Hi. I didn't see this term mentioned in the thread, so I wanted to share this all with you. It's about Izzat. Some posts have mentioned 'saving face', which is Izzat, but I wanted to elaborate on it.
Izzat has no direct translation into English. We only have terms that can broach the same concept such as 'honour' or 'reputation' or 'face'. Izzat is so much more than that. It's a zero-sum game of collective honour shared by whole groups of people, all of whom take it very, very seriously. A system like this isn't just foreign to Enlightenment values, but I'd argue it's antithetical to every sensible form of governance on the planet. It will destroy any system that assumes good faith.
Izzat conflicts are not about who is right and who is wrong. It's about who wins and who loses. This means it's a zero-sum game where just about any action is justified (including murder) to restore the lost Izzat. Izzat is a limited social currency and the easiest way to get it is to take it from someone else. Winning is righteous in Izzat. Losing is unrighteous. This means that if someone plays the game of izzat well enough, they can get away with just about anything (murder, rape, scamming, cheating, stealing). The only morality in Izzat is the protection of your group's collective ego. The only appropriate response when your Izzat is attacked is the complete destruction of whoever insulted it.
Two people get into an argument. They might escalate, but chances are it won't be that bad. i.e. 'Sorry I broke your garden gnome.' With two Indians in an argument, the stakes are always deadly thanks to Izzat. Neither of them can back down, nor can they admit fault. Admitting fault is seen as deliberately humiliating yourself. Not only that, but because Izzat is shared, you are shaming everyone who shares your Izzat. So, admitting fault or taking responsibility for a problem is a form of social suicide. This means even if the dispute was over something completely fucking stupid or trivial (like a broken garden gnome), it could spiral into a decades long honour feud.
Izzat is also the reason why police are reluctant to get involved in disputes. Because Izzat is a zero-sum game, all participants are involved in the game. If a policeman sides with one family over another in an Izzat dispute, this means that he's deliberately taking the side of that family and dishonouring the other. This marks him for retribution by the offending party. Without parties being able to be impartial, then centralized authority cannot effectively function.
Let's say someone in India complains about a broken water pipe. Instead of the problem being addressed, the official responsible for the water pipe denies it's a problem and counterattacks him instead, because daring to question his efficacy in his role was challenging his Izzat. So the official destroys the person who brought the problem up. The water pipe never gets fixed.
Izzat is also the reason why Indian managers are so infamous for hiring more Indians. It's because from the manager's perspective, he's using his position to gain an invisible social currency. Merit and actual qualifications come second to that idea. If he hired a westerner, he would not gain or even lose Izzat by doing so. He has a very strong cultural incentive not to be impartial. Meanwhile, if he can strong-arm dozens of Indians into a company, he is gaining huge quantities of Izzat and conspirators who owe an absolute debt to him.
It's not uncommon to see Indians gloat about their success in the west. And yes, izzat is very much a system that enables short term success. But the fundamental reality is the prosperity that these Indians find so attractive in the first place wouldn't exist if the west practiced something similar to Izzat. Our systems can only exist on the assumption of good faith, and not a majority of people exploiting them for destructive short term gain. On top of that, if an Indian causes the systems and companies he comes into contact with to collapse, then he can just go back to India with his plunder. He has no stakes in the long-term prosperity, functionality or stability of these systems. The stakes are completely asymmetrical in the Indian's favour.
You all know about that infamous video of that Indian scamming a food bank. Once again, winning is righteous. Losing is not. By employing 'clever' means (jugaad), he successfully extracted more resources for himself and his family. From the perspective of jugaad, a rule is not something to respect, but merely an obstacle to the Indian's own gain. Since he cheated the system and wasn't caught, he is seen as a righteous and dignified man in the Izzat framework.
I read a story in India about a man offering to pay another man to use a public toilet instead of defecating openly. The latter left and came back with several friends and beat the former to death. The problem was not that he was defecating openly, but that he was criticised for doing so. And with Izzat, it's not an eye-for-an-eye. Izzat is often an eye-for-a-whole-head. Disproportionately and brutally annihilating your enemies is the correct move to make because you take back your lost Izzat and then some. This kind of vindictiveness would be rightly seen as horrifying and disgusting in most of the world.
