Yeah, sort of, though I think it has more to do with the judeophile conditioning we're taught from womb to grave. When people start looking at it objectively, it creates a bit of a "They Live" hysteria. You want to give everyone glasses, but you just come off as crazy. Of course, that just isolates the person, distorting their perspective and feeding paranoia, and the ability to create a nuanced and reasoned argument becomes lost. It becomes The Jews, rather than a characteristic that seems prevalent in the Jewish demographic.
But, that's not the same thing as pointing out that some individual degenerate journalist or academic is Jewish, as they often are. That's just to trigger others pattern recognition.
I think it has more to do with the judeophile conditioning we're taught from womb to grave.
I don't think that exists. I see far more attacks on Jews than any other ethnic group, even ethnic groups who deserve it more.
When people start looking at it objectively, it creates a bit of a "They Live" hysteria. You want to give everyone glasses, but you just come off as crazy.
Tell me about it. I know that Jews are more likely to be regressives, but I deny that this is because of some essence of pure evil in their blood. It's because they are more likely to be professionals and so called 'intellectuals'. What is the truth to which you think I am blind?
But, that's not the same thing as pointing out that some individual degenerate journalist or academic is Jewish, as they often are. That's just to trigger others pattern recognition.
It's more like confirmation bias. I never see those people on threads where there's a Jew opposing regressivism, of whom there are none too few.
I don't think that exists. I see far more attacks on Jews than any other ethnic group, even ethnic groups who deserve it more.
That may be true in Europe. Not really sure. In the US, evangelicism has severe judeophilia due to Armageddon prophesy. There's also no critical examination of Jews throughout history on what brings about their persecution. If it's spoken of at all, it's attributed to "jealousy" or "scapegoating". Intellectually dishonest. edit: In our education setting we also generally spend more time on the Holocaust and individual stories than we do on WW2.
Their biggest issue has always been lack of assimilation. Just the persistence of distinctly Jewish identities across Europe for centuries is testament to this fact, though we can even see this lack of assimilation between Jewish communities when forced together into ghettos. They moved up the Rhine for trade opportunities, but they never really emigrated. They just moved. Usury certainly didn't help perceptions.
But the main driver of judeophilia is, of course, the Holocaust. Judeophilia may not be as apt a word, here, but it's certainly a shield. Any criticism as a people is strictly taboo because of the big H's big H.
Tell me about it. I know that Jews are more likely to be regressives, but I deny that this is because of some essence of pure evil in their blood. It's because they are more likely to be professionals and so called 'intellectuals'. What is the truth to which you think I am blind?
Why boil it down to evil? They have a high verbal acumen in their blood (if you buy into IQ). They make a lot of arguments. Hell, half their religion seems to be arguing the nuance of just how much they can get away with without violating their holy scrolls. Natural lawyers.
I think the greater question is, just how many lawyers do we need? Does a plethora of lawyers create its own issues? Does an overabundance of the professional class create societal imbalance? Just how much of an economy should deal with and reward financing production of goods, versus the actual creation of goods (and therefore value)? Can an oversized intellectual class be unhealthy for a nation?
I think so.
I never see those people on threads where there's a Jew opposing regressivism, of whom there are none too few.
They exist, but I disagree with the last part. There are too few. Regardless, to praise them would just be the "based black man" meme. The problem isn't one of individuals, but of demographic tendency.
You're seeing what you want to see, just like so many others. Your sort says "it's the jews", the red pills say "it's the women", the nationalists say "it's the mexicans (or the chinese)" and the race baiters say "it's the blacks".
Just because your interpretation says all the rest are being played for fools doesn't make your interpretation more correct.
Any conspiracy theory that involves a group of people being megalomaniacally smarter than everyone else enough so to pit everyone against everyone else... is wrong.
Because the truth is the entirety of humanity is extremely stupid. There is no grand scheme, there's just a whole lot of very stupid people acting in their own self interest.
Even the gestalt of marxism is fueled by stupid people who believe that working communism would be a magical land of unicorn rainbow farts... and the cynics among them who just want to rule over the rubble are the most rational among them.
