all 91 comments

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

if they're factual what is the issue

[–]HopeThatHalps 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Can you give an example?

[–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Read Culture of Critique and the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit.

[–]HopeThatHalps 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If I were to read it, what example would I find, with respect to my request? Is there a particular factual critique that is of interest? A passage from the book that, if quoted, would be regarded as anti-semetic?

[–]send_nasty_stuff 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's nothing in either book that would classify as classically antisemitic in the sense of opposing Jews as a group at a genetic level. However, the modern usage of antisemitism has skewed towards, 'any criticism of Jews' and under that warped self serving definition both books would be antisemitic.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed.

[–]sawboss 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

Same as usual. People are unhappy because they lack liberty. As they see their liberty being further constrained they look for someone to blame.

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

Can you think of any ways around this?

I've thought of trying to teach people techniques to find out who's really to blame for things, but detective work is always harder than scapegoating.

[–]sawboss 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Can you think of any ways around this?

Absolutely yes, but it is extremely unpopular. We have to learn to honor each other's individual liberty as much as we value our own. Consequently, we have to be willing to give up exploiting legal and political power to oppress each other. Yeah, it's that simple and that unlikely.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Ha! No, I meant ways around the scapegoating; solving the whole "liberty" thing won't happen at least until people can agree on what the word means.

[–]sawboss 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Not in the current environment of political tribalism.

I often wonder, "why the Jews?" I've done some reading which suggests certain reasons, but to my mind it all amounts to envy. I've never found anything which would convince me of the tired old theory that a small cabal of Jews run everything behind the scenes. (It might as well be Alex Jones' lizard-men.) People just seem unwilling to give up the notion that somehow, more than any other ethnic group, Jews are superlatively loyal to each other over any other.

All I can suggest is when you see such propaganda and know it to be false, just do some digging and demonstrate why it's a false narrative. As we've seen, it's not even that hard to do usually. The false assumptions come from emotion, usually resting on a foundation of other assumptions which are specious at best.

And I'm tired of it. Honest to God I can't even tell you how shameful and stupid it all looks to me. Even 20 years ago this kind of shit was so distant from mainstream thought that even bringing it up would get you laughed out of the room, or shunned. Now though, we see it coming from both "right" and "left" (as in the Women's March scandal). Why? It's sickening.

[–]AschTheConjurer 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

My Phillipino flatmate and I decided to look into why antisemitism is a thing as well, about 2 months back, because as an Asian he quite literally has no fucking idea about any of it. I was especially curious, too because despite not being jewish (my mum did one of those 23-and-Me type DNA test things, results were "100% British/Anglo Saxon" according to her) I've actually been on the receiving end of a stereotypical skinhead's antisemitism because of my name, which is a bastardized version of the Hebrew word for 'Priest', and this guy used that as an excuse to home-invade me and my partner-at-the-time in order to extort our 'secret jew wealth' out of us. He didn't make it past the front door, thankfully - we'd been in similar situations before and were paranoia-prepared for this sort of thing.

Anyway, tangent aside: after looking into it for a couple hours, all we could find was, essentially, that people originally hated Jews because they "killed Jesus". It seems like pretty much all the conspiracy theories and all the antisemitism that's come ever since then has, at it's root, been a matter of:

  1. But.. we've always hated the Jews. That's just how it is.
  2. People making excuses for their words and actions after the fact, in order to retroactively justify their behaviour.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

people originally hated Jews because they "killed Jesus"

What, Jesus "King of the Jews" of Nazareth, a Jew Himself? Well, at least it makes more sense than the other explanations.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The hillel sect and pharisees put that on his cross as mockery. For Jesus never claimed he was king of the Jews.

Jess is what everyone should aspire to be.

The New Testement is full off truths. I'd also invite yo to read the Saying of Jesus, which is a book that only has Jesus's sayings and nobody elses.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for the clarification.

[–]AschTheConjurer 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I hadn't even thought about that. I had the airquotes there solely because I have huge skepticism towards all religions and the stories they created.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, they definitely killed Jesus. That's the consensus of historians using sources other than the Abrahamic texts. Whether Jesus was anything more than a very wise philosopher is what's in question (and many would say that it was never in doubt, but whether they say "yes" or "no" is hard to predict).

[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Jesus was crucified as a fulfillment of prophecy, not because of Jews or even Romans. Only God can forgive sin, and it is through Jesus' sacrifice that we are forgiven.

There's also the prohibition of usury between Jews which doesn't apply when a Jew loans money to a non-Jew. The notion seems to be that at various times in Europe affluent Jews loaned money and charged interest. People who could not pay their loans were subject to losing their property. You can bet that would engender quite some bitterness. Turns out that in the early 20th century Germany financed their military through borrowing, and while I don't have a source to confirm this it might be reasonable to imagine some of those wealthy financiers were Jews.