There was a greentext from 4chan (I don't have it so bear with me). Anon knew an Indian. This Indian would make outlandish claims (he could benchpress 500kg, he was a billionaire, he did arms deals with the US government). Anon said he didn't believe the Indian. The Indian reacted with righteous indignation. The situation escalated to the point where the Indian was emailing Anon death threats. Anon responded by forwarding the emails to the police. The Indian killed himself. Anon was left baffled at the whole situation and had no idea what the fuck just happened.
So, without Izzat, this looks like an utterly insane and pointless sequence of events. But with Izzat? The Indian's actions suddenly make sense. He was boasting to increase his Izzat, and when Anon simply stated his disbelief, it was seen as a vicious attack on his Izzat. The Indian escalated the situation to restore the lost Izzat. When the police got involved, the dispute had become public, so the Indian's shame had increased to unbearable levels. He committed suicide in order to save his remaining Izzat. Anon had no idea what Izzat was, or if he did, he didn't mention it, yet the Indian's actions perfectly align with this framework. This is what makes me believe the green text was genuine.
The western idea of merit is competence in a role. Merit in Izzat is determined by what lengths you will go to to achieve a goal, with competence merely being one path. It often becomes a secondary path, as printing a degree that says you're qualified to be a jet pilot is just as good as being able to actually fly a jet in the eyes of Izzat. In other words, Izzat selects for appearance over authentic merit or morality.
Now, a counterargument an Indian might make is 'Izzat is a dated word' or 'We don't use that word.' I like to compare it to the word vendetta. Vendetta in Italian has a very specific meaning (a familial blood feud where revenge must be taken to restore honour etc). This word would not exist if this didn't reflect a specific facet of Italian life. Izzat is no different. Hell, I've had to write several paragraphs just to explain what the hell Izzat is. Izzat isn't an archaic term either. It's well and truly alive in the modern Indian lexicon.
If izzat were regularly discussed openly, this would be considered one of the greatest possible insults in the Izzat framework. Izzat is why Indians do mass reports, death threats, false flags and various other underhanded tactics when a westerner exposes something they don't want people to see (such as the poop throwing festival). If I knew something like that existed in the west, I would say 'wow that's disgusting, we should stop this'. But in India, the problem is not the point. The point is the problem being exposed and the perceived insult to izzat from exposing the problem. The water pipe never gets fixed.
The one saving grace is Izzat performs awfully in the long term. Once Indians displace you, they will go back to playing this insane game among themselves. It's what happened to companies that got hit by Izzat. This is also why there aren't any homegrown Indian companies that have the same influence as Microsoft or Google. Whenever they start getting ahead, their companies implode from infighting, nobody doing their jobs, everybody trying to cheat each other and nobody addressing critical issues. Systems that delegate authority and work on good faith eventually win out over zero-sum honour feuding. Izzat cannot maintain complex systems because its players are only concerned with short term gain.
With the west, the issue is that it often fails to live up to its own ideals. It's not a perfect system, but we can course correct and address problems pragmatically. With Izzat, Indians live up to those ideals very, very often. When you see the dysfunctionality of India, remember that it's a feature of Izzat, not a bug.
Jugaad as a term also warrants more explanation, but my post is long enough as it is.
It's just dawned on me how similar jeets and journalists are. Both willing to deny to the death the obvious truth when it would be damaging to the stories they have crafted. Attacking anyone who points out your wrongdoing instead of fixing it. Endlessly playing favourites with their own. Journos were spiritual street-shitters all along.
As always, the good news is - the right way (White European Christian) wins out in the end as it inevitably must. Bear your suffering with dignity knowing this. God would never allow His children to suffer without purpose.
Its basically the same root that evolved slightly differently over centuries.
