Wait, he was Jewish? Isn't that quite a position of influence in such a pivotal moment in history...

Wait, he was Jewish? Isn't that quite a position of influence in such a pivotal moment in history? I don't think the overall population of Jews in the USSR ever actually surpassed, for example, 5%, but I am open to information.
Why do people think he was ethnically Russian when he was clearly ethnically Jewish?

Other urls found in this thread:

journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Why was Trotsky such a beta male compared to Stalin?

Stalin, too. He was Georgian, if I recall correctly. Why were minority groups with such little sway (in comparison to the overall population) so disproportionately in control, so to speak? If I'm not mistaken, the troika leading up to Stalin's assumption was composed of two other ethnic Jews, Zinoviev and Kamenev. For such a tiny group of people, why were they so keen on participating in a movement of that nature and why, as time passed, did they come to assume positions of power before Stalin "realized" (putting it quite sweetly) this?

>Wait, he was Jewish?
Are you burger or something?

Altough he was kicked out of Jewish comunity (along with other communist Jews) by some ritual in Odessa.

I see resemblance here

I don't see how my citizenship makes some deceased historical figure more or less Jewish; actually, it seems quite irrelevant.
Another irrelevancy is acceptance within a culture or community. How does that rewrite your ethnicity? If I am an ethnic Russian, my exile from the land does not make me any more or less 'French' if I move to France, or any more/less Russian for leaving the community/land.

Why would minorities support the old Czarist regime or even more radical white factions?
What would they have to gain from that?

The old regime is irrelevant in the timeframe I'm discussing once the royal family was done away with. But as a hypothetical (i.e. if they still had authority over the lands), a reason why minority groups should support them would be their status as head of state. It's just a question of supporting any authority or hierarchy, full stop. Obviously, anarchists did not want that. My question is why a proportion of the Jewish population was attracted to these movements. It was certainly enough to land them in positions of influence.
How were the 'white factions' more radical than the result? It's speculative, at best. I mean, it is certainly possible for the white factions to launch their 'White Terror' of sorts, but, again, it is speculative.
>What would they have to gain from that?
From an anarchical perspective, you only lose things.

>I don't see how my citizenship
To put it bluntly...Americans are notorious for being ignorant fools.

>How does that rewrite your ethnicity?
When you disown your father, he is no longer your father in perspective of society even if you share blood. Just as Trotski&co. were disowned by Russian Jews for their anti-semitic policies.

>Americans are notorious for being ignorant fools.
Aren't the majority of Nobel prize winners American? Or, a significant chunk, if I recall correctly. A nation of 300 million is bound to have the dullards rise to the top.
>When you disown your father, he is no longer your father in perspective of society even if you share blood.
You are begging the question. It has changed from territorial distancing from a community as the reason why people are "no longer ethnic Jews" to familial deterioration. If I do both: spit in the face of my ethnic Jewish parents AND move away from the community/culture, that will not "revert" my ethnicity in any capacity. You are assuming ethnicity is only a shared culture/society, which is not true. It almost always includes a common ancestry, too. My point is that this cannot be rewritten after an organism has been born (for now...).
>for their anti-semitic policies.
Interesting, source?
And again, I think we are talking about two different things. From the community, sure. Not ethnically (when the term ethnicity includes an ancestral component, as well, which it, to the best of my knowledge, does).

>Aren't the majority of Nobel prize winners American?
Yes, Nobel prize winners will make up for shit-tier education on non-American history.

>If I do both: spit in the face of my ethnic Jewish parents AND move away from the community/culture, that will not "revert" my ethnicity in any capacity.
It does. Ethnicity is not only about ancestry. Especially for Jews, who are nigh indistinguishable from the white majority.

>Interesting, source?
Put Eвceкция in google.

>Yes, Nobel prize winners will make up for shit-tier education on non-American history.
It depends on who you mean as 'Americans'. In terms of breaking it down by PISA scores, American whites, Jews, and Asians perform quite well, whereas American blacks do not. In terms of academia, I already mentioned the American achievements. In terms of the village idiots, you can find them all around the world.
>It does. Ethnicity is not only about ancestry.
I said: "You are assuming ethnicity is only a shared culture/society, which is not true. It almost always includes a common ancestry, too."
When I say "includes", that does not mean "is entirely limited to". So, if you are divorced from a culture or society, your ancestry is not rewritten, therefore your ethnicity is not amended. Culturally, you are 'distinct', sure. But not from an ancestral point-of-view.
>who are nigh indistinguishable from the white majority.
Again, it depends what you mean by 'white'. If you mean Southern Euros, or even maybe Eastern Euros (according to the source), then sure. journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006644
>Put Eвceкция in google.
Do you mean a specific search? Google scholar got the same result for me. Pic related is general search.

>In terms of breaking it down by PISA score
I don't care about PISA, I'm talking about ignorance of history other than their own. Lurk more and you'll understand.
>So, if you are divorced from a culture or society, your ancestry is not rewritten, therefore your ethnicity is not amended.
And you are assuming ethnicity is defined solely and only by ancestry, as if assimilation between simmiliar people was not a thing. Exempli gratia What are ethnicities of Friedrich August Hayek or Vladimir Ilyich Uljanov?
>Again, it depends what you mean by 'white'.
Slavic in this case.
>Do you mean a specific search?
Try "Jewish section"

This is the daily "why are Jews overepresented in the USSR" thread in disguise isn't it

Stalin looked beta too

Because jew is not a race you retard

Perhaps

>Being this obsessed with me

Do you dream of me too ?

Yes, you're my favourite waifu.

he looks funny

Need for social acceptance.

...

first day at work always looks funny

>The old regime is irrelevant in the timeframe I'm discussing once the royal family was done away with.

That's retarded, without the Czars you don't have an october revolution. It's pretty obvious educated jews supported communism for the reason that it was a universalist movement that they thought would tear down social barriers through its anti religious sentiment. Remember anti-semitism in Russia was religious in character, it was totally different from the anti-semitism in Nazi Germany, which disregarded the religious status of Christians with Jewish blood. It's also worth noting the educated jews were concentrated at the right places (the cities) at the right time, poor rural jews had little influence on the movement and were largely crushed by it.