New revisionist history, “jeets built Silicon Valley”
(twitter.com)
Comments (29)
sorted by:
And, as always, the leftists are the pro-retarded-slogan side.
"DEI IS MERIT!"
Bleh. Retards.
No, hiring based specifically on things other than merit is not pro-merit. Obviously.
Read between the lines. Obviously the jeets are much smarter and harder working than you dumb White Americans. Fully internalized "Diversity Is Our Strength".
Harder slaving is more like it. I work hard. I play hard. We all do. It's different. My life is totally different from that of the jeet, and I like it that way.
war is peace
Ignorance is strength
freedom is slavery
dei is merit
fear is freedom!
subjugation is liberation!
contradiction is truth!
Finkle is Einhorn!
Hate to say it. Hate to say it. This guy is a lolbertarian. He wrote an entire book about how the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is very bad.
He loves to troll and be retarded though (even by lolbertarian standards). I think here he means: you're engaging in worse anti-meritocracy than DEI, so compared to you, DEI is more meritocratic.
Hell hath no fury like a lolbertarian having his open borders threatened.
FUCK! As a libertarian...I hate libertarians!
No but, jokes aside, it is pretty frustrating. I think Dave Smith nails it on the issue, and explains it the best; there is a libertarian argument for not letting your country get overrun by a bunch of foreigners who just want free shit, and will end up ruining the country.
One of the core concepts of libertarianism is property rights. If we're going to have a country at all, that country is, to some extent, the property of the people who live there, and who fund it. Same goes for cities and "public property." No, the parks don't belong to the homeless, they belong to the law-abiding citizens who don't make things worse for everyone else.
Just like a libertarian would argue, rightly, that no one can force them to take anyone else into their house, you can make the same argument for the country and borders. Way too many "libertarians" miss that, and are just for globalist trade, which does not produce liberty.
Which it was. Shame he seems to have gotten lost in the weeds and insists on being a retard on the nationalism question.
America is not just an economic zone! This message goes out to everyone; liberals, neocons, libertarians, and all the rest. We're an existing country, nation, and people. That has to be protected. Everything else is framing.
I'd go a bit further than say that if your political ideology does not allow for opposing your country being overrun by foreigners, or your streets with druggies, then there is something fundamentally wrong with your political ideology. Going out on a limb, I know.
Eeeeh... I can't say I find it terribly convincing, but I'm glad that you believe that rather than "well, if my ideology is inconsistent with Basic Common Sense, I guess basic common sense has to go".
As you rightly point out, a country is more than an economic zone. A home is more than a house, and a country is more than 'property' where you are an infinitesimal shareholder.
Sallust rightly said that most people don't want liberty, but rather mild masters (slightly paraphrased).
That's the sad part; it clearly, clearly does. A bunch of "libertarians" are just the remnants of hippy leftists, who bought into all the anti-white, anti-West nonsense, but are less hateful about it than the leftists and progressives.
For the record, although I align with libertarians on a lot, it doesn't mean I think it's the perfect answer or anything; it's clearly not. Ideology should not supersede pragmatism, and a bunch of libertarians are either acting in bad faith, or get lost in the weeds. Doesn't help that libertarians are often super autistic, either. Like you said, if your movement/ideology/whatever can't protect your own country or people, there's really no point.
Again, just because I identify with and sometimes as "libertarian," doesn't mean I subscribe to everything. And, you always have to take into account that many ideologies are somewhat diverse, and you get infighting. There are "libertarians" who are leftists, some who are more centrist, and then the more pragmatic libertarians who, although they often wouldn't like the comparison, align much more closely with the right.
Basically, I'm not going to let retarded leftists ruin yet another thing. I'm libertarian-leaning, but staunchly opposed to open borders, mass migration, anarcho-tyranny, and all the rest. I don't view those people as libertarian (true communism has never been tried, no true Scotsman, etc., I know, but still.) A bunch of libertarians are just leftists or hippies wearing a skinsuit. That ain't me, obviously.
I want a system that protects liberty, and acknowledge that that does need to operate the lever of power, and even perhaps be somewhat authoritarian, in response to the current climate. You can't protect liberty by being soft, when society is overrun by a bunch of authoritarian commies who hold a bunch of power.
Anti-white is stupid, but frankly, a lot of the critiques of the so called 'West' are valid. The West has been making a total mess of things of many other places. People get it exactly wrong. They feign shame for the West's history and defend the West's present, while they should be ashamed of the West's present and be proud of the West's history.
You can make any ideology work if you're not autistic about it. Hell, I don't even have an ideology.
I think 'no true Scotsman' works well for ideologies. Scotsman is pretty open and closed. But the definition of libertarianism, or communsim for that matter, is and can be contested. Hell, after WW2, most Germans thought that national socialism was a good idea badly executed. Hitler and the Nazis had some good ideas that appealed to a lot of people - like transcending all minor German identities (like Bavarian or Hessian) and transcending class identities.
As you say below, modern West. I don't think most of the people talking positively about "the West" are referencing the modern version, and are instead lamenting what we lost.
Hey, no argument here. That's exactly correct.
And, thus, libertarianism fails. Alas, alas!
The point of 'no true Scotsman' as a phrase is that it's purity spiraling, though. The argument is that it's removing a bunch of Scots from being Scotsman, because you added random shit. So it's exactly like "true communism." Ironically, "true Scotsman" has nothing to do with Scotsmen, because it's just a style of argument.
I know, but I've long been annoyed by how that fallacy is used. Basically, at any point that you try to enforce any form of standard whatsoever, that claim will come out. Even for stuff that isn't "random". You get problems with that because you choose to adopt a label for your beliefs that is also used by others.
Imagine that you called yourself a Blerpian instead of a Libertarian - i.e., a label no one used before. Then some libertarians who don't fit your strict criteria also call themselves a Blerpian. Do you have more rights then to enforce your view of what a Blerpian is than you do now for libertarian?
I don’t think Richard Hanania has real beliefs. I think he’s a clout-chasing mentally ill freak who is cozying up to sections of the left after he failed to get traction on the right.
The local short bus brigade are just trying to make a narrative from this nobody because he is Jewish. Pay no mind to it.
He's an Arab Palestinian, but of course, you're a transparent troll who believes nothing he says.
Like what? How did they get that idea? Even now it would be better without the jeets.
Because it sounds good on paper and, if it was at all true, would totally 'own the cons.'
It's not like their movement is based on truth, but feelings. So, if you assume Their Truth™ is that The Whites are an oppressive group who throw their weight around and wield institutional power to keep their own positions despite being incompetent (retard colonialism), then it follows that pushing "DEI" would be pro-merit.
It's completely deranged, but you can sort of make the puzzle pieces fit, if you try to look at it from Leftist Reality™. If white dominance in a white majority country was unearned, DEI brings freedom and meritocracy. It's cultist logic.
Cheap labor, it’s all pro immigration has been a front for since the “great new society” push.
It's also a front for white genocide.
It’s like how blacks take something over and think it’s theirs.
Basketball, dreadlocks, fried chicken, public parks, etc.
If jeets could build Silicon Valley they would have one of their own.
They don't. Because they didn't, and can't, build it.
Indians: "Totally built Silicon Valley, guys"
Also Indians: Can't even build a bridge.
https://communities.win/c/home/p/19BGqrwu7d
Silicon Valley (much like AI), was help developed by the military and intelligence, especially by removing regulations and taxes. Almost all the developers were explicitly American, and they got to have the government stay out of their way and not get heavily taxed.
Next stage : We built your country so we deserve to take it over :
https://x.com/wgthink/status/1934219429660823654