Meaning its almost certainly inherent to Asia in general, and you can probably find some form of it in all groups near the area. Islam/Arabic concepts of "honor" likely are the same thing given religious justification.
Idk a lot about the Samurai of Japan’s past, but I think you’re on to something because they too had a concept similar to izzat, it was called mienai (face) and Meiyo (honor/reputation). If they were insulted publicly by a lower ranking samurai or any commoner, or if Samurai felt like his honor was called into question in any way, the Samurai had no choice but to attack and usually kill the person who disrespected him publicly, because if he didn’t, his reputation would be publicly destroyed, it would shame he and his family in the eyes of the rest of the community, and there was no coming back from that shame so you either manned up and killed/maimed the offender on the spot or else you were fucked.
yep, its something white people dont really understand because they had an enlightenment period where truth/justice became the moral standard, and for so long that they cant comprehend other people, not white people, do not behave that way.
duels are an interesting thing. I would like to know more about that kind of culture.
If you felt insulted you could challenge the other guy to a duel. The other guy would have to defend his honor against yours.
What if you are a complete nutbag challenging people to duels over nothing for some outside gain? What if someone without honor/skill pays you to insincerely challenge his targeted opponent to a duel?
The movie The Duelist kind of delves into the questions you ask, based on a real life event that spanned years, which was part of a series of fascinating historical tidbits from Evangelista's Encyclopedia of the Sword:
The on-location sets really help sell the story despite the film's lower budget. A shame that Ridley Scott's best work (outside of Gladiator) are still his earlier films before he became a household name.
Oh I forgot about that one... but you're right. The duel in the film -- from what I remember -- was very logically sound though, in terms of why it happened and what led to it. And in some ways, I was hoping it would because Lyndon was a right wanker.
In the Duelist, it was more-so that the man who was challenged had no actual alts with his challenger and had no reason to duel but was pulled into it regardless, which fits in line with the question you asked about a nutbag trying to pull someone into a duel with nothing to gain.
Difference being there are Chinese literary works that people consider worth reading, and thus familiarizing people with it. Can you name one Indian work in the last three millenia?
After the Vedic scriptures/Upanishads there was the Mahabharata, the Bhagavad Gita, the Ramayana, the Pali Canon and Jatakas (probably more than that, but those are the best known)
In more recent years you have the mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan who did a lot of interesting work. Also Gandhi obv, but he was not that great, even if he got racepilled by his time in South Africa.
Wikipedia dates the Vedas to 1500-900 BC, with the Upanishads later at 600-300 BC. Much like the ancient Chinese, those ancient Indians (if they can even be called such) don't exist anymore.
The tl;dr of the jeet collective honor system is that any success, by any means, gains "izzat" for their entire caste while taking responsibility for a mistake so it can be fixed shames their entire caste.
Interesting. I've never tried archiving a KF thread before.
Archive Today seems to have only took screenshots of two of the thread's pages when I click around back & forth.
Not sure if you or other users had to manually get it to screenshot those two or it just chose those two automatically. Past the two selected screenshots, if one manually chooses bookended thread pages on either side, Archive Today simply links to the actual current KF thread pages.
IIRC, Taylor Lorenz' family members who own portions of The Wayback Machine/ Internet Archive have gone back and deleted any traces of KF captured in their repository for partisan reasons.
Sort of like the 🧃wanting to avoid being a fraier (a chump/sucker) by making someone else their fraier. Sort of funny how the idea of collaborative success is something peculiar to high-IQ, high trust (White) societies.
This free exchange of information is what creates a unified, world-wide immune response to the infestation of those street shitters and they cannot allow that. It's their very existence on the line.
yeah, that part where just a guy exposing some lies got a jeet to kill himself is probably some really good info on how to make indian lives more difficult.
This poat also explained to me why hanging up on certain customer service representatives, just to call back solves problems the first refused to solve. I've always just done that, I had no idea why I had to do that.