If you do another broken quote reply to me again, I will block you. I don't put up with that pedantic bullshit. You either make a point in proper conversation, or gtfo.
Now... You say "it doesn't require intelligence but money and influence."
I'm calling bullshit on that.
It's implicit in the "its the jews!' position that there must be an intelligent plan, otherwise they wouldn't be making it an ethno/religious argument, but rather a classist argument. Plenty of non-jews have money and influence. But the jew hating crowd isn't going after the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld Halliburton Superfriends Crew, who clearly have more money and influence than the jews do. The jew hating crowd hates the jews because they perceive them as part of a grand ethno conspiracy. If they didn't then they'd just hate all rich people (or all idle rich people).
It's implicit in the "its the jews!' position that there must be an intelligent plan, otherwise they wouldn't be making it an ethno/religious argument, but rather a classist argument.
No, the only thing it requires is humanity's strongest in-group preference, and, if we're all being honest, the most externally-reinforced in-group preference in history.
While the types whose favorite question is J love to point out the number of pogroms, expulsions, and genocide attempts, they have a bit of a blind spot for the implications behind them - of course, the conspiracy led by one Jew primarily consists of other Jews. Six thousand years of ethno/cultural history have taught him that no one else can be trusted, so a midwit cousin is a better co-conspirator than a goyim, and a dim brother is safer to put on your board of directors than even the most competent outsider.
Accept that, and rather than a grand conspiracy set up by some metaphysical defect in their genes, a plot to rule and control is nothing more than a passing familiarity with history and a sense of self-preservation.
One must concede, however, that it's far more difficult to draw the ties between Bush and Obama than it is to connect a cabal whose mothers all attended the same Temple school in the Bronx.
Your sort says "it's the jews", the red pills say "it's the women", the nationalists say "it's the mexicans (or the chinese)" and the race baiters say "it's the blacks".
You forgot "weak men". And there's truth in every argument, but no single one is a complete picture.
But what irks me about the antisemites is their conceit. They think that their hypothesis accounts for ALL the other truths.
That their boogiejew is behind everything else. The black poverty, working poor drug problems, feminism, oilwar, all of it. They big up judaism into a megalomaniacal supervillain just to pat themselves on the back at having such a terrible opponent.
It's pathetic and irritating and more than a little cringe.
Is it rational to think one ethnic group contributes disproportionately to the problem relative to others, though?
The absolute obsession that some have with the Jews, and with vilifying Jews in general, shows that it goes far beyond that.
Yeah, sort of, though I think it has more to do with the judeophile conditioning we're taught from womb to grave. When people start looking at it objectively, it creates a bit of a "They Live" hysteria. You want to give everyone glasses, but you just come off as crazy. Of course, that just isolates the person, distorting their perspective and feeding paranoia, and the ability to create a nuanced and reasoned argument becomes lost. It becomes The Jews, rather than a characteristic that seems prevalent in the Jewish demographic.
But, that's not the same thing as pointing out that some individual degenerate journalist or academic is Jewish, as they often are. That's just to trigger others pattern recognition.
I don't think that exists. I see far more attacks on Jews than any other ethnic group, even ethnic groups who deserve it more.
Tell me about it. I know that Jews are more likely to be regressives, but I deny that this is because of some essence of pure evil in their blood. It's because they are more likely to be professionals and so called 'intellectuals'. What is the truth to which you think I am blind?
It's more like confirmation bias. I never see those people on threads where there's a Jew opposing regressivism, of whom there are none too few.
That may be true in Europe. Not really sure. In the US, evangelicism has severe judeophilia due to Armageddon prophesy. There's also no critical examination of Jews throughout history on what brings about their persecution. If it's spoken of at all, it's attributed to "jealousy" or "scapegoating". Intellectually dishonest. edit: In our education setting we also generally spend more time on the Holocaust and individual stories than we do on WW2.
Their biggest issue has always been lack of assimilation. Just the persistence of distinctly Jewish identities across Europe for centuries is testament to this fact, though we can even see this lack of assimilation between Jewish communities when forced together into ghettos. They moved up the Rhine for trade opportunities, but they never really emigrated. They just moved. Usury certainly didn't help perceptions.
But the main driver of judeophilia is, of course, the Holocaust. Judeophilia may not be as apt a word, here, but it's certainly a shield. Any criticism as a people is strictly taboo because of the big H's big H.
Why boil it down to evil? They have a high verbal acumen in their blood (if you buy into IQ). They make a lot of arguments. Hell, half their religion seems to be arguing the nuance of just how much they can get away with without violating their holy scrolls. Natural lawyers.
I think the greater question is, just how many lawyers do we need? Does a plethora of lawyers create its own issues? Does an overabundance of the professional class create societal imbalance? Just how much of an economy should deal with and reward financing production of goods, versus the actual creation of goods (and therefore value)? Can an oversized intellectual class be unhealthy for a nation?
I think so.
They exist, but I disagree with the last part. There are too few. Regardless, to praise them would just be the "based black man" meme. The problem isn't one of individuals, but of demographic tendency.
Displaying ignorance on a topic is not an argument.
No.
You're seeing what you want to see, just like so many others. Your sort says "it's the jews", the red pills say "it's the women", the nationalists say "it's the mexicans (or the chinese)" and the race baiters say "it's the blacks".
Just because your interpretation says all the rest are being played for fools doesn't make your interpretation more correct.
Any conspiracy theory that involves a group of people being megalomaniacally smarter than everyone else enough so to pit everyone against everyone else... is wrong.
Because the truth is the entirety of humanity is extremely stupid. There is no grand scheme, there's just a whole lot of very stupid people acting in their own self interest.
Even the gestalt of marxism is fueled by stupid people who believe that working communism would be a magical land of unicorn rainbow farts... and the cynics among them who just want to rule over the rubble are the most rational among them.
If you do another broken quote reply to me again, I will block you. I don't put up with that pedantic bullshit. You either make a point in proper conversation, or gtfo.
Now... You say "it doesn't require intelligence but money and influence."
I'm calling bullshit on that.
It's implicit in the "its the jews!' position that there must be an intelligent plan, otherwise they wouldn't be making it an ethno/religious argument, but rather a classist argument. Plenty of non-jews have money and influence. But the jew hating crowd isn't going after the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld Halliburton Superfriends Crew, who clearly have more money and influence than the jews do. The jew hating crowd hates the jews because they perceive them as part of a grand ethno conspiracy. If they didn't then they'd just hate all rich people (or all idle rich people).
No, the only thing it requires is humanity's strongest in-group preference, and, if we're all being honest, the most externally-reinforced in-group preference in history.
While the types whose favorite question is J love to point out the number of pogroms, expulsions, and genocide attempts, they have a bit of a blind spot for the implications behind them - of course, the conspiracy led by one Jew primarily consists of other Jews. Six thousand years of ethno/cultural history have taught him that no one else can be trusted, so a midwit cousin is a better co-conspirator than a goyim, and a dim brother is safer to put on your board of directors than even the most competent outsider.
Accept that, and rather than a grand conspiracy set up by some metaphysical defect in their genes, a plot to rule and control is nothing more than a passing familiarity with history and a sense of self-preservation.
One must concede, however, that it's far more difficult to draw the ties between Bush and Obama than it is to connect a cabal whose mothers all attended the same Temple school in the Bronx.
You forgot "weak men". And there's truth in every argument, but no single one is a complete picture.
There is some truth, yes.
But what irks me about the antisemites is their conceit. They think that their hypothesis accounts for ALL the other truths.
That their boogiejew is behind everything else. The black poverty, working poor drug problems, feminism, oilwar, all of it. They big up judaism into a megalomaniacal supervillain just to pat themselves on the back at having such a terrible opponent.
It's pathetic and irritating and more than a little cringe.
So you look for the dumbest version of an argument you can find, then present that as the entire argument.