We all know the story of the ADL's recent actions vindicating critics of Jewish power. We here are also familiar with anti-idpol, the idea that identity politics such as BLM, feminism and white nationalism, etc. are bad and should be discarded in favor of egalatarianism and the movmement/scene/faction/whatever that attempts to make that happen. Anti-idpol's response to the ADL's recent actions has been to declare that the ADL's apparent pro-Jewish activism is merely a front for their real goal, supporting Democrats, a response that I mocked and critiqued more rigorously. Anti-idpol's followup so far has been to sub "Fabian" in place of "Democrat" and restate the argument. This does almost nothing to alleviate the problems with this take that I pointed out in my critique. I suspect anti-idpol will sub nearly any word in the dictionary - with notable ommissions under "J" - in place of "Democrats" to see what they can get to stick if you play their games long enough.
Now imagine if black or white nationalism was in the news doing something bad. Do you think anti-idpol would hesitate to critique either one as a political force? They certainly don't hesitate to condemn white nationalism with the strongest possible language, calling it genocidal. You would think Jewish idpol doing something bad would be a great opportunity for them to point out problems with additional forms of idpol. Instead, they seek to launder Jewish idpol's actions by blaming them on other political forces. How can anyone take so-called anti-idpol seriously when it washes the hands of Jewish idpol like this? It looks fake and gay to me. Will they finally cede ground and admit that we are witnessing Jewish idpol in action?
Here's the thing. Identity Politics IS a bad thing. It's like political violence, in a perfect world, it shouldn't be used.
The problem lies in the fact that white-people endlessly give the benefit of the doubt and try to take the higher ground approach.
It's like being in a back-alley knife fight and critiquing your enemies form.
It unfortunately hasn't settled in yet to most of the masses that this ideological warfare is actually warfare. It sounds silly to say it but they aren't playing a political game, they are playing for keeps.
When you live in a safe and secure neighborhood, you don’t need a gun to protect your home.
Likewise, when you live in an ethnically homogeneous nation with a unified culture and heritage, you don’t need identity politics to protect your people.
In both cases, a potentially violent tool of intervention only becomes necessary when the environment demands it. The blame for what happens next lies not with the tool but rather with the people who altered the environment to become threatening in the first place.
In other words: the anti-idpol crowd are the equivalent of gun control advocates. They believe that political violence will cease when the people who use idpol to defend themselves put down those ugly tools - while the criminal aggressors continue to use them.
Except you always need a gun to protect you because criminals come to your home.
Giving the government powers to ethnically regulate society is pointing that gun at yourself and firing.
The state does not represent the people, and it sure as fuck can't be trusted with being the ethnic representation of a people, because the first thing it will do is turn around and go "you're not a true scottsman" and start shooting it's own constituency. There is no point where anything will be homogeneous enough, and no point where identity will be unified enough, because you will act as race traitors immediately to secure power for your selves and your own personal understanding of what your people are.
That would require leaving the house so probably not.
I lived in a majority white small town in England for most of my early life.
I still don't think we ever didn't worry about locking the front door. That's just a common sense thing, not a race thing.
OMG you're a britbong, that makes so much more sense.
I don't live there anymore.
Something something, jungle.
That doesn't change anything.
I tend to think a nation is no longer entitled to ethnic homogeneity when it forcibly imports ten percent of its population, even as slaves, from across the ocean. So yeah, not a “stormfag”.
This doesn’t prevent me from recognizing a fundamental truth: diversity + proximity = war. That war will be fought with idpol, guns, or both. Anyone who doesn’t arm themselves will be slaughtered.
In America, the war began in 1964 with the passage of the civil rights act, which is a de facto replacement for the constitution. This was followed by Hart-Cellar opening the immigration floodgates. In the half century since, America has gone from 90% euro white to 60%. This is demographic shift on par with genocide.
There is no going back. It’s over. America will be a multicultural society from now until the day it inevitably collapses. Without shared heritage, culture, and values, our society will be governed by intertribal strife.
None of this is “white supremacy”. It’s just the way the world works.
Notice you said "on par with" rather than actually saying genocide. Even you know the idea of "white genocide" sounds stupid.
There's more evidence of male genocide, with the constantly increasing male suicide rate and decreasing labor force participation in the last 30 years.
I have come to the conclusion that you are acting in bad faith.
It's like complaining about bad weather. It may be true, but it's a fact of life. It's something you have to deal with. White people can't be the only fucking idiots sitting on the bench while everyone else plays for their team. That's how you get blown out.