I was waiting at a priority lift at tokyo skytree with my babies. The lift is meant for people with strollers, pregnant women, elderly etc. basically people who have issues taking escalators. The lift comes down and its fucking packed with indian tourists. Like 20 people in the lift where it cant even squeeze another person in. And they all look fine. I told my wife this is why japan is going to want them out
Really explains how a lot of "based" Indians on the right lost their minds after that poo festival documentary came out. They went 100% Team India and started bitching about Whitey so quickly and naturally that it's almost like they were pretending all along just to weasel their way into positions of power.
Its not exclusively Indian either, its a part of the entire subcontinent.
I recognized the term because it was used as the title for a 2005 norwegian film about Pakistani youths raised in Oslo in the 80s and 90s becoming involved with criminal gangs.
The post text you want to read:
Hi. I didn't see this term mentioned in the thread, so I wanted to share this all with you. It's about Izzat. Some posts have mentioned 'saving face', which is Izzat, but I wanted to elaborate on it.
Izzat has no direct translation into English. We only have terms that can broach the same concept such as 'honour' or 'reputation' or 'face'. Izzat is so much more than that. It's a zero-sum game of collective honour shared by whole groups of people, all of whom take it very, very seriously. A system like this isn't just foreign to Enlightenment values, but I'd argue it's antithetical to every sensible form of governance on the planet. It will destroy any system that assumes good faith.
Izzat conflicts are not about who is right and who is wrong. It's about who wins and who loses. This means it's a zero-sum game where just about any action is justified (including murder) to restore the lost Izzat. Izzat is a limited social currency and the easiest way to get it is to take it from someone else. Winning is righteous in Izzat. Losing is unrighteous. This means that if someone plays the game of izzat well enough, they can get away with just about anything (murder, rape, scamming, cheating, stealing). The only morality in Izzat is the protection of your group's collective ego. The only appropriate response when your Izzat is attacked is the complete destruction of whoever insulted it.
Two people get into an argument. They might escalate, but chances are it won't be that bad. i.e. 'Sorry I broke your garden gnome.' With two Indians in an argument, the stakes are always deadly thanks to Izzat. Neither of them can back down, nor can they admit fault. Admitting fault is seen as deliberately humiliating yourself. Not only that, but because Izzat is shared, you are shaming everyone who shares your Izzat. So, admitting fault or taking responsibility for a problem is a form of social suicide. This means even if the dispute was over something completely fucking stupid or trivial (like a broken garden gnome), it could spiral into a decades long honour feud.
Izzat is also the reason why police are reluctant to get involved in disputes. Because Izzat is a zero-sum game, all participants are involved in the game. If a policeman sides with one family over another in an Izzat dispute, this means that he's deliberately taking the side of that family and dishonouring the other. This marks him for retribution by the offending party. Without parties being able to be impartial, then centralized authority cannot effectively function.
Let's say someone in India complains about a broken water pipe. Instead of the problem being addressed, the official responsible for the water pipe denies it's a problem and counterattacks him instead, because daring to question his efficacy in his role was challenging his Izzat. So the official destroys the person who brought the problem up. The water pipe never gets fixed.
Izzat is also the reason why Indian managers are so infamous for hiring more Indians. It's because from the manager's perspective, he's using his position to gain an invisible social currency. Merit and actual qualifications come second to that idea. If he hired a westerner, he would not gain or even lose Izzat by doing so. He has a very strong cultural incentive not to be impartial. Meanwhile, if he can strong-arm dozens of Indians into a company, he is gaining huge quantities of Izzat and conspirators who owe an absolute debt to him.
It's not uncommon to see Indians gloat about their success in the west. And yes, izzat is very much a system that enables short term success. But the fundamental reality is the prosperity that these Indians find so attractive in the first place wouldn't exist if the west practiced something similar to Izzat. Our systems can only exist on the assumption of good faith, and not a majority of people exploiting them for destructive short term gain. On top of that, if an Indian causes the systems and companies he comes into contact with to collapse, then he can just go back to India with his plunder. He has no stakes in the long-term prosperity, functionality or stability of these systems. The stakes are completely asymmetrical in the Indian's favour.
