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.
He's basically a soc dem with 2010s "skeptic community" social views and views himself as part of a "big tent" of "anti-wokeness" that spans a variety of competing world views.
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.
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?
I'm impressed at the control they have over people if they think they can get away with saying things like that when someone mentions they have a lot of control over how things work.
I can't tell if this means they feel they're about to lose control and are getting desperate, or if it means they're so totally in control that they feel utterly invulnerable and able to rule with an iron fist without consequences.
Yes, they have repeated this same play over and over all throughout history, and it ends the same way, every time.
The only reason they survive is because there is always another nation willing to take them in when one is driving them out. They refuse to stop repeating this cycle, eternally convinced that it's gonna work this time.
And who knows, maybe they're gonna be proven right.
Like Bobby Fischer said of their race, they can't be happy at the natural order of things. They need to be the only one controlling it to fit their convenience or belief. And it's funny we are seeing that in every industry, financial, governing, health and entertainment all seem to be gripped under that on foreign entity now.
#notalljews and all, but... assuming for the sake of argument that their expulsion was justified in every single instance, why does it keep happening? It can't be genetic, I'm pretty sure it's not a divine curse, so what is it about their culture that always leads to this outcome? I understand it with cultures that don't assimilate (Gypsies etc) but jews seem extremely good at assimilating.
I'm willing to accept the premise that a large enough number of bad apples try to subvert and harm their hosts that said hosts want to kick the entire tribe out, but I can only understand it as an abstract. What are the behaviors and psychological mechanisms behind it? And why is it always so bad that the entire group gets targeted, not just the culprits?
It's an open question to anyone who wants to answer. Generally, since there are too many examples to cover in detail.
Makes more sense in that context. If you want to know a culture, look at what it teaches. It doesn't completely match the blame that I often see attributed to secular jews but I guess religious teachings have a big impact on secular culture too. Look at how many atheists celebrate Christmas and adopt (halfassed versions of) Christian values.
It's like asking why Americans are so obsessed with guns and free speech - because its baked into holy text of the nation. No people ignores their origin story.
I forget where I first read this, but one theory is that during the Middle Ages there was a strong selection for neurotic, manipulative, greedy Jews. Basically, the Jews who lived outside the cities and farmed, etc. converted to Christianity or Islam and just stopped considering themselves Jewish. The ones in the cities gravitated towards banking, etc.
The people who stuck with that identity selected for having an extremely strong ingroup preference. It's why you'll see "atheist" Jews and Orthodox Jews uniting whenever it is beneficial for them, and why "remembering the Holobunga" is the most important part of being a Jew to American Jews.
TL;DR if you were a normal person over the last couple thousand years you probably stopped considering yourself Jewish after a while.
Well cities are often cesspools so I can see how a group descended entirely from affluent urbanites could have a lot of negative, culturally entrenched baggage.
You say 'selected'. Do you mean in terms of genetics? Of course I'm willing to accept IQ being inherited genetically, and I'll even grant you 'neurotic', but I'm not sold on 'greedy' and 'manipulative' being hereditary traits (if that's what you meant).
I think of ingroup preference as something that most groups have, only it's beaten and shamed out of the ones that aren't allowed to have it. But it's very plausible that being kicked out a bunch of countries and developing a 'it's us against the world' mindset would kick it into overdrive.
But it's an interesting theory, thank you for sharing it.
I'll read it, if I can get it without being put in a database somewhere.
I looked at some snippets, and what I'm getting is: they see themselves as colonists rather than guests, so they work to culturally, politically and academically terraform their new homes to suit them better (basically weakening the cohesion of the host), and place themselves in positions of power, because they don't trust their hosts will treat them well?
In essence, unironically colonialism.
And obviously people object to it, so it becomes self-sabotage and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It's on.. the whites already knew, now they've unwittingly awoken the blacks, and the hispanics have also noticed... the the (((tribe))) is highly suspicious.
whites are the only ones that actually cared about the hall of costs and felt obligated to pamper the 'victims' because of how infiltrated the institutions are, once the whites become minority as they foolishly wanted, they'll realize the browns and blacks don't give a shit about other people's victim status and only want to expand the power and influence of their own tribes, this alliance of 'the oppressed' will only work when the whites who extend sympathy outside of the race are still in charge, and then the golems will turn against their masters
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.
He's basically a soc dem with 2010s "skeptic community" social views and views himself as part of a "big tent" of "anti-wokeness" that spans a variety of competing world views.
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.
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.
Wouldn't have figured you for a "Not ALL Women" person!
Ah yes, that's why people get cancelled, for offending the normies. Great job cracking the code!
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.
Players kneeling during the national anthems, fans tell them to leave politics out of it and shut up and dribble = racist.
Player criticize Israel and Jews on social media: Know your place black man!
And whitey didn't even tell them they couldn't have that opinion. All whitey said was 'keep it off the field, we're not paying to see that'.
This is straight up 'believe what we tell you to believe or get fired'.
The replies are hilarious, oppression Olympics at its finest
I almost wonder if that's the only "allowable" counter against someone like him.
Yeah I got banned there
I'm impressed at the control they have over people if they think they can get away with saying things like that when someone mentions they have a lot of control over how things work.
