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?
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.