[–]AschTheConjurer 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, I can guarantee there were times in history where jewish people did dodgy shit. It falls into the problems with generalizations that all generalizations do, though: The bullshit of the 10% gets attributed to everyone, which isn't fair. I've been on the receiving end of discrimination and hate based on every factor of who I am as a human being, from my race to what's between my legs to my hobbies to the fact i wont align with the left or the right politically. As much as possible I try to narrow down to as small and specific of a group ad I can whenever I'm talking about shit I don't like or disagree with in a public context (different when I'm at home talking shit)

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The pharisees and hillel sect of judaism killed jesus. Jews because they, during babylonia times and afterward utilized usury on gentile nations where Christians were not allowed to. Now Rome has broken that promise and predatory usury is back in session for Rome and the Jewish sects they hired to hold their money. The hatred stems from financializarion, usury and debt. JESUS WAS KILLED BY THE HILLEL sect and the Romans for trying to restore the JUBILEE YEAR to annul sin and REAL DEBTS.

Jesus also was the son of god.

[–]dark_devil_dd 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Now though, we see it coming from both "right" and "left" (as in the Women's March scandal).

I had to google it, found this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/23/us/womens-march-anti-semitism.html

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/276694/is-the-womens-march-melting-down

So it doesn't really surprise me , the whole stuff is full of cringe. Some movements are about "inclusion" they're about reductionism, they're based on self-centered impulses that center around a part of someone's identity, their tendency seems to be to repeat the process and move towards narrower and narrower aspects about identity.

It's the logic of:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

[–]sawboss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The antisemitism has always been in Feminism though. It is only recently that they have to publicly own it. I don't know why they get a pass on it.

[–]d3rr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You could dig into how some anti-semitism is funded and propagated by the Zionists themselves. That'd be a nice slap you in the face type meme. I imagine you were after a different sort of answer though.. hmm...

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's not that slap-in-the-face. Not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews. That hypothesis doesn't fail the absurdity heuristic.

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Not all Jews are Zionists, and not all Zionists are Jews

I'm saying that Zionists are responsible for some acts of anti-semitism in the US, like "hoax" hate crimes. There's some kind of an allegiance between Zionism and white nationalism, that pokes its head out at places like Breitbart.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And I'm saying that it's plausible that some privileged and unscrupulous Zionists are doing what you say they're doing. I'm not saying that I believe it is the case, but I'm also not saying that I believe it's not.

(And yes, I know I shouldn't be using the absurdity heuristic, but I'm not making a proper judgement on the issue so I think it's probably fine. Famous last words.)


Oh, I see. I misinterpreted what you meant by "slap […] in the face". Carry on.

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll settle for not absurd, cheers.

[–]34679 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

The fuck is going on?

People don't like their governments being overly influenced by foreign lobbies, and Jews often mistake that for anti-semetism.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Jews often mistake that for anti-semetism.

Or use it as a cover to attack any opposition.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Try saying it more nicely, then, and focus on the lobbyists and not their religion / ethnicity. If they still take offense, you could ask other people (preferably strangers) whether what you're saying is OK.

Remember: you can say whatever you want, but clarify your meaning carefully so people you aren't offending don't feel the need to take offense.

[–]34679 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The only person who has control over being offended is the person offended. Beyond being polite as often as possible, I don't give a shit what anyone else decides to be offended by.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That's a good sentiment, I think. Though "XYZs often mistake that for an attack against XYZ" is a red flag for people not being very introspective, in my experience.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

More nicely? The tone is off now?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, the words are. But people often don't notice the problems with what they're saying, and since most people don't view themselves as anti-Semites they believe their arguments can stand without anti-Semitism.

[–]send_nasty_stuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's not a mistake. Sometimes antisemitism is real but most of the time it's a manufactured cover for nefarious Jewish actions. There's a reason for the phrase, "The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you"

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The only thing you can do is love them, even the neconservative Zionist Jews who demolitioned the towers and killed close to 3,000 people. Oh yeah, there were some trained Jesuits involved for a pretext for a military order in the middle east as was there a Greater Israel Expansionist policy as well as Yinon agenda. Even some fake catholics and zionist christians were involved. Lots of muslims too, at leadt a few Sunni's who signed PNAC. However, the majority to blame for the world trade center bombing are neconservative (neotrotskyite) Zionist Jews. Murdoch, the gentile Zionist even boasted about the destruction of the towers in a few films he produced. Same with the Israeli film producer who aided in smuggling US nuclear triggers to Israel as a spy, he being friends with Murdoch, Silverstein and Netanyahu.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And 90% of Jews are ashkanazi in the US or Khazars. Meaning you can not be antisemitic to them if you tried. They are not the semitic Jews of biblical times. Read the book, 'The Thirtieth Tribe.' Or read or watch anything with former Zionist and member of the World Zionist Organization, Benjamin Freedman.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

50% of the Bolshevik government after the revolutionbup to 1920 were Jews. 25% were crypto Jews, meaning they changed their names. Only 25% were Germans, poles, armenians, etc,. And an even smaller amount were ethnic Russians.

