That explains why they get along so damn well.
(media.scored.co)
Comments (53)
sorted by:
... and why they're inherently INCOMPATABLE with Christian Western civilization.
Narratives of Power: The Parallels of Zionism and Hindutva
You just literally normalised the idea that certain groups are inherently 'other', justifying exclusion and violence.
They did that to themselves. Noticing their behavior isn't the same as endorsing it, idiot.
It is your behavior. You believe that certain groups are inherently 'other', justifying exclusion and violence. You are condemning the thing you practice every day.
Cool. Now STFU and "other" yourself.
Oh, if only we could get each other to STFU, Chaos. My Gods, 99% of the population would agree that the world would be a better place if only Scored posters could get each other to shut the living fuck up already.
So gay
Faggot nigger detected
Go be a masochist somewhere else you pervert. Don't force us to participate in your humiliation fetish.
That does not make any sense.
Eww. You used Scored? That's a self-report if I've ever seen one.
I do, yeah. I'm new here. You think .win is better? It's two ways of accessing the same threads, no?
You're actually stupid.
I'm not condemning it. I just think that if they do it, we should do it too. Ethics is a reciprocal system. You can only apply ethics to ethical people. You cannot apply ethics to unethical people.
It's always a race to the bottom, isn't it? People look at shitty behavior, identify a demographic or ideological difference they have with the person doing it, and conclude: "Nice, now I'm allowed to be a piece of shit, too!"
Yes, that's how ethics works.
Your entire ethical system is "she hit me firrrrst!"
"Don't put people in jail for kidnapping! Thats hypocrisy!"
Are you really this big of a dysgenic pussy?
It's an 11 day old account posting in bad faith, so either he's exactly that dysgenic or someone is trolling for giggles.
Either it's dysgenic or it's in bad faith. Make up your mind, idiot.
Bad faith it is then. Now get the fuck out of here.
Mhm. Can you define "bad faith" or is it just a phrase you heard that you think makes you sound smarter than you are?
Aww it got mad when I called it a faggot lol
I didn't get mad, I just wondered why you're hoping that I'm a faggot.
"Those guys really don't like us and think we're just resources to be exploited. I think we should probably protect ourselves from them."
You: "You're othering them to justify exclusion and violence!"
You're just embarrassing.
I think you're missing that OP accused Jews of normalising the idea that certain groups are inherently 'other', justifying exclusion and violence.
When you say "You're othering them to justify exclusion and violence," you aren't quoting me. You're quoting the academic paper "Narratives of Power: The Parallels of Zionism and Hindutva."
I found it amusing that OP would try to 'other' Jews by accusing them of 'othering.' It's like taking your dick out and then accusing the guy next to you of being a pervert.
Your analogy is painfully stupid.
Every viable moral framework depends upon the order of events. Self-defense isn't murder. Punishing anti-social behavior isn't anti-social. Pointing to the bad behavior of another tribe is not itself a bad behavior. And identifying a group of people after they have consistently and proudly identified themselves is not "othering" them.
Also, I reject the implied premise of "othering" as a valid concept. It is a laughably reductive term that is exclusively deployed as a strategic catch-all against behaviors that leftists deem to be wrong.
When someone says "every viable moral framework depends upon the order of events," all I ever see is people behaving like assholes and then arguing over who was an asshole first, because if it's the other guys, then they're in the clear.
But it's actually not a difficult question to answer: people have been assholes since we first climbed down out of the trees.
A better question would be, who normalized the idea that all groups are inherently 'identical'?
John Locke and Franz Boas, I guess. Locke argued that people were largely blank slates at birth and that a king is fundamentally no different from a peasant; Boas debunked "scientific racism" like phrenology.
Now I'm picturing you in the "read Locke" t-shirt with a spear through your chest lol
Oh come on, there's no way he's going to get that reference.
Now now, judging a king and a peasant from the same country isn't the same as judging two kings from different countries, is it?
they are
exclusion is good, it keeps things healthy and respectful. violence is necessary if the excluded don't accept that no means no.
Well yeah that's why gypsies are actually a hybrid of the 2.
Both groups have a caste that thinks they own everyone else.. both also have high numbees of emfebble weak men too.
Demon worshippers get along swimmingly