the ITALIANS killed jesus!

[unblock]

with all the discussion about the anti-semitism inherent in the 'passion' story, and/or any specific anti-semitism in mel gibson's particular adaptation of the story, i find it very interesting that NOBODY discusses any kind of anti-italianism.

in this story, one can argue that 'the jews' bore some guilt or that 'certain people who happened to be jewish' bore some guilt or even 'certain people with power within the jewish religion' bore some guilt. however, it's certainly clear that the ROMANS bore some guilt in this matter. you certainly can't say that they were not involved. they dominated the entire area at the time, were in full control, organized and performed the crucifixions along with other forms of punishment, capital and otherwise.

and yet, while some narrow-minded people are quite eager to hold today's jews and all of judaism responsible, i've never heard a peep of anger directed at italians, as descendents of the romans for their role.

of course i'm not advocating anti-italianism and more than i would advocate anti-semitism. it's just that there's an obvious parallel that for some reason no one ever draws.


frankly, i think that this fact belies the anti-semitism in the story, as it raises a question of one party but not of the other.


thoughts?

[aldian159]

1. That's because the Catholic Church

long the ones calling for Jewish blood (up till they officially said that Jews didn't kill Jesus), is based in Italy.

[MikeGalos]

2. Sorry to offend any fundamentalists

but the gospels were written down at a time when the church was trying to get popular in Rome. It plays down the Roman role and plays up the evil natives (in this case, Jews) to get a sympathetic ear.

Hence, The Gospel According to Mel portrays Pilate as a poor Roman administrator who was forced to execute someone against his will because of pressure from the locals rather than as a bloodthirsty tyrant who was recalled to Rome in disgrace for being a brutal thug who happily murdered thousands of the locals (again, in this case, Jews) which is what secular history documents.

Hard to sell a story of a native who organized a revolt against colonial rule and was executed by the colonial government to the colonial home power when you make them the bad guys.

Oh, and in the next revolt, when the Jews DID expel the Romans for a few short years, the early Christians hid out in Jordan rather than join the new country. Of course, in the end, the result was that Rome looted Israel and stole enough wealth to use the proceeds to build the Flavian Amphiteatre (The Colosseum) and Christianity wasn't tied to the revolt.

As an FYI: the text of the dedication plaque on the Colosseum reads:

IMP CAES VESPASIANVS AVG
AMPHITHEATRVM NOVVM
EX MANVBIS FIERI IVSSIT

Which translates to:

The Emperor Caesar Vespasian Augustus ordered the new amphitheater to be made from the proceeds from the sale of the booty

[Taeger]

8. Pilate

You don't become a Roman governor by having pity.

NEWSFLASH!!!! Anyone who would have even IMPLIED that they were of higher station than the Emperor would have been crucified IMMEDIATELY!!!!

Romans were not a kind and gentle people. They were absoluetly brutal and vicious. They were the ultimate social darwinists.

Oh and BTW, the entire notion that the temple priests would have needed approval of the Roman governor is ABSOLUETLY preposterous. It suggest that ANYTIME that Jewish authorities wanted permission to off one of their own, they needed Pilate's PERSONAL approval.

It's absolute bull!!!!!!

[ChompySnack]

3. I agree wholeheartedly

The fact that the Romans, and Pontius Pilate, sentenced him to death and killed him strikes me as an undisputed fact. While Gibson's film apparently portrays Pilate as a sensitive man and reluctant to condemn Jesus to death, he had no problem sentencing tens of thousands of other Jews to death before and after. Apparently the Jews didn't rule that area of the Roman empire, fancy that.

Convenient that the Roman Catholic church is the one that decided what was and wasn't going into the bible as we know it. Seems to me that they wanted to blame others for their own 'sins.'

[MikeGalos]

7. Actually that's pretty unfair to say

Seems to me that they wanted to blame others for their own 'sins.'


More realistically it should be:
Seems to me that they wanted to blame others for their target market's 'sins.'

[kixot]

4. We can take a bigger brush to that and say

That the movie offends ALL Latins since we can blame the entire Roman Empire.

Spanish, French, Italian, Portugese, and Romanians unite! :eyes:

[aquart]

5. So that Catholic/Vatican/Pope thing is basically guilt? Denial?

[FDRrocks]

6. The real victims: Italian Jews n/t

[Moderator]

9. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.