White people are fighting on their own teams. Those teams just aren't some weird racial block since "white" isn't an ethnic group, we all have our own interests, and racializing ourselves into this socialist political bloc you want is stupid.
That's why we're losing.
On the contrary. Racialism fundamentally homogenizes the differences between ethnic groups, and eradicates them to serve a larger racial narrative, normally espoused by intellectuals, who assert some racial character that exists only in their mind.
All of the ethnic distinctions within that racial group are paved over to serve Socialism, and anyone not fitting the Socialist's order are attacked.
The rejection of those racial narratives is what allows ethnic groups to survive a Socialist onslaught by people claiming to represent their interests.
This is why American blacks believe in racialist nonsense like Wakanda and Kwanza, when real Africans actually have an actual ethnic history and culture to fall-back on; and why there is extreme tension between American blacks, Africans, Caribbean blacks, and Brazilian blacks. American blacks are heavily socialized and are blotting over their real history and culture by plastering pictures of Hollywood actors and Fentanyl users everywhere.
What fucking team? White women long left your team to join Team Women, and they're reaping the benefits of that while you do your oy veys and your "jogger" crap.
The only people on Team White are white men, so why can't it be Team Men and have a better chance of winning anything?
The number one team you have to beat is Team Women, and you haven't even acknowledged their existence.
The one that brought where we were before critical levels of poz began metastasizing around the 1960s
We've already been over this countless times. Repeat after me: "White women are the second most right-wing demographic in the country behind only white men."
Would be extinct in a generation
What alternate history bullshit are you on? You've never been unified, other than when the situation forced it, and even after that, they knifed you in the back as soon as they had the chance. For example, women campaigned alongside the KKK to oppose the black vote. They convinced you of the "snow under" strategy of letting white women vote. How did that one go for you?
That is getting closer and closer to being a false statement, and I can't wait for it to be one. I explained about ages, about how every other demographic is moving right while they move left, but it doesn't seem to stick in your head.
Maybe I should try a different approach.
White women are your version of the neocons' obsession with Israel. They're your "greatest ally".
Voting is kinda gay in general, but White women have a far better voting track record than black men. I've already explained to you that even if you get your wish, and they some day move further left than minority men, that would be an outlier of history so it's a stretch to attribute it to essentialism rather than the political climate at the time. I'm sure the system would love a gender divide over a white identity movement since the latter is the one that is actually a threat. I won't be surprised to see the system attempt to draw radicalizing white men until male identity instead of white identity. Fake radicals like Milo are already doing that.
What your dementia-addled brain can't understand is that the voting divides between whites and POCs are just one small piece of a larger puzzle that includes things like racial differences in IQ and the millennia of history between Jews and European gentiles. You're trying to arguing that trends that are at best emergent only in the advanced stages of pozzification somehow represent an eternal political conflict.
When you do attempt to draw from history, you end up making utterly moronic claims like Peggy McIntosh inventing racial politics in the 1980s or just denying history that contradicts your world view, like that of the tranny movement.
I've said for years that any ideology that doesn't account for and guard against bad faith is not one that will survive. That includes libertarians and so called conservatives.
I don't care that some of you don't want to accept that "Jewish IdPol" is a skin-suit for socialism.
BLM has been a National Socialist movement, and I've been condemning them since 2014. I absolutely blame white communists for the violence that they participated in. It's not the first time National Socialists and Communists worked together to destroy the lives of innocent people. It's why I called it a Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Black National Socialism and White Communism.
Dismissing the acts of Communists because they are white really shows how blinded by racial ideology you are being.
As with "white socialism's never been tried", I'm counting this as one of the dumbest statements that I've ever heard.
Communism, National Socialism, and Fascism are all Leftist ideologies. They actually exist in direct opposition to Liberalism and seek it's destruction. By definition, they can exist both under and outside of Liberalism.
Capitalism is just a Marxist slur for "Cultural Judaism" so how dare you.
That's shockingly ahistorical. Leftism is a bastardization of Liberalism. Not the other way around. Capitalism is merely a slur. Free market economics are not an ideology, it's just a recognition of economics to the benefit of the general public.
Liberalism does not create any of those things. Again, those ideologies are all reactions against Liberalism and it's corresponding individualism. They exist because people rejected Liberalism, sought to destroy it, and created ideologies to do that. They exist, because the people who invented them said they did.
All of this is wrong. Economics is economics. So long as humans exist, it will continue as it is a natural system. Embracing private property ownership is not damaging to the environment, it's preserving it. Liberalism exists to actually free the populace to engage in trade and property ownership. It provides a protection against moral degeneration, considering that most moral degeneration is coming from state action and political efforts. On top of all of that, the finite resource argument is only true at a scale you really can't get to, it's why Peak Oil is bullshit. Once you remove oil deposits from readily available sources, you can actually get more sources that were yet undiscovered. To tap all undiscovered resources would require so much advancement that you could very easily use the diminishing returns to incentivize supplemental materials.