You all know about that infamous video of that Indian scamming a food bank. Once again, winning is righteous. Losing is not. By employing 'clever' means (jugaad), he successfully extracted more resources for himself and his family. From the perspective of jugaad, a rule is not something to respect, but merely an obstacle to the Indian's own gain. Since he cheated the system and wasn't caught, he is seen as a righteous and dignified man in the Izzat framework.
I read a story in India about a man offering to pay another man to use a public toilet instead of defecating openly. The latter left and came back with several friends and beat the former to death. The problem was not that he was defecating openly, but that he was criticised for doing so. And with Izzat, it's not an eye-for-an-eye. Izzat is often an eye-for-a-whole-head. Disproportionately and brutally annihilating your enemies is the correct move to make because you take back your lost Izzat and then some. This kind of vindictiveness would be rightly seen as horrifying and disgusting in most of the world.
There was a greentext from 4chan (I don't have it so bear with me). Anon knew an Indian. This Indian would make outlandish claims (he could benchpress 500kg, he was a billionaire, he did arms deals with the US government). Anon said he didn't believe the Indian. The Indian reacted with righteous indignation. The situation escalated to the point where the Indian was emailing Anon death threats. Anon responded by forwarding the emails to the police. The Indian killed himself. Anon was left baffled at the whole situation and had no idea what the fuck just happened.
So, without Izzat, this looks like an utterly insane and pointless sequence of events. But with Izzat? The Indian's actions suddenly make sense. He was boasting to increase his Izzat, and when Anon simply stated his disbelief, it was seen as a vicious attack on his Izzat. The Indian escalated the situation to restore the lost Izzat. When the police got involved, the dispute had become public, so the Indian's shame had increased to unbearable levels. He committed suicide in order to save his remaining Izzat. Anon had no idea what Izzat was, or if he did, he didn't mention it, yet the Indian's actions perfectly align with this framework. This is what makes me believe the green text was genuine.
The western idea of merit is competence in a role. Merit in Izzat is determined by what lengths you will go to to achieve a goal, with competence merely being one path. It often becomes a secondary path, as printing a degree that says you're qualified to be a jet pilot is just as good as being able to actually fly a jet in the eyes of Izzat. In other words, Izzat selects for appearance over authentic merit or morality.
Now, a counterargument an Indian might make is 'Izzat is a dated word' or 'We don't use that word.' I like to compare it to the word vendetta. Vendetta in Italian has a very specific meaning (a familial blood feud where revenge must be taken to restore honour etc). This word would not exist if this didn't reflect a specific facet of Italian life. Izzat is no different. Hell, I've had to write several paragraphs just to explain what the hell Izzat is. Izzat isn't an archaic term either. It's well and truly alive in the modern Indian lexicon.
If izzat were regularly discussed openly, this would be considered one of the greatest possible insults in the Izzat framework. Izzat is why Indians do mass reports, death threats, false flags and various other underhanded tactics when a westerner exposes something they don't want people to see (such as the poop throwing festival). If I knew something like that existed in the west, I would say 'wow that's disgusting, we should stop this'. But in India, the problem is not the point. The point is the problem being exposed and the perceived insult to izzat from exposing the problem. The water pipe never gets fixed.
The one saving grace is Izzat performs awfully in the long term. Once Indians displace you, they will go back to playing this insane game among themselves. It's what happened to companies that got hit by Izzat. This is also why there aren't any homegrown Indian companies that have the same influence as Microsoft or Google. Whenever they start getting ahead, their companies implode from infighting, nobody doing their jobs, everybody trying to cheat each other and nobody addressing critical issues. Systems that delegate authority and work on good faith eventually win out over zero-sum honour feuding. Izzat cannot maintain complex systems because its players are only concerned with short term gain.
With the west, the issue is that it often fails to live up to its own ideals. It's not a perfect system, but we can course correct and address problems pragmatically. With Izzat, Indians live up to those ideals very, very often. When you see the dysfunctionality of India, remember that it's a feature of Izzat, not a bug.
