Considering it's basically unenforced and that both the far left and far right violate it with impunity (given that they agree that whitey is superior and merely disagree on the consequences of that undisputed fact), I'm rather suspicious.
I've seen a number of posts/comments just shy of 'refuel the motorcycles, race war now!' that haven't been removed after a day or more.
Not complaining, mind you. I think those folks are largely missing the point (that a member of the chosen people who is never told of his ancestry is not biologically inclined to subvert and destroy his home and his neighbors), but they're at least willing to listen, by and large, to arguments that run somewhat counter to the beliefs they hold.
Considering it's basically unenforced and that both the far left and far right violate it with impunity
I'm glad it worked out this way.
I know I advocated way back when the jannies wanted to make bunkers on Saidit and others that further censorship was pointless and would just split the community. Then again here on .win I argued that global admins don't give a shit and most of the rules are unnecessary aside from purely illegal stuff and protections against disingenuous shills.
A lot of the discussions that are had daily here just couldn't be had if you were under reddit's cucked ruleset for example.
given that they agree that whitey is superior and merely disagree on the consequences of that undisputed fact
I've personally redpilled a shitload of people with that line of thought.
The only thing tethering most of those people to far-left alignment is the communistic moral relativity argument of equality and a rejection of biology.
It's the easiest thing in the world to worm your way into their heads when you can make good and bad arguments from their perspective.
that a member of the chosen people who is never told of his ancestry is not biologically inclined to subvert and destroy his home and his neighbors
I would disagree with this but mostly on the wording.
Judaism as a religion and culture teaches people to be subversive, deceptive, and to accept degeneracy.
A person isn't a member of the Chosen Tribe according to them until they've been exposed to the subversive doctrines.
I'm a memetic supremacist; "white" memes are the memes of success — that's why joggers accuse extra-melanin men and women who attempt to achieve success by effort and persistence of "acting white", and why those who "act white" tend to be more successful regardless of skin pigment while those who fail to "act white", again regardless of genetics, tend to fail.
Pure Judaism is not a successful memeplex; the introduction of assimilated Christian-European memes from Ashkenazi (and to a lesser extent Sepphardic) diaspora Jews is largely the source of contemporary Israeli success.
This has nothing to do with CRT, in fact it's opposite of it; CRT believes that the majority racial group (white) is genetically preordained to oppress other groups, i.e. certain racial groups are inherently evil. In fact, the rules state that talking about simple racial facts ARE allowed. Stuff like black predisposition to more likely have sickle cell anemia or more fast-twitch muscle fibers. However, you CANNOT, for example, use these facts to argue that black people are BETTER or WORSE than other groups, because it's a superficial measurement of "goodness", as well as spits in the face of the traditional view of "all men created equal". Like James Damore stated in his memo, certain groups may behave differently, but we can use those differences to find alternate points of view or make products with different foci.
You can do without the hyperbole. Just because an internet janitor clicked the naughty button on your comment doesn't mean you should turn into a blubbering vagina.
I recently got flagged for a rule 16 violation and didn't even know we had rules.
Yeah, as important as dispelling the idea of wrongthink is, I consider it just as important to have a hard-line stance of "grow a pair or fuck off" for anyone who wants go to crying hyperbolic wolf.
Don't make a habit of entertaining rats and it's a lot easier to keep your house clean and in order.
Admittedly, I'm not surprised that some of the stuff you say would break rule 16. Which I'll also add that there's a lot more rules on the subreddit there than I remember. So I'm glad that I've never bothered to try and use it since it went private. Even if I understand why they do because it's Reddit. Just all the more reason to jump off that ship.
That said, I don't disagree with you. But I'm sure that a fair bit of people do. Even then, I'd rather we just talk and discuss this type of stuff. It doesn't even have to be respectful, I kind of stopped caring about civility with how much it gets rammed down my throat whenever I'm on the normie places. It's much better than banning people so we don't "look bad".
Can we even talk about "race" on here without breaking rule 16 and what can we actually talk about or infer without breaking rule 16?
My understanding of the rule, based on how little seemingly crosses the threshold to action being taken, hinges on the "entire" part. So it's still plenty possible to discuss race in the most accurate terms without breaking the rule.
E.G. Saying "African Americans are much more likely to have sickle cell anemia than the rest of the US population" is permitted by the rule. But saying "all black people have sickle cell anemia" and then making unfavorable conclusions based on that is against the rule, and not to mention very incorrect. Stick to demonstrable propensity and occurance rates within groups, rather than absolutist statements about the everyone in the group that invariably end up being inaccurate anyway and I don't see there being any conflict with that rule.