Okay, I'm adding this comment to the stupid pile.
Yes, you do exist.
I mean, I'm going to assume that you exist and you're not a retarded and poorly programmed bot, so you exist.
And there is no difference between Fascism and Communism that once existed, or that currently exist. They are affirmative systems. They do not have to exist as an outgrowth of Liberalism. They exist despite, inspite of, and without Liberalism.
There's literally tons. Liberalism is actually being quite badly mauld by illeberalism. The entire political Left is Illeberal. Communism is illiberal. Islamism is Illiberal.
Nope. Liberalism doesn't do that. It does the opposite of that by definition. We live in a socialist system; and yes, that is crueler than many dictatorships.
That's also never true. Dictatorial systems can always require colonization of people's minds. Again, Liberalism doesn't create a "false consciousness" (that's the word you're looking for). It actually seeks to prevent the state from doing that by allowing political dissent.
I think idpol is probably inevitable. I don’t think you can have whites, blacks, Latinos, Asians, and jews all living under one government without there being hostility between the groups. White people will eventually figure this out or be genocided.
The people who call America an “experiment” should be shot.
You're welcome to get the fuck out of my country, traitor.
Free white persons of good character.
Socialists do not count as people, let alone people of good character.
Since you're going to literally quote me.
My stance is pointing out that your Identity Politics is just a vaneer for socialism and you and the ADL both know it and are playing the same game.
Yes, and I have. That's why I keep calling BLM a Black National Socialist movement. That's what it is. WEB Du Bouis basically invented the term Black Folk as a reference to creating a black Volkish movement.
Most Identity Politics we see today is a skin-suit of Socialists. It has been since the Progressive Nationalist movement. Just because you don't like being called out, doesn't mean it's not what you're doing. Zionists use jews as a skin suit. National Socialists use Germans as a skin suit. Feminism uses women as a skin suit. Unions use Labor as a skin suit. You use white people as a skin suit.
Just so I understand you, is your claim is that the ADL (among other Jewish idpol organizations, but we can mostly focus on them for now) is not operating for the benefit of Jews?
Nope. And we can focus on all of the different groups because they are all doing the same thing.
BLM doesn't operate for the benefit of blacks, particularly when they are defunding the police and getting black criminals out of jail to terrorize black communities, while supporting black abortions and poverty through dependency structures. Socialism is antithetical to any human interest. There are no Chinese Communists, there are only Communists that happen to be Chinese.
Same thing here: Leftist jews aren't jews. They're Leftists. I'd go so far as to say that secular jews in general aren't even jews. The religion is the core of the ethnic group. Abandoning judaism is abandoning jewishness. Leftism requires the abandonment of judaism, and also requires the abandonment of property, family, and community. Leftism requires the annihilation of judaism, as Marx explicitly stated.
Did you even read my comment that I linked in the OP?
https://communities.win/c/KotakuInAction2/p/16ZDhBALTQ/x/c/4TnP1iO8Ogi
The only thing you sort of addressed about it by swapping "Democrats" out for "Fabians" is that you acknowledge the ADL as a global organization, unlike the original claim floated about their agenda being about Democrats and therefore US domestic politics. Everything else stands unaddressed.
I was answering the one question you asked. Why would I answer a question from 4 days ago in a reply to a question from exactly this second?
You are claiming that they aren't trying to benefit Jews, but all you did is swap Dems out for another bogeyman. Everything I said in my 4-day old comment there still applies. Notice how swapping out Dems for Fabians clarifies nothing.
First off, the ADL maintains a Zionist disposition and consistently advocates on behalf of Israel. If they are all about
Democrat partisanshipFabians-or-whatever-other-bogeyman-other-than-Jews, why do that have the same position on Israel as the Republicans, including Trump?Secondly, the ADL has done a number of oddly specific things that have no obvious pro-leftist/democrat implications. As u/trump4045 said, they attacked Iceland for trying to ban circumcision. The ADL also attacked AirBnB for boycotting Israeli settlemnts. How does any of that help promote
leftism/demsFabians-or-whatever-other-bogeyman-other-than-Jews?Thirdly, it's one thing to examine the ADL's motives, but you also have to look at the responses to them. While the ADL doesn't get their way 100% of the time - PewDiePie and Tucker Carlson come to mind - it's staggering how many times the ADL has told seemingly powerful institutions to "jump" only to be answered with "how high?" Is nearly every organization on Earth
leftist/demFabians-or-whatever-other-bogeyman-other-than-Jewish controlled?Fourthly, the ADL isn't the even the only Jewish organization involved. While the AJC has worked with the ADL at times, it's still a separate org with its own leaders and history, and you can interrogate its actions along the same lines as my first two critiques above.