Jugaad as a term also warrants more explanation, but my post is long enough as it is.
This is horrifying.
Just when you thought you couldn't hate jeets anymore than you already do.
honestly, this is more or less how non whites think and behave.
Niggers killing each other (or us) over "disrespectful looks" comes to mind.
yep, perceived disrespect, real or not, is worth dying for.
It's just dawned on me how similar jeets and journalists are. Both willing to deny to the death the obvious truth when it would be damaging to the stories they have crafted. Attacking anyone who points out your wrongdoing instead of fixing it. Endlessly playing favourites with their own. Journos were spiritual street-shitters all along.
As always, the good news is - the right way (White European Christian) wins out in the end as it inevitably must. Bear your suffering with dignity knowing this. God would never allow His children to suffer without purpose.
https://youtu.be/bUOuh_7HYsM?t=40
Yeah. There's a ton of good discussion and sources in the thread, but that's the core everyone should read to understand the concept.
similar to Chinese "saving face"
Its basically the same root that evolved slightly differently over centuries.
Meaning its almost certainly inherent to Asia in general, and you can probably find some form of it in all groups near the area. Islam/Arabic concepts of "honor" likely are the same thing given religious justification.
Idk a lot about the Samurai of Japan’s past, but I think you’re on to something because they too had a concept similar to izzat, it was called mienai (face) and Meiyo (honor/reputation). If they were insulted publicly by a lower ranking samurai or any commoner, or if Samurai felt like his honor was called into question in any way, the Samurai had no choice but to attack and usually kill the person who disrespected him publicly, because if he didn’t, his reputation would be publicly destroyed, it would shame he and his family in the eyes of the rest of the community, and there was no coming back from that shame so you either manned up and killed/maimed the offender on the spot or else you were fucked.
yep, its something white people dont really understand because they had an enlightenment period where truth/justice became the moral standard, and for so long that they cant comprehend other people, not white people, do not behave that way.
We had it, there was also mechanisms in place to control it. Duels are the most obvious example.
duels are an interesting thing. I would like to know more about that kind of culture.
If you felt insulted you could challenge the other guy to a duel. The other guy would have to defend his honor against yours.
What if you are a complete nutbag challenging people to duels over nothing for some outside gain? What if someone without honor/skill pays you to insincerely challenge his targeted opponent to a duel?
Very interesting indeed.
The movie The Duelist kind of delves into the questions you ask, based on a real life event that spanned years, which was part of a series of fascinating historical tidbits from Evangelista's Encyclopedia of the Sword:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075968/
Interesting film; well worth the watch.
The on-location sets really help sell the story despite the film's lower budget. A shame that Ridley Scott's best work (outside of Gladiator) are still his earlier films before he became a household name.
I will look into it.
I was thinking of the movie Barry Lyndon too.
Oh I forgot about that one... but you're right. The duel in the film -- from what I remember -- was very logically sound though, in terms of why it happened and what led to it. And in some ways, I was hoping it would because Lyndon was a right wanker.
In the Duelist, it was more-so that the man who was challenged had no actual alts with his challenger and had no reason to duel but was pulled into it regardless, which fits in line with the question you asked about a nutbag trying to pull someone into a duel with nothing to gain.
Difference being there are Chinese literary works that people consider worth reading, and thus familiarizing people with it. Can you name one Indian work in the last three millenia?
After the Vedic scriptures/Upanishads there was the Mahabharata, the Bhagavad Gita, the Ramayana, the Pali Canon and Jatakas (probably more than that, but those are the best known)
In more recent years you have the mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan who did a lot of interesting work. Also Gandhi obv, but he was not that great, even if he got racepilled by his time in South Africa.
The vedas are old as fuck l. Prior to that "last 3000 years" cutoff.
Wikipedia dates the Vedas to 1500-900 BC, with the Upanishads later at 600-300 BC. Much like the ancient Chinese, those ancient Indians (if they can even be called such) don't exist anymore.
