He used to be massive far-left progressive when he used to hang out in reddit. I was looking back in my profile, seems like I had an argument with guy whose handle name was AntonioOfMilan long time ago. I'm convinced he just hangs around here to tone control and be an unelected hall monitor.
When I had an argument with that guy, that was like 6, 8 years ago, way before this message board came. I think it's probably the same person probably came to conclusion he doesn't want to be in that ideology. AOV might not be far-left progressive now but he still uses all those argument tactics when he senses he might lose the argument. He still proudly wears the label atheist, too even though they are just as almost the same as far left.
I was thinking about that this morning in the case of Kanye. Sure, it's not as if it's just Jewish people that are taking him down. Or even primarily Jews. We live in a society! When it comes to cancelling wrong-thinkers, we're all in this together. It doesn't exactly "prove him right". However that is a rationalization, and ignores decades of soft power and influence.
I generally treat everyone as individuals and want everyone to get along. I don't care much for "attacking identity groups as inferior or conspiring" (say, like women), least of which because it's not tactically smart. Especially if you live in a mixed-race nation and other groups can be potential allies. But let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
anti-semitism is generally frowned upon
Why? Was that always the case? What changed in Western culture to make it so? Is there something special about anti-semitism vs. other racial discrimination? (Did he engage in racial discrimination?) I'm interested in the greater societal reasons, but also in your personal opinion. Would you "cancel" or distance yourself from Kyrie if you were in the position to do so?
I'm not even sure it's true that the brand is "toxic to normies", especially with Kyrie. Most people wouldn't have cared. Except that "normies" are basically empty vessels that parrot what influencers tell them is important. There were way too many twitter replies about that guy that were indistinguishable from bots, yet I can't conclude they are all bots because that's how people in the collective actually speak. It becomes difficult to see or criticize them as individuals.
Why? Was that always the case? What changed in Western culture to make it so?
Well, there was this small issue in the early 40s.
Is there something special about anti-semitism vs. other racial discrimination?
The fact that it actually led to mass murder, while the other kinds led to isolated attacks by certain groups?
in your personal opinion. Would you "cancel" or distance yourself from Kyrie if you were in the position to do so?
I've given my position on this. Blaming the Jews is, in my opinion, a thinly veiled scapegoating attempt to avoid having to confront women's actions, by claiming utter garbage like "they were made to do it!".
I probably wouldn't "cancel" him if I was deciding if he got paid or not. I'd just tell him what I think privately and say publicly that he can have his own opinions.
Which is ironic, because most people on his side are likely grinding their teeth at the fact they couldn't cancel me here.
This is hilarious. Someone can point out that some Jews are wealthy and powerful, and that number is (indisputably) disproportionate to their population (which is, according to the left, a Very Bad Thing -- all things must be proportionate or it's evidence of racism/oppression) and according to you, that's "blaming the Jews."
Hell, in Kyrie's case, the "problematic" bit was that he claimed to be a Jew. And his claim that he might be a Jew is somehow anti-Semitic?
But your claim that literally all women are part of a worldwide secret conspiracy, well, that's ok. Not scapegoating at all.
Blaming the Jews is, in my opinion, a thinly veiled scapegoating attempt to avoid having to confront women's actions, by claiming utter garbage like "they were made to do it!".
Because as we know, one of the few surviving Matriarchal cultures that has lasted most of human history and is well represented in the elites has nothing to do with women's influence in the world.
Hi Imp. You would probably call me a 'holocaust denier' but I don't dispute its entire existence, I have just seen inconsistencies that make me question the specific narrative surrounding it. Is this a bad thing? What is it about that particular event that makes it, to a man like yourself who asks questions about the propaganda pushed on him by society, uniquely unquestionable?
Do leaders and elites not lie? Do groups not conspire to present information in a way that aids their causes and discredits their enemies? Why is that 'conspiracy' more ridiculous than the one that you present about women, which also goes against majority consensus? What makes it so unthinkable that we might not have been taught the entire truth about a vitally important, world-changing event and which, according to you yourself, has led to the suppression of speech that we are seeing right now?
Were you there personally to verify the authenticity of what we are told to believe? If not, why is it so unthinkable to question it?
Antonio and imp can’t even show up in these threads anymore lol
What exactly can they even do to them lol
I am reasonably convinced Antonio is a paid shill for Israel at this point. Imp, I don't know what his deal is, pretty sure he's just a troll.