Read IHR's The Last of the Romanovs. The author being an investgative jounalist for Britain traveled to and fro Russian during the revolution. During this time the comintern released a white paper Illstrating the people and ethnicites in the bolshevik government. These people were mot all regular Jews, the were internationalist, revolutionary Jews, who sought to impose a red terror in response to the white terror. Many of them were mot even Zionists.

[–]zyxzevn 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

I don't understand. I see nothing against Moslem or Jew.

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

You mean the federal law that was passed requiring the State Dept to monitor anti-Semitic activity in Europe, but no provision for monitoring any other minor group hate crimes?

Why do you think every other minority group was absent from mention in that law?

Why would the US exclusively focus solely on antisemitism???

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

but no provision for monitoring any other minor group hate crimes?

First of all: the doctored image made it seem like criticising the patriotism of any person in the "Jewish" category was made illegal. Secondly, there aren't any other provisions in that particular law; that's not the same as there being no other provisions at all.

Why do you think every other minority group was absent from mention in that law?

Because it was a law about anti-Semitism in Europe?

Why would the US exclusively focus solely on antisemitism???

Well, you haven't shown that.

It's difficult to prove a negative, but if there's some sort of search system on the US government website you could try searching for names for other categories of people that other people are being abusive towards (e.g. "black", "colored", "n*****" "asian", "yellow", "Muslim", "Moslem"…) and seeing what laws come up. If you try to find something and nothing comes up, that's evidence. Then, if you want, you can make a post about it, and I'll vote it insightful check, then vote it insightful if I don't find anything or comment with a link if I do find anything.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

First of all: the doctored image made it seem like

Your factual assumption is incorrect.
The image was a screenshot and was not doctored. Parts of a screenshot from a bill that has been passed into law were circled red.

The post was not antisemitic. The idea that your pushing is bogus.

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

There is no way, on that site, to produce such an image with a screenshot (and that's ignoring the red circles).

But, fine. Omit the word "doctored". The rest of the comment still stands; the image made it seem like criticising the patriotism of any person on the "Jewish" category was made illegal, etc..

The post was not antisemitic.

It used deception to falsely portray a blanket "Jews" in a negative light.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There is no way, on that site, to produce such an image with a screenshot (and that's ignoring the red circles).

This is not true.

The user used the Windows "Snip Tool" and red marker to circle. This feature is on every PC that has Windows 8, or later. That's a layup.

That's a suspicious statement coming from you. I thought you were familiar with computers, and offered to help the admins with code?

The post was not antisemitic.

It used deception to falsely portray a blanket "Jews" in a negative light.

Also false. The bill is legit, and it contains the info from the screenshot. That is a fact.

If this is an uncomfortable for some individuals, then they should petition their local leaders to have the law changed.

 

It's strange that you're so interested in with this particular topic; given your claim that it doesn't affect your life.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Why are you repeating the same arguments in two threads? The user didn't simply use the Windows Snip Tool; I've already asked you to demonstrate using Problem Steps Recorder or a third-party screen recorder how it would be possible to produce such an image simply with that tool, without creating a composite image from multiple screenshots and you still haven't.

You're consistently trying to change the topic in order to win the argument. This isn't about whether the law exists or whether it contains that text (the answer to both is yes, as we both know); this is about whether the law was misrepresented. I say yes, you say no, fine, but don't use unethical, deceptive "debating techniques" to try to "prove" your point.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Because you're repeating the same tired argument, which deserves the same concise response.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Windows Snipping Tool is a screenshot program combined with a basic graphics editor. Whether or not it was used is almost completely independent of whether the screenshot was modified more than cropping and doodling.

I've offered you several simple ways to prove that the image shown can be produced simply by cropping a screenshot and drawing over it in red pen. You have sidestepped them, refusing to prove your argument. (Look, not the only one who knows how to bold things!)