Lastly, I can't help but chuckle at the reversal of fortunes here. It's usually the critics of Jewish power who have to fight off accusations, including from this conservative/whatever milieu, that we are flat-earth tier conspiracy theorists reading tea leaves, yet here it is them who are saying, in so many words, "The ADL has all the appearances of a Jewish supremacist organization, but that's just what THEY want you to think!"
Correct. A Leftist secular state weilding jewish nationalism as a cudgel. Because they are Leftists.
No, I just went to the source. Democrats are just a final political end-point from the Fabian infiltration and subversion of western governments. We could have stuck with BLM. National Socialism, Communism, and Fabian Socialism tend to be enemies, and yet you have Black National Socialists being funded to race riot and burn police stations. The Fabians understand (by definition of the name), that in order to bring about Socialism, you have to undermine and subvert the population slowly in a cultural war of attrition.
You have to make yourself seen as the absolute political representative of your specific faction of the Coalition Of The Margins. It's all about looking like you give a shit, in order to impose Socialism, which in the end betrays everyone. This is the lesson that the Social Democratic Party in Germany figured out in 1918: if the Left just goes around and says "Fuck you, we don't want democracy or representation, we want a dictatorship of the Proletariat. If you had read more Marx you wouldn't have asked us for such stupid things." to the people that elected them; you'll get ferocious blow-back from the populace. Instead, the SDP had to pretend like they gave a shit, and had to act slower and more methodically. Molding the world around them into Socialism. Hence the word "Fabian".
A mostly worthless criticism about Iceland is a good way to catch a headline while jews get beaten and fucking macheted by Black National Socialists in New York City, all as Bill DeBlasio shuts down their synagogues.
It's the same reason Feminists condemned men generally in Cologne, rather than Islamist migrants. Or refuse to condemn Islamist grooming gangs in Labour party safe districts. You keep pushing the narrative regardless of how many of the people you claim to protect die.
How many women's organizations are there? Guess what: all of them are operating off of a Feminist framework. Which means all of them are operating off of a Marxist meta-narrative applied to sex. It explains why every single solution to every single problem involves Socialism as the only answer.
How many black organizations are there? Same problem.
How many workers organizations are there? Same problem.
How many environmentalist organizations are there? Same problem.
Leftists only believe in Leftism. Everything else is a skin-suit.
Every single solution, to every single problem, to every single issue, in every single one of these pressure groups is Socialism. You can watch the ADL betray and condemn jews all day long for not being good socialists.
What a load of nonsense, AirBnB wasn't boycotting "Fabians." It was boycotting Israeli settlements. The ADL got that reversed. The Iceland thing wasn't just PR. They got that reversed as well.
In other words, the ADL secured tangible, material, economic gains for Israeli Jews and preserved Jewish religious/cultural traditions in Iceland. If that's not a real political force, then I have to ask how you would define a real political force.
It's interesting that you are throwing the AJC under the bus. Are you saying that an organization with this history is all about leftism?
Wait until you find out about the liberal organizations that don't liberate anyone, and the conservative organizations that don't conserve anything.
Do you include the pressure groups that align with Republicans? You ignored the point I made about the ADL's pro-Israel stance aligning with conservatives and Republicans, including Trump.
Did you see her meltdown? That was hilarious. I noticed that conservatives started to include "anti-white" in their lexicon here and there after that development. I suspect conservative operatives realized that gayop wasn't working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh0EMfjhqzM
She eventually got "cancelled" for saying...whatever the fuck this is.
https://archive.ph/DQKha
I haven't checked in on her since she blew up over her "if you think CRT is anti-white then you're a racist" stance. Turns out just today she spills the gossip on why Adam was fired from Timcast ... by telling us something that was apparently told to her in confidence.
Stay classy, Karlyn.
Do you have a synopsis? I really don't want to sit through a half hour of listening to that ghastly woman.
CRT is anti-white. That's the point. It's to intentionally drive a black-white divide and cast whites as a bourgeoisie stand-in.
She, correctly, realizes that Leftists are happy to demonize whites, and praying to God that people like you and Richard Spencer join their white affinity groups to legitimize their overall narrative. It doesn't make it not anti-white, though.