Oh shit you got banned for the niggerkike rule before I did?
That's impressive.
Considering it's basically unenforced and that both the far left and far right violate it with impunity (given that they agree that whitey is superior and merely disagree on the consequences of that undisputed fact), I'm rather suspicious.
I've seen a number of posts/comments just shy of 'refuel the motorcycles, race war now!' that haven't been removed after a day or more.
Not complaining, mind you. I think those folks are largely missing the point (that a member of the chosen people who is never told of his ancestry is not biologically inclined to subvert and destroy his home and his neighbors), but they're at least willing to listen, by and large, to arguments that run somewhat counter to the beliefs they hold.
I'm glad it worked out this way.
I know I advocated way back when the jannies wanted to make bunkers on Saidit and others that further censorship was pointless and would just split the community. Then again here on .win I argued that global admins don't give a shit and most of the rules are unnecessary aside from purely illegal stuff and protections against disingenuous shills.
A lot of the discussions that are had daily here just couldn't be had if you were under reddit's cucked ruleset for example.
I've personally redpilled a shitload of people with that line of thought.
The only thing tethering most of those people to far-left alignment is the communistic moral relativity argument of equality and a rejection of biology.
It's the easiest thing in the world to worm your way into their heads when you can make good and bad arguments from their perspective.
I would disagree with this but mostly on the wording.
Judaism as a religion and culture teaches people to be subversive, deceptive, and to accept degeneracy.
A person isn't a member of the Chosen Tribe according to them until they've been exposed to the subversive doctrines.
I'm a memetic supremacist; "white" memes are the memes of success — that's why joggers accuse extra-melanin men and women who attempt to achieve success by effort and persistence of "acting white", and why those who "act white" tend to be more successful regardless of skin pigment while those who fail to "act white", again regardless of genetics, tend to fail.
Pure Judaism is not a successful memeplex; the introduction of assimilated Christian-European memes from Ashkenazi (and to a lesser extent Sepphardic) diaspora Jews is largely the source of contemporary Israeli success.
This has nothing to do with CRT, in fact it's opposite of it; CRT believes that the majority racial group (white) is genetically preordained to oppress other groups, i.e. certain racial groups are inherently evil. In fact, the rules state that talking about simple racial facts ARE allowed. Stuff like black predisposition to more likely have sickle cell anemia or more fast-twitch muscle fibers. However, you CANNOT, for example, use these facts to argue that black people are BETTER or WORSE than other groups, because it's a superficial measurement of "goodness", as well as spits in the face of the traditional view of "all men created equal". Like James Damore stated in his memo, certain groups may behave differently, but we can use those differences to find alternate points of view or make products with different foci.
Can you show a screencap or archive showing the ban message?
This is not a screencap or archive.
You can do without the hyperbole. Just because an internet janitor clicked the naughty button on your comment doesn't mean you should turn into a blubbering vagina.
I recently got flagged for a rule 16 violation and didn't even know we had rules.
Yeah, as important as dispelling the idea of wrongthink is, I consider it just as important to have a hard-line stance of "grow a pair or fuck off" for anyone who wants go to crying hyperbolic wolf.
Don't make a habit of entertaining rats and it's a lot easier to keep your house clean and in order.
Admittedly, I'm not surprised that some of the stuff you say would break rule 16. Which I'll also add that there's a lot more rules on the subreddit there than I remember. So I'm glad that I've never bothered to try and use it since it went private. Even if I understand why they do because it's Reddit. Just all the more reason to jump off that ship.
That said, I don't disagree with you. But I'm sure that a fair bit of people do. Even then, I'd rather we just talk and discuss this type of stuff. It doesn't even have to be respectful, I kind of stopped caring about civility with how much it gets rammed down my throat whenever I'm on the normie places. It's much better than banning people so we don't "look bad".
My understanding of the rule, based on how little seemingly crosses the threshold to action being taken, hinges on the "entire" part. So it's still plenty possible to discuss race in the most accurate terms without breaking the rule.
E.G. Saying "African Americans are much more likely to have sickle cell anemia than the rest of the US population" is permitted by the rule. But saying "all black people have sickle cell anemia" and then making unfavorable conclusions based on that is against the rule, and not to mention very incorrect. Stick to demonstrable propensity and occurance rates within groups, rather than absolutist statements about the everyone in the group that invariably end up being inaccurate anyway and I don't see there being any conflict with that rule.