He used to be massive far-left progressive when he used to hang out in reddit. I was looking back in my profile, seems like I had an argument with guy whose handle name was AntonioOfMilan long time ago. I'm convinced he just hangs around here to tone control and be an unelected hall monitor.
I thought AntonioOfMilan was someone mocking AoV, but it's been years so idk.
When I had an argument with that guy, that was like 6, 8 years ago, way before this message board came. I think it's probably the same person probably came to conclusion he doesn't want to be in that ideology. AOV might not be far-left progressive now but he still uses all those argument tactics when he senses he might lose the argument. He still proudly wears the label atheist, too even though they are just as almost the same as far left.
What's the point? You see what you want to see.
I explained a few times that anti-semitism is generally frowned upon. They're being "cancelled" because their brand is toxic to normies.
I was thinking about that this morning in the case of Kanye. Sure, it's not as if it's just Jewish people that are taking him down. Or even primarily Jews. We live in a society! When it comes to cancelling wrong-thinkers, we're all in this together. It doesn't exactly "prove him right". However that is a rationalization, and ignores decades of soft power and influence.
I generally treat everyone as individuals and want everyone to get along. I don't care much for "attacking identity groups as inferior or conspiring" (say, like women), least of which because it's not tactically smart. Especially if you live in a mixed-race nation and other groups can be potential allies. But let me play devil's advocate for a moment.
Why? Was that always the case? What changed in Western culture to make it so? Is there something special about anti-semitism vs. other racial discrimination? (Did he engage in racial discrimination?) I'm interested in the greater societal reasons, but also in your personal opinion. Would you "cancel" or distance yourself from Kyrie if you were in the position to do so?
I'm not even sure it's true that the brand is "toxic to normies", especially with Kyrie. Most people wouldn't have cared. Except that "normies" are basically empty vessels that parrot what influencers tell them is important. There were way too many twitter replies about that guy that were indistinguishable from bots, yet I can't conclude they are all bots because that's how people in the collective actually speak. It becomes difficult to see or criticize them as individuals.
Well, there was this small issue in the early 40s.
The fact that it actually led to mass murder, while the other kinds led to isolated attacks by certain groups?
I've given my position on this. Blaming the Jews is, in my opinion, a thinly veiled scapegoating attempt to avoid having to confront women's actions, by claiming utter garbage like "they were made to do it!".
I probably wouldn't "cancel" him if I was deciding if he got paid or not. I'd just tell him what I think privately and say publicly that he can have his own opinions.
Which is ironic, because most people on his side are likely grinding their teeth at the fact they couldn't cancel me here.
This is hilarious. Someone can point out that some Jews are wealthy and powerful, and that number is (indisputably) disproportionate to their population (which is, according to the left, a Very Bad Thing -- all things must be proportionate or it's evidence of racism/oppression) and according to you, that's "blaming the Jews."
Hell, in Kyrie's case, the "problematic" bit was that he claimed to be a Jew. And his claim that he might be a Jew is somehow anti-Semitic?
But your claim that literally all women are part of a worldwide secret conspiracy, well, that's ok. Not scapegoating at all.
Because as we know, one of the few surviving Matriarchal cultures that has lasted most of human history and is well represented in the elites has nothing to do with women's influence in the world.
Nothing at all.
Ah yes, that's why people get cancelled, for offending the normies. Great job cracking the code!
I'm not having a serious discussion on this with someone who doesn't believe in the Holocaust.
Hi Imp. You would probably call me a 'holocaust denier' but I don't dispute its entire existence, I have just seen inconsistencies that make me question the specific narrative surrounding it. Is this a bad thing? What is it about that particular event that makes it, to a man like yourself who asks questions about the propaganda pushed on him by society, uniquely unquestionable?
Do leaders and elites not lie? Do groups not conspire to present information in a way that aids their causes and discredits their enemies? Why is that 'conspiracy' more ridiculous than the one that you present about women, which also goes against majority consensus? What makes it so unthinkable that we might not have been taught the entire truth about a vitally important, world-changing event and which, according to you yourself, has led to the suppression of speech that we are seeing right now?
Were you there personally to verify the authenticity of what we are told to believe? If not, why is it so unthinkable to question it?
You're too demented to have a serious discussion about anything, Mr. Peggy McIntosh invented racial politics in the 1980s.
Normies don't deserve to vote then.