I can't tell if this means they feel they're about to lose control and are getting desperate, or if it means they're so totally in control that they feel utterly invulnerable and able to rule with an iron fist without consequences.
they always over play their hands
Yes, they have repeated this same play over and over all throughout history, and it ends the same way, every time.
The only reason they survive is because there is always another nation willing to take them in when one is driving them out. They refuse to stop repeating this cycle, eternally convinced that it's gonna work this time.
And who knows, maybe they're gonna be proven right.
Like Bobby Fischer said of their race, they can't be happy at the natural order of things. They need to be the only one controlling it to fit their convenience or belief. And it's funny we are seeing that in every industry, financial, governing, health and entertainment all seem to be gripped under that on foreign entity now.
I don't get it.
#notalljews and all, but... assuming for the sake of argument that their expulsion was justified in every single instance, why does it keep happening? It can't be genetic, I'm pretty sure it's not a divine curse, so what is it about their culture that always leads to this outcome? I understand it with cultures that don't assimilate (Gypsies etc) but jews seem extremely good at assimilating.
I'm willing to accept the premise that a large enough number of bad apples try to subvert and harm their hosts that said hosts want to kick the entire tribe out, but I can only understand it as an abstract. What are the behaviors and psychological mechanisms behind it? And why is it always so bad that the entire group gets targeted, not just the culprits?
It's an open question to anyone who wants to answer. Generally, since there are too many examples to cover in detail.
This image clarifies a lot of things for me. I think it's source of the whole problem.
That's actually fascinating, thank you
That mindset sounds an awful lot like modern progressivism.
The same reason Muslims just can't put down jihad. It's baked into their holy texts.
Makes more sense in that context. If you want to know a culture, look at what it teaches. It doesn't completely match the blame that I often see attributed to secular jews but I guess religious teachings have a big impact on secular culture too. Look at how many atheists celebrate Christmas and adopt (halfassed versions of) Christian values.
It's like asking why Americans are so obsessed with guns and free speech - because its baked into holy text of the nation. No people ignores their origin story.
I forget where I first read this, but one theory is that during the Middle Ages there was a strong selection for neurotic, manipulative, greedy Jews. Basically, the Jews who lived outside the cities and farmed, etc. converted to Christianity or Islam and just stopped considering themselves Jewish. The ones in the cities gravitated towards banking, etc.
The people who stuck with that identity selected for having an extremely strong ingroup preference. It's why you'll see "atheist" Jews and Orthodox Jews uniting whenever it is beneficial for them, and why "remembering the Holobunga" is the most important part of being a Jew to American Jews.
TL;DR if you were a normal person over the last couple thousand years you probably stopped considering yourself Jewish after a while.
Well cities are often cesspools so I can see how a group descended entirely from affluent urbanites could have a lot of negative, culturally entrenched baggage.
You say 'selected'. Do you mean in terms of genetics? Of course I'm willing to accept IQ being inherited genetically, and I'll even grant you 'neurotic', but I'm not sold on 'greedy' and 'manipulative' being hereditary traits (if that's what you meant).
I think of ingroup preference as something that most groups have, only it's beaten and shamed out of the ones that aren't allowed to have it. But it's very plausible that being kicked out a bunch of countries and developing a 'it's us against the world' mindset would kick it into overdrive.
But it's an interesting theory, thank you for sharing it.
If you're really interested, you can try digging into Culture of Critique and discussions surrounding it.
I'll read it, if I can get it without being put in a database somewhere.
I looked at some snippets, and what I'm getting is: they see themselves as colonists rather than guests, so they work to culturally, politically and academically terraform their new homes to suit them better (basically weakening the cohesion of the host), and place themselves in positions of power, because they don't trust their hosts will treat them well?
In essence, unironically colonialism.
And obviously people object to it, so it becomes self-sabotage and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If that's how it is... it's actually quite sad.
You can also read the author's author writing at Occidental Observer.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/author/kmac/
It's on.. the whites already knew, now they've unwittingly awoken the blacks, and the hispanics have also noticed... the the (((tribe))) is highly suspicious.
whites are the only ones that actually cared about the hall of costs and felt obligated to pamper the 'victims' because of how infiltrated the institutions are, once the whites become minority as they foolishly wanted, they'll realize the browns and blacks don't give a shit about other people's victim status and only want to expand the power and influence of their own tribes, this alliance of 'the oppressed' will only work when the whites who extend sympathy outside of the race are still in charge, and then the golems will turn against their masters
translation: I hope he feels powerless sees that we own him.
This is what he gets for folding as quickly as he did
White man exploiting black man = bad. Jewish man (who is often more white) exploiting black man = ????
Why dont we all identify as jewish. That way we can use it as a cudgel to bash our way up the ladder of the oppressed.
Well there was a man a couple thousand years ago that told the Jews that holding themselves separate from others wasn't a nice thing.
And we saw how that went.
really shutting those "jews run everything" guys up when you act like this...
Sure sounds master-racish. That Stockhölm syndrome took a while to manifest... <Gilad Erdan>
I mean as far as I know this black man's only crime is now kneeling to them on this issue.
Why is this guy slammed a ball player like this?
“Put in his place” = “back on the plantation, uppity nigger”
TFW you are the Israeli ambassador and you can’t even spell “Antisemitic” correctly in a tweet… 🤦🏻♂️🤔