So, maybe I was wrong and they are just puppets of a higher power. Maybe they are supposed to be our allies after all.
Maybe it's the Jews who are trying to put a check on male power. The noticers might have been right after all.
So what can we do to stop them? Well, I guess the first thing is to protest. Can anyone think of a date?
The impetus of second and third wave feminism were Jewish in nature. Now, these two women didn't act without a firm groundwork of critical theory in place to reject tradition, but these two are at the nexus of the most destructive forces to the family in Western societies.
Do you want me to find their Jewish facilitators? They're there, but it's a lot of research to give you names and connections, and I have no illusion you'd be convinced even if the research was put in front of you.
How about a simpler question? Is antisemitism immoral, and if so, why?
You're going on all sorts of rants that have nothing at all to do with the question at hand, which is this claim:
For all the claims that it's "obvious", people who believe such nonsense find it very difficult to substantiate it.
Anti-semitism is immoral for the same reason as hating any other race is.
You assume hate, which is emotional. My question concerns the rationale. Why, from a rational standpoint, is antisemitism (or racism) immoral? It's a question I've never seen answered. There is simply a dogma that insulates it from inquisition.
Maybe we should start with a basic definition of morality? For myself, it's an action or encouragement that harms societal trust or enrichment for individual benefit.
I think you are correct. Most people are just conditioned to regard it as bad, without knowing why it is. However, that does not mean that there cannot be good reasons for regarding it as bad. Judging people based on their ethnicity is ignoring their individuality. A Jew may be good or bad, but then you just assume he is bad, because of a carefully selected list of other Jews who are also bad.
Societal trust seems to be harmed by vilifying one ethnic group. As for enrichment, many countries have suffered economically because they threw out a group of middlemen. So it seems according to your own definition, anti-Semitism is not a good thing.
On this we agree, but I would never judge an individual as anything but an individual. Where we probably disagree, is that to me, a demographic group must be looked at as a demographic group, even though it's comprised of individuals. I have nothing against an individual black person, but I know blacks commit half the homicides in my nation. They also have a different way of thinking (as a group, though individuals do closely mirror my own thinking), that I believe is highly destructive to all the ideas my ancestors have built up. If they were half the demographic group, and their social values were the same, there would be no rationale to find their inclusion immoral in relation to my own demographic.
Yes, financial innovation helps Capitalism. Capitalism at its heart works off of greed, which is simply human nature. However, pure greed is destructive to social trust. There is a balance to find between individual liberty, and social benefit. Anarcho-Capitalism is as horrible of an idea as Communism. Jews (as a group) tend towards both extremes. All extremes, really. It's hard to moderate that influence. Individually, Jews run the gamut, but they find themselves individually at the extremes in disproportion, and that acts as a force multiplier of those extremes where ever the group exists.