I know it's hard to accept – this was basically me two months ago – but is this really the hill you want to die on? You're losing your hard-earned reputation here.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes, the title was misleadng but it wasn't antisemitic.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Technically, it was. And it was intended to portray a false anti-Semitic message as fact.

[–]zyxzevn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That is about politics, not about being against jews. The same ideas come from people who are jew or have jewish background. As if that fact was actually necessary.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why do you even need to bring that up, though? Seems the perceived legitimacy of some of these "political" claims is riding on the back of hatred.

[–]wizzwizz4 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

Perhaps somebody wants to push all the non-racist people off the site?

[–]Zombi 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

While I'd rather not go that route (what defines a racist, anyway?) I'd also love it if all the blatantly antisemitic posts got the hell off the front page. All we can do is callout posts such as this one and not upvote their posts.

I don't agree with what they have to say, but it would be hypocritical of me to call for censorship.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Posting non-political content and political content that doesn't focus on chopping people up into groups is probably the easiest way of getting these to go away, short of censorship which isn't on the table (and I'd feel uneasy about anyway).

Oh, and clicking on the anti-Semitic posts to upvote comments that call them out.

[–]HeyImSancho 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

So is criticism of any 'protected group', when due, actually bad under all circumstances?

It would be easy to see, once we go down this path, any relevant information could easily be flushed down the proverbial toilet simply by screaming the approved 'msm catch phrase of the day'......

Examples: 'Shut up you Nazi!!!'. I see that in the media often times, usually followed with NPC(none player charactors) group cheers, of course rooting for their 'home team', rather than cheering out of real owned, and thought out beliefs. Worse, yet, 'shut up nazi', or take a pick, 'shut up with your white privilege', being used across so many boards; I guess serial killers now, have 'white privilege'.......

You're so quick to want to silence talk, and discussion in a non approved direction, but what of the opposite, and crazy reactions we're seeing? An example? "My little pony" is now misogynistic......

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

So is criticism of any 'protected group', when due, actually bad under all circumstances?

Ooh! I was actually thinking about this in the shower, so I'm glad for a chance to share my thoughts.

So, basically, I have a pretty strong belief that large, non-homogeneous groups don't tend to share common goals and interests, and so blaming all individuals of a group for a wrong done by members of that group is pointless and counterproductive.

Protected groups are the groups that people frequently chop people up into to make these large blanket assertions about. (Or rather, protected groups are the subset of the aforementioned group of groups that have legal protection.)

So criticism of any 'protected group' is never due. Criticism of members of that protected group can be due, and when it is it is good, but there's rarely any point in bringing up the protected group when doing so – it dilutes your argument by introducing a non-argument into it.

I agree with you in paragraph 2, and paragraph 3 up until:

I guess serial killers now, have 'white privilege'.......

to which I say "sometimes they do, but this is irrelevant in determining their guilt". Specifically, it can be useful to observe what biases present in society lead to this serial killer being able to gain access to serial killer tools and prevent people from picking up on the serial killer's behaviour. Maybe it's because they're white? Or maybe it's because she's a mother of two, and when near the scene of a crime has a buggy with two infants in it, and a mother is clearly not a serial killer so isn't even added to the suspect lists.

You're so quick to want to silence talk,

Silence? No. Call out, refuse to support and boycott? Yes.

and discussion in a non approved direction,

I'd love discussion. In fact, I participated in the discussion about the last anti-Semitic post on the front page. The main concern is not the symptom (anti-Semitic posts being made) but the disease (people holding unsupported, generalised beliefs that harm people without allowing the people to accomplish their goals).

but what of the opposite, and crazy reactions we're seeing?

I also disagree with those, like the "my little pony" one.

Don't be as quick to place people into flawed categories as I am. Most of your assumptions about my beliefs are wrong, as I'm sure are my assumptions about others' beliefs.

[–]HeyImSancho 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Don't be as quick to place people into flawed categories as I am. Most of your assumptions about my beliefs are wrong, as I'm sure are my assumptions about others' beliefs.

I don't really have assumptions as such. I've noted a few people on the board, who tend to, 'innocently' steer directives back towards the same direction that the large social media groups, as well as the MSM are trying to steer people..... Yet, it's perfectly innocent, and organic... Spew lol

An easy example of this broad sweeping crap, would be the plight for 'no antisemitism' on the board..... But, the term, 'antisemitism' by modern standards is only towards "Jews", but is a Jew a religious affiliation, or a racial Semitic group? They play both cards at different times, and usually distinctly separate; most funny of all, the Ashkenazi are Europeans; I mean have you seen the Israeli Knesset lately? If Hitler is exactly how the victors wrote in history, then he'd be laughing, and smiling at the color of Israel.

Yet another aspect of 'antisemitism', