on hand myself.
Shouldn't we encourage people to learn? After all refuting the refutations is part of the scientific method right?
And finally the other Marxist technique in use (not in use by you though) is the constant use of equivalence.Fartig below does it. Capitalism is shown to be a failure because of the experiences of Argentina and Chile but Marx is still a good critic of capitalism. Let's forget about the great experiments in misery under Stalin in Russia, Mao in China, Pol Pot in Cambodia and the continuing horrors in North Korea.
Marx is not a valid criticism of capitalism. In an imperfect world there are imperfections. Marx asserts the problems with Capitalism inevitably lead to communism because of the basic structure of capitalism. . If it doesn't his "scientific" conclusions are invalid. You don't have a claim to being a good nuclear physicist if all your theories fail continually in the lab. The same goes for Marx's science. After all he wasn't just asserting criticisms of capitalism but that he was correct while anarchists like Bukunin, socialists like La Salle, etc were wrong…..he asserted he was fundamentally right and knew the path of history….He never claimed to be only a mere researcher open to correction. Hence he is a giant fraud.
You are an ignoramus. Chomsky has denied the Communist genocide in Cambodia. He has also helped French Holocaust deniers like Robert Faurisson – in writing. You are extremely stupid.
Not a single one of them was Communist. Jabotinsky was anti-Communist.
The socialists who build israel were not marxists and were not Communists. You know absolutely nothing about Communism if you confuse it with Communism. You also have a major reading comprehension problem: I have not said a single bad word about Socialism, yet you accuse me of that.
Your answer is truly disgusting. You give lessons without having even the most basic and elementary notion of Israeli history. The most basic book of Israeli history can show anyone the distinction between Israeli Labor and Communism. The first built Israel. The second was a slave of Stalin. It is shocking that you cannot make this basic distinction between Communism on one side and Socialism or social-democracy on the other. How about you pick up an Israeli history book for a change?
Communism gave the world genocide and totalitarianism. – USSR, China, etc. In Israel, Communists were Stalin's vile fifth column. In contrast, socialism gave the world quite a number of free societies, including Israel. If you cannot make even this most basic distinction of all, your lesson is worth nothing. Since you confuse Communism and Socialism, what else do you confuse, Socialism and National-Socialism? I wish you personally to live in a Communist country. See how like your genocidal friends. As a Zionist, I am proud to be card-carrying Socialist and Israeli citizen.
Excellent points!
That is contrary to both Jewish religion and the laws of State of Israel.
Anusim are Jews forced to convert to another religion. No one forced Marx's family to convert to Christianity, Most of your interventions here could be gone if you consulted the dictionary.
Marx was a piece of shit (because of what he did, not who he was born). That would be a good description of the man and his anti-Semitic ideas.
That's a lie. Most of what you write on Tablet is a complete lie. Anusim means Jews that were forced to convert. No one forced Marx's parents.
Before we get into a parsing war, let me try to formulate something on which we can agree, OK?
1. The Yishuv Labor movement was composed of various factions with evolving ideology. Some of them were Marxists, some were not. All of them were socialist.
2. Whatever one thinks of Marx and Marxism, to deny that early 20th century socialists were not influenced by him would be to fly in the face of facts. Some like Ben-Gurion grew up and fraduated from Marxism; some like Mapam did not. But you'll hardly find a socialist back then whose ideas were not either an elaboration or a disputation of Marx's. (Disputation could also take the form of exegesis, like Borochov's). I am not an expert on this (and I suspect neither you are) but this much is standard knowledge.
3.It's all too easy today to draw a crisp line, as you do, between Bolshevism and other left ideologies. But it was not possible to do so in real time!
Mapam, for example, could not bring itself to repudiate Stalin even after 1956. But Mapam certainly contribute positively to Israel in its Palmach phase. So it's much more complicated than you make it seem.
There's more to it but I'm afraid it's becoming a scroll already… Do you agree with my analysis so far? If not, where is the point of divergence?
Speaking of dictionaries, it's "inventions", if you're going to accuse me of such. And the Encylopedia Judaica via the Jewish Virtual Library states, "ANUSIM (Heb. אֲנוּסִים; "forced ones"), persons compelled by overwhelming pressure, whether by physical threats, psychological stress, or economic sanctions, to abjure Judaism and adopt a different faith (in contradistinction to meshummadim, or voluntary apostates – see *Apostasy)."
So, Heinrich Marx was psychologically and economically under duress.
Mainstream Judaism and Medinat Yisra'el follow Talmud for the most part, not Tanakh. I encourage you to look into Karaite and even Messianic thought if you desire to gain a different perspective.
And you're better than Marx by calling a misguided and broken man a POS?
Revisionism and socialism came from and/or influenced Communism. Whatever your problem is, I'm not going to tolerate your rudeness toward me; so I'm going to ask you to cut your rudeness out.
I'd ignore Natan79 at this point. He's being verbally abusive and rude, both of which are unacceptable and unJewish. Vayikra 19:17-18 states, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt surely rebuke thy neighbour, and not bear sin because of him." Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD." If Natan truly feels that any of us are sinning, he surely is not rebuking us in a Jewish manner.
"Because Marxism really can be like a religion" Agree! Moreover, communism is a kind of judaism : a book, the Capital; a few prophets, Marx, Lenin etc.; a chosen people, the proletariat; a messianic era, the communism; synagogues and payers, the cells of the party and the party meetings; repairing the world, by social justice. Communism, Marx's fruit, didn't fall far from it's judaic tree. Yes, Marx was a Jew and yes, he invented a new and successful religion inspired by the religion of his fathers. It's not without reason that so many Jews were also communists.
Moshe (Moses) Hess was an early marxist and even invented the term "communism" it seems. He was also an ardent zionist, the first modern zionist maybe, before Herzl (read "Rome and Jerusalem"). Reality is not as simple you think. And it's not because you are right on some other points that you are right on this one. Denying the influence of Marx on Judaism, put you at the same level as the stalinists who rewrite the history when they are displeased with it. A lot of Jews have been communist, it's better to try to understand why than to deny their intelligence.
Born from a jewish mother he is, for the Jews, a Jew. According to the jewish (rabbinic) law.
"Jew" is reserved for the descendants of the tribe of Yehuda.
Um… no. The district of Judea was so named because the returnees were mostly refugees from the Kingdom of Judah, which was home to Judahites, Benjaminites, Levites, and any number of Israelites from other tribes who had chosen to live there. Jew is a word denoting those people.
As a matter of practicality, "Jew" means descendent of the Israelites who received the Torah at Sinai after the Exodus, plus any converts who joined us since then.
Communism is in no way "a kind of Judaism".
No, Mara, he was not. He had numerous employment opportunities open to him. Just not the one he wanted. Having your desires thwarted does not consititue "overwhelming pressure" or "economic sanctions". Heinrich Marx simply thought that being a lawyer was more important than remaining faithful to his people. He was absolutely a voluntary apostate.
If I tell you that you can't be President of the United States if you're Jewish, you can't say, "But it's my dream to be President of the United States! I'm therefore under unbearable duress and must become a Christian." That's just nutty. The lawyer thing is the same principle. He could have been a shopkeeper or a freaking janitor, but his desire to be a lawyer was the most important thing to him, so he voluntarily apostasized.
There's a reason all of the kibbutzim failed eventually.
Since we can't agree on Heinrich Marx, we can hopefully agree on Karl Marx's mother. "In 1815 Herschel began work as an attorney, in 1819 moving his family to a ten-room property near the Porta Nigra.[19] His wife, Henrietta Pressburg, was a semi-literate Dutch Jew who claimed to suffer from "excessive mother love", devoting much time to her family and insisting on cleanliness within her home.[20] Retaining her Jewish faith, her beliefs would have some influence on her children.[21]" (See Wikipedia)
And the point is…?
that was a nice Freudian slip.;)
How bold to come out against Soviet style communism in 2013! I look foreword to the author's next courageous and timely stance which will undoubtably be a rousing rhetoric against (yes, dare I say, against!) Torquemada and any Spanish inquisition's which may have sprung up from his ideals.
The point is that we can hopefully agree on something about Marx.
Is that important to you? Okay, what exactly is it that we're going to be agreeing about? Something about Marx's mother, I guess, but I don't see what there is to agree about. Or to disagree about, for that matter.
We were debating as to whether Marx's parents were Anusim. We can at least agree that his mother remained openly Jewish.
Wow. You've just proven to be one of the most disagreeable and mean people that I've ever encountered. Heinrich Marx was trying to provide for his family and use his gifts and talents, and you would rather his family have been poor or even dead from starvation.
I assume you're from an upper middle class family, yes? Lots of professionals? Because I find it disgusting that you'd equate jobs held by most people to being "poor or even dead from starvation". No one ever died of starvation from not being a lawyer. Sheesh.
Your critique of colossal thinker like Karl Marx is not baseless but utter nonsense! The man whose ideas moved millions of people cannot be obnoxiously called a fraud like a political opponent! this is bizzare article
For a person whose thought and principles have utterly failed in every application, Marx, who is at the center of many controversies, remains an enigma. May I suggest a solution to this problem. Far from being "scientific," as Marx claimed, Marx has
all the characteristics of a clinical psychopath, as defined by Dr. Hervey Cleckley and as up-dated by Dr. Robert Hare.
This article glosses over Marx's troubled relationship with his wife and family. Yes, Marx professed and demonstrated love for his wife and family, while keeping them in abject poverty. Four of his children died of starvation-induced poverty, which brings into question his dedication to his family. One of his grown daughters committed suicide. Marx's alienation from his religious heritage is typical of psychopaths, bringing into question his own sense of identity. Read further:
Marx was an economic neophyte that liked to pontificate about utopia whenever alcohol clouded his reality. And one day an extremely naive man by the name of Engels overhead one of Marx's drunken sermons & bought into it hook, line, & sinker. Their meeting gave birth to communism, one of the great blights in history.
Why did it take so long for people to discover how shallow & unworkable the concept was (and is)? Plus, communism has a penchant for corruption. (The only place it ever worked was in Marx & Engels' imaginations.)
The basic problem with communism is that it runs counter to the fundamental nature of man. Marx & Engels may as well have tried to teach cats to give up hunting birds & mice.
Notice that Marx identified Jews with capitalism, and Hitler totally bought into that narrative, blaming Jews for much of the economic malaise Germany suffered and giving him justification for confiscating the Jews' properties in order to fund his social programs.
(Does socialism always require a scapegoat, like the 1 percenters in America? BTW, many of the 1 percenters in America are Jewish.)
Plus, the famous German, Martin Luther, had long preached to his congregations (and anyone else that would listen) that Jews had the blood of Jesus on their hands (a myth that turned out to be Roman propaganda).
Well, we know that Hitler (Y'Sh) and Marx were both totally wrong and misguided (Well, Marx was misguided; the other deliberately, to say the least, ignored the truth.). Being a capitalist does not make one Jewish, or Jewish one a capitalist.
Also, we know that Pilate and Luther (I almost typed "Hitler" instead of "Luther", but what's the difference ultimately?) spread Roman propaganda. That was Pilate's whole point: he really didn't find Jesus innocent, either; he just said that he did. That Pilate would lie about what he really thought and was his hands confirms, "among the long line of cruel procurators who ruled Judea, Pilate stood out as a notoriously vicious man." (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/jesus.html)
So, of course Pilate would actually "have allowed a mob of Jews, whom he detested, to force him into killing someone whom he [only claimed that he] admired." Why? To, in your words, "scapegoat them. Pilate (and his predecessors–among whom stand Ferdinand and Isabella, and Luther) had every bit of mens rea in the world.
The mention of Israel as some kind of paragon of democracy pretty much sums up all you need to know about this article – ie without any relevance to the ideas of Marx, and does jewish thought a huge disservice in the process. Perhaps the author should look to Walter Benjamin and he may yet find a way out of the malaise.
"David Greenglass and the Rosenbergs helped bring the world close to atomic Armageddon and gave the Soviet Union, as a nuclear-armed power, the might to subject millions to its tyranny."
I find this doubtful. This may well have been their intention, but I don't think that the information that they actually provided played a significant role in the development of nuclear weapons in the Soviet Union.
The Truth About Israel and Dissent4:59 PM —
The New York Times substitutes a bogus headline for actual reporting
The Most Important Thing Netanyahu Did in New York Wasn't at the U.N.3:52 PM —
It was meeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi
Synagogue Ark Finds New Home—in a Church11:06 AM —
Unlikely arrangement saves ornate ark as NYC temple becomes condominium
Welcoming Tablet's New Contributors9:15 AM —
Paul Berman, Matti Friedman, Todd Gitlin, Heather Rogers, and Marc Weitzmann Give Us Five Reasons to Celebrate the New Year
Mossad Looks For New Recruits Online6:18 PM —
Israel's elite intelligence force now accepts virtual applications
Mickey Cohen is What 'Boardwalk' is Missing3:21 PM —
The real-life gangster was a few years too late for the Prohibition-era show
Neil Diamond Heads Home to Brooklyn12:23 PM —
The rocker will perform a free concert at his former high school tonight
Jews Not Allowed in Palestinian University10:45 AM —
Haaretz writer booted from Birzeit conference; will an academic boycott ensue?
Relearning Polish History Through the Eyes of a Resistance Fighter4:23 PM —
Visiting Warsaw with my uncle, I saw a different part of WWII history
Orthodox Man Refuses To Sit Next to Feminist Activist on AirplaneBy Elana Sztokman — Elana Sztokman flies the not-so friendly skies home to Israel
How To Say You're SorryBy Marjorie Ingall — As Yom Kippur approaches, I'll share what I've learned about how to apologize—and how not to
It's Never Too Late To AtoneBy Etgar Keret — Even if the person you wronged doesn't remember what you did, it can still make a difference to ask for forgiveness. Maybe.
Facebook, Unchain Me!
How Time's Arrow and the Phrygian Half-Step Make Jewish Music Holy
The Most Important Thing Netanyahu Did in New York Wasn't at the U.N.
Why I Stopped Saying the Unetaneh Tokef, and Why I'm Ready To Say It Again
Love Syndrome: Israel Story, Episode 2
The Truth About Israel and Dissent
Twitter: tabletmag
- "No other melody lifts that one great heart that is the Jewish people like Kol Nidre." http://t.co/MRYXMk7NwD #yomkippur
Basya Schechter Mixes Prayer Songs With Brass, Oud, and Radiohead
On a new album, the captivating leader of the band Pharaoh's Daughter reclaims the music that dominated her religious childhood
Love Syndrome: Israel Story, Episode 2
Chaya Ben Baruch's sixth child was born with Down syndrome. Then she did what every good mother does—set out to find him a mate.
Leonard Bernstein: A New Look at His Rise, His Foibles, and His Impact on Music History
The dynamic conductor and genius behind 'West Side Story' also wrote classical works. Allen Shawn explores what they reveal.
- Debut Novelist Yelena Akhtiorskaya on Misery, Writing, and Brighton Beach
- Review: "This Is Where I Leave You"
- Buzzfeed Hipsters Sample Jewish Food For the First Time
- Brooklyn's Best Vintage Store Also Supports Jewish Kids With Serious Illnesses
- My Evening with LeAnn Rimes & the LA County Sherriff
- A Conversation with Jim Marchese of Real Housewives of New Jersey
- Edge of Tomorrow: At 91, Grandma reflects on the state of the world and her soul for Rosh Hashanah
- Brian Finkelstein?s one-man show: Suicide, untimely deaths, masochism and humor


text:
Login | Register
All Industries
Business & Finance
-- Business
-- Financial Services
-- Insurance
-- Marketing
Consumer & Food
-- Beverages
-- Consumer Goods
-- Food
-- Retailing
-- Biotechnology
-- Healthcare
-- Medical Devices
-- Pharmaceuticals
Heavy Industry
-- Construction
-- Energy
-- Manufacturing
-- Materials
-- Transportation
Internet & Media
-- E-Business
-- Internet
-- Media
-- Publishing
Public Sector
-- Defense
-- Education
-- Government
Telecom & Computing
-- Computer Technology
-- Fixed Networks
-- Software
-- Wireless
Company/Country Reports
-- Company Reports
-- Country Reports
-- Regional Reports
Poland Consumer Electronics Report Q3 2014
Jul 21, 2014 -
Business Monitor International
- 64 pages
Click here to open the POPUP
You've added the following report to your cart:
Cart Summary
Total Items:
Table of Contents
Request Details
We have a positive outlook for the medium term development of Poland 's consumer electronics market . Our outlook is underpinned by a strong consumption story and demand growth in key device categories such as tablets and smartphones. However, we have a bearish outlook for digital camera and notebook volumes in the short term, with these device categories under pressure from smartphone and tablet cannibalisation respectively. Our core scenario is for continued growth in consumer electronics spending, as we forecast a CAGR of 3.9% 2014-2018 . There is, however, risk to the downside as a result of the deteriorating security situation in neighbouring Ukraine .
Headline Expenditure Projections
Computer Hardware Sales: USD3.8bn in 2013 to USD4.0bn in 2014, 5.1% in US dollar terms. Unit growth is strong as tablet sales boom, but with consumers increasingly opting for low-cost sub-PLN600 tablets, value growth is more subdued.
Handset S ales: USD4.0bn in 2013 to USD4.1bn in 2014, +3.1% in US dollar terms. The market is forecast to exhibit slower growth in 2014 as price pressures in the Android ecosystem a squeeze on value growth.
AV Sales: USD2.5bn in 2013 to USD2.6bn in 2014, +5.5% in US dollar terms. The FIFA World Cup in 2014 is expected to provide a boost to TV set demand, including HD TV, 3D and smart TV models.
Key Trends & Developments
The tablet market in Poland boomed in 2012 and 2013 - and BMI estimates tablet unit sales surpassed notebook sales in 2013. This is in line with trends observed across the region, however one feature of the Polish market not reflected elsewhere in the region is the relative failure of Apple to take a commanding position. Instead it is lower-cost Android partner vendors that have driven the market, with Samsung faring well alongside regional brands such as Prestigio . However , in 2014 it is expected that Lenovo will be the major disruptive force in the Polish tablet market after making...
The Poland Consumer Electronics Report has been researched at source and features latest-available data covering both the manufacture and sale of consumer electronics products, critically analysing - and forecasting - the market dynamics affecting each sub-sector, including audio-visual, computers, mobile handsets, gaming and automotives electronics. Furthermore, the report analyses the domestic and global economic trends driving device demand and provides company rankings and competitive landscapes covering leading multinational and national consumer electronics companies and analysis of latest industry news and trends in Poland.
Business Monitor International (BMI)'s Poland Consumer Electronics Report provides industry professionals and strategists, sector analysts, business investors, trade associations and regulatory bodies with independent forecasts and competitive intelligence on the consumer electronics industry in Poland.
Key Benefits
Benchmark BMI's independent consumer electronics industry forecasts for Poland to test other views - a key input for successful budgeting and strategic business planning in the Polish consumer electronics market.
Target business opportunities and risks in Poland through our reviews of latest industry trends and major deals, projects and investments.
Exploit the latest competitive intelligence with company SWOT analyses.
BMI Industry View
Summary of BMI's key industry forecasts, views and trend analysis covering consumer electronics, major investments and projects.
Consumer Electronics Market
Analysis of the size of the domestic market for electronics products, with in-depth assessment and data covering the dynamics driving each sub-sector; audio-visual, computers, mobile phone handsets and gaming devices, as well as demand for automotives electronics.
Electronics Industry
Analysis and data of the domestic electronics manufacturing sector. We assess the regulatory and business operational issues facing manufacturers - including openness to foreign investment, infrastructure, IP issues and the global demand context - and their impact on the production of electronics goods, which is again broken down via market sub-sectors.
Industry Forecast Scenario
Historic data series and forecasts to end-2018 for all key industry and economic indicators (see list below), supported by explicit assumptions, plus analysis of key risks to the main forecast, covering computers, communications and gaming devices. Indicators include:
Industry value (US$bn); population (mn); nominal GDP (US$bn); real GDP growth (%), GDP per capita, industrial production Index (% y-o-y ave.) unemployment % of labour force.
Business Environment Rankings
BMI's Consumer Electronics Business Environment Rankings provide a country-comparative Risk-Reward Rankings index aimed at investors and participants in the regional consumer electronics market. The rankings methodology makes sophisticated use of over 40 industry, economic and demographic data points.
BMI Industry View
Business Environment
Industry Forecast
Table: Consumer Electronics Overview, 2010-2017
Macroeconomic Forecasts
Economic Analysis
Risks To Outlook
Table: Poland - Economic Activity
Industry Risk Reward Ratings
Europe Risk/Reward Ratings
Eurozone Crisis Eases Risk Outlook
Table: CEE Consumer Electronics Risk/Reward Rating, Q213
Market Overview
Table: Computer Sales, 2010-2017
AV Devices
Table: AV Sales, 2010-2017
Mobile Devices
Table: Mobile Handsets, 2010-2017
Competitive Landscape
Industry Trends And Developments
Industry Trends and Developments
Table: Electronics Output, 2010-2017
Table: Manufacture Of Computers, Electronic And Optical Products (index) July 2009-July 2010 (previous month = 100)
Table: Poland Electronics Sector: Employment (2009)
Table: Electronics Trade, 2010-2017
Table: Electronics Production by Segment, 2010-2017
Table: Manufacture of Consumer Electronics (Quarterly, September 09-June 11) (PLNmn)
Table: Manufacture of Electronic Components and Boards (Quarterly, September 09-June 11) (PLNmn)
Table: Manufacture Of Office Machines And Computers (units) June 2011-March 2011
Table: Sold Production Value: Office Machines And Computers (PLN) May 2011-March 2012
Table: Manufacture of Communications Equipment (Quarterly, September 09-June 11) (PLNmn)
Demographic Forecast
Demographic Outlook
Table: Poland's Population By Age Group, 1990-2020 ('000)
Table: Poland's Population By Age Group, 1990-2020 (% of total)
Table: Poland's Key Population Ratios, 1990-2020
Table: Poland's Rural And Urban Population, 1990-2020
Electronics Industry
This report does not have a list of Companies Mentioned available
This report does not have a press release associated with it
Order This Report
|$1,295.00|Single User License|PDF - Download Now with 3 Quarterly Updates - Downloadable
Once you've selected your preferred license option, hit 'order now' to complete the checkout process using any major credit card, check or wire/bank transfer.
The Fast Market Research Advantage
Only the Best
All of our research is sourced from the most trusted and established global analysts and consultancies
Client Focused
From start-ups to multinationals, we focus on providing the right research to our diverse client base
Shop Securely
Our US-based customer service team and eCommerce systems adhere to highest data security standards
Industry-leading Customer Support
Individualized assistance from our expert staff is never more than an email or phone call away
About the Publisher
Business Monitor International (BMI)
offers a comprehensive range of products and services designed to help senior executives, analysts and researchers assess and better manage operating risks, and exploit business opportunities, across 175 markets. BMI offers three main areas of expertise: Country Risk BMI's country risk and macroeconomic forecast portfolio includes weekly financial market reports, monthly regional Monitors, and in-depth quarterly Business Forecast Reports. Industry Analysis BMI covers a total of 17 industry verticals through a portfolio of services, including Daily Alerts, monthly regional Insights, and in-depth quarterly Country Forecast Reports.
Publisher Details
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
Copyright © 2014 Fast Market Research, Inc.


text:
Winners Receive:
Just "Like" (fan) the MovieWeb Facebook page (below) and then leave a comment below telling us why these prizes must be yours!
If you already "Like" MovieWeb, just leave a comment below telling us why these prizes must be yours!
Former high school football star turned farmer and family man, Scott Murphy (Brian Presley) finds himself with a unique opportunity to revisit his glory days during his high school state championship game where he permanently injured his knee in a game-winning play. Given a second shot at football fame, Scott seeks counsel from Coach Hand (Kurt Russell) his longtime mentor on and off the field, to help him decide whether to let his fate unfold, or follow a path that will change his future.
Touchback was released April 13th, 2012 and stars Brian Presley, Kurt Russell, Melanie Lynskey, Marc Blucas, Christine Lahti, Sarah Wright, Drew Powell, Steve Turner. The film is directed by Don Handfield.


text:
Horses Sold
Seven's Wild
Seven is a Thoroughbred mare who has competed successfully at the Training level and is ready to move up to Prelim.
Congratulations to Kristen on your purchase of Seven!
BackJack is a 2004 17h Thoroughbred gelding that is one of the first of the CEF homebreds! He is currently doing the jumpers and has competed at Novice level eventing.
Congratulations Rachel on your purchase of BackJack!
Model American
Model American aka Little Mod or Mod Squad is a stunning 2007 Thoroughbred gelding by Idol American. He has three lovely gaits and a quiet temperament and he is currently going Novice. Mod is another example of a serious prospect for Crow's Ear Farm. He is delightful to work around and has the softest mouth that you could ride with your pinkies. He stands 15.2hh and has no vices. There is nothing complicated about this horse and he is simply a classy individual.
Congratulations on Benita on your purchase of Mod!
Seajack is a 2002 16.1 hand Chestnut NZ TB gelding sired by Aberjack. He is a proven preliminary mount, with multiple top placings up and down the east coast, including a CCI* in Ocala, FL. He has also run a season of intermediate and is currently qualified for a CCI**. Would be perfectly suitable for an ambitious YR or Adult Amateur. No vices.
Congratulations to Louis on your purchase of Seajack!
"Sherman" is a 2005 Thoroughbred gelding who came off the track fall 2011 and is coming along well in his training to be a premier event horse. He is incredibly light on his feet and has a very soft mouth. He is lovely to be around and brave on the trails. This is a very trusting individual and Valerie Ashker believes he will mature to be one of their easiest yet competitive rides.
Congratulations Tera on your purchase of Sherman
Genius to Go
"Genius" is a 2009 TB gelding currently located in California.
Congratulations Jan Byyny on your purchase of Genius!
Raptor Force
"Raptor" is a 2006 TB gelding with a positive attitude that makes him the most pleasant ride of the day. He is one of the most kind and elegant prospects we have ever offered for sale. He is an incredible jumper and soft and steady on the flat. Raptor is very easy to ride and hacks out alone or in a group. He is sound with no vices. He is currently competing at Preliminary but would make an ideal 1* horse for a young rider or amateur. Raptor is also a Training level packer.
Congratulations to Emily on your purchase of Rappy!


text:
Preheat broiler. Toss tomatoes and onion with 2 teaspoons oil, 1/2 teaspoon salt, and the red-pepper flakes. Broil on a rimmed baking sheet until tomatoes are just starting to brown, 5 to 7 minutes.
Transfer tomatoes to a 9-inch square baking dish. Broil bread until golden, about 1 minute per side. Halve 1 garlic clove, and rub bread with a cut side. Thinly slice all garlic.
Rinse broccoli rabe, leaving slightly wet. Toss with 2 teaspoons oil, 1/4 teaspoon salt, the garlic, and lemon juice. Broil until leaves begin to brown, about 1 minute. Turn with tongs. Broil, turning once, until just tender, about 2 minutes.
Stir beans and oregano into tomatoes. Dot with ricotta. Drizzle with remaining 2 teaspoons oil. Broil until bubbling, 3 to 5 minutes. Serve over toast and with broccoli rabe on the side.
Pretty good. I had roasted the tomatoes ahead of time. I used fresh basil as that is what I had available. Added extra crushed red pepper and added some anise seeds (fennel would be good, too.) The beans would be better if they were chopped a bit or mashed so that they would stay on the bread better. Quite messy, but tasty!Reply


text:
Leatherman Super Tool 300 Multi-Tool 831181$74.99
The award-winning, Leatherman Super Tool 300 is the multi-tool for the working man. Larger pliers are the strongest Leatherman has ever produced and the sloped-top handle design means you can maneuver them further into tight spaces. When you're working with gloves on, the large side cutouts make it easy to still grab components and rolled handles make for a comfortable grip. Stranded, hard and regular wire cutters all come standard on Super Tool 300, and because they're removable you can repair or re-sharpen on the spot. 19 tools all ready for your toughest jobs. Super Tool 300 is back from vacation and ready to get to work.
- Needlenose Pliers
- Regular Pliers
- 154CM Replaceable Wire Cutters
- 154CM Replaceable Hard-wire Cutters
- Stranded-wire Cutters
- Electrical Crimper
- Wire Stripper
- 420HC Knife
- 420HC Serrated Knife
- Saw
- Awl w/ Thread Loop
- Ruler (9 in 22 cm)
- Can Opener
- Bottle Opener
- Wood/Metal File
- Phillips Screwdriver
- Large Screwdriver
- Medium Screwdriver
- Small Screwdriver
- Closed Length: 4.5 in (11.5 cm)
- Weight: 9.6 oz (272.15 g)
AR North America Blue Clean 1900Psi Electric Pressure Washer AR383
Regular Price: $169.99
Special Price: $129.99
AR383 cold water pressure washer comes with the following features:
- Triplex Plunger pump with axial wobble plate
- Total Stop System for automatic start/stop
- Trolly with wheels
- Accessoryholder
- Water filter adapter
- Quick connect garden hose adapter
- Universal electric motor
- Adjustable spray head with special fan jet settings
- Foam soap dispenser
- Turbo nozzle lance
Specifications PSI 1900 GPM 1.51 Horsepower 1.5 Amps 14 Motor Type Universal 120V 60HZ Temperature 122 degrees F Weight 28 Measurements 15.1 x 11.8 x 31.43
Dewalt 20V Max Cordless Lithium-Ion 1/2 in. Compact Drill Driver Kit DCD771C2
- Compact, lightweight design fits into tight areas
- High speed transmission delivers two speeds (0 - 450 / 0 - 1,500 RPM) for a range of fastening and drilling applications
- Ergonomic handle delivers comfort and control
- Heavy duty 1/2-in ratcheting chuck with carbide inserts provides superior bit gripping strength
- Two-speed, all-metal transmission for increased run time and longer tool life
Campbell Hausfeld Desiccant Cleaner & Dryer PA208503AV$79.97
Product Description
- Removes water vapor at the point of use
- Desiccant changes color when it needs to be changed or recharged
- Outlet screen keeps desiccant particles out of tools
- Clear bowl with metal guards for easy viewing of fluid level and impact protection
- Quick release bowl, and quarter turn drain for easy maintenance.
Shop-Vac Wall Mount Pro 5 Gal. 4.5 HP Wet/Dry Vac 3942000$69.99
Centralized cleaning for garage, work shop, hobby area, laundry room or anywhere a hands free vacuum center is desired. Complete with a wall mount bracket and 18' extra long reach hose for wider area cleaning. Space saving "wall-mount" design provides a cleaning solution that's there when you need it!
- Cord Length: 6 Feet
- Operation Sound Level: Extra Quiet
- Hose Size: 1.25" Diameter
- Warranty: 3 Years
- Lock-on Hose
- Wall Mountable Design
- Onboard Accessory Storage
- 1-1/4" Dia. X 18' Lock-On hose
- (3) 1-1/4" extension wands
- 10" wet/dry nozzle
- round brush
- crevice tool
- gulper nozzle
- tool holder
- wall mount bracket
- Foam Sleeve
- Cartridge Filter
- Disposable Filter Bag
Rural King 1250 Watt 2-Cycle Generator GEN1250$99.98
All Generator Sales are Final. No returns. If you have a warranty issue it will be your responsibility to take to your local store for item to be fixed by one of our mechanics. If you purchase online and do not have a local store you can ship the item to us to be repaired at your expense both ways. Rural King assumes no liability of freight damage. If product is damaged in shipping the customer will be responsible for filing a freight claim with that carrier.
- AC Power: 120V -60HZ
- Rated Power: 800 Watts
- Surge Power: 1250 Watts
- (1)120V Outlet
- (1)12V Outlet
- Engine: 2HP 2 stroke
- Engine displacement: 63cc
- Fuel Ratio: 50:1 mix
- 1 Gallon Fuel Tank
- Sound Quality: 60 decibels at 7m
- EPA Certified
- Muffler Spark Arrestor included
RapidAir 1/2" Master Kit (Manifold Kit, 2 Outlet Kits, 100 Ft. Tubing) 90500$89.99
This complete compressed air distribution system is designed to be installed in or on walls. It allows convenient access to compressed air lines wherever you need them. No special tools needed for installation.
- 100 ft. RapidAir Tubing and cutter
- (2) 90120 Aluminum Outlet Block
- (1) 90220 Aluminum Manifold Block
- (6) 50100 3/8 NPT Straight
- (4) 50300 Union Elbow
- (2) 50120 Hand Valve
- (2) 50125 1/4 NPT Brass nipple
- (2) 50130 1/4 NPT Brass 45 degree
- (3) 50135 3/8 NPT Brass Plug
Mat Industries Air Compressor 1 Hp 3 Gal Hotdog VPF1080318$129.99
- Oil free, low maintenance operation
- No oil to add or change
- No belts or pulleys to replace
- Easy cold weather start
- Heavy duty, 120 volt induction motor; plugs into standard outlet for quick and easy use
- Equipped with:
- Pressure regulator
- Tank and tool pressure gauges
- Single hand operation brass (no spark/anti-rust) quick connect
- On/off switch
- Rubber feet reduce vibration and stabilize compressor
- Available in :
- 2 and 3 gallon horizontal hand carry
- 7 and 17 gallon horizontal portable
- 10 and 20 gallon vertical portable
Hobart Leather Welding Jacket - 2XL 770573$69.99
Genuine split cowhide, long sleeved welding jacket with heavy duty Kevlar® stitching, riveted pockets and a lined collar.Learn More
Dewalt 18V XRP Battery Combo Pack DC9096-2
- (2) High capacity XRP™ batteries have 40% more run-time than standard batteries
- Powers entire DEWALT® line of 18V tools allowing users to run multiple tools off of the same battery pack