The written forms, not the oral tradition.
Ho..how do you know about these?
I used to not think jeets were so bad. Got a rude awakening in the past decade.
The Kama Sutra?
Japanese Bushido too, up to and including Seppuku.
Asia in general has a saving face thing. But jeets work on a different spectrum and consider themselves distinct from it.
So basically Indians have their own version of Chinesse Mianzi?
The tl;dr of the jeet collective honor system is that any success, by any means, gains "izzat" for their entire caste while taking responsibility for a mistake so it can be fixed shames their entire caste.
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/the-india-menace.174997/post-23043218
Even shorter tldr.
They're animals.
Fun remark from the kf thread, two different ways to mock a jeet for collective dishonor, will have to try them next time pedojeet comes around:
I prefer to call them a planetary cancer haha.
The e. coli on their shit heap subcontinent.
Here is an archive of that thread
Interesting. I've never tried archiving a KF thread before.
Archive Today seems to have only took screenshots of two of the thread's pages when I click around back & forth.
Not sure if you or other users had to manually get it to screenshot those two or it just chose those two automatically. Past the two selected screenshots, if one manually chooses bookended thread pages on either side, Archive Today simply links to the actual current KF thread pages.
IIRC, Taylor Lorenz' family members who own portions of The Wayback Machine/ Internet Archive have gone back and deleted any traces of KF captured in their repository for partisan reasons.
I just put the URL into archive.ph.
Sort of like the 🧃wanting to avoid being a fraier (a chump/sucker) by making someone else their fraier. Sort of funny how the idea of collaborative success is something peculiar to high-IQ, high trust (White) societies.
This explains indian behavior in tech as well
Lol. How old were you
This. This is why the pajeets are afraid of us talking to each other. This is why they yammer on and on about about freedom of speech being bad (proof: https://archive.is/kcVTS#selection-1703.0-1703.85), how working for yourself is supposedly illegal (proof: https://archive.is/5lP6C#selection-1509.0-1513.32), how they claim sites like this could be shut down for 1st amendment-protected speech. (proof: https://archive.is/RyZ8R#selection-1465.37-1465.116.)
This free exchange of information is what creates a unified, world-wide immune response to the infestation of those street shitters and they cannot allow that. It's their very existence on the line.
Sounds like another group of (((parasites))) that ruin every society that lets them in.
They’re similar
Very much so, down to the worship of the cow/bull-headed Baal idol.
The comment about using this concept to get them to self deport isn't getting the attention it should be getting.
yeah, that part where just a guy exposing some lies got a jeet to kill himself is probably some really good info on how to make indian lives more difficult.
This poat also explained to me why hanging up on certain customer service representatives, just to call back solves problems the first refused to solve. I've always just done that, I had no idea why I had to do that.
Indians.
I was waiting at a priority lift at tokyo skytree with my babies. The lift is meant for people with strollers, pregnant women, elderly etc. basically people who have issues taking escalators. The lift comes down and its fucking packed with indian tourists. Like 20 people in the lift where it cant even squeeze another person in. And they all look fine. I told my wife this is why japan is going to want them out
I have a simpler theory: they are wild animals spawned by Satan
That’s Jews but I guess Jêêts was Satan’s side project
Nosebergs are white-collar shitjeets
And that's why I don't hold emerging markets in my ETF portfolio.
Really explains how a lot of "based" Indians on the right lost their minds after that poo festival documentary came out. They went 100% Team India and started bitching about Whitey so quickly and naturally that it's almost like they were pretending all along just to weasel their way into positions of power.
Its not exclusively Indian either, its a part of the entire subcontinent.
I recognized the term because it was used as the title for a 2005 norwegian film about Pakistani youths raised in Oslo in the 80s and 90s becoming involved with criminal gangs.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0469443/
https://youtu.be/8LPfaxxSFf8?si=IHxo9R3ACC7f5iwC
Yes the Indian caste system is built on a retarded bug like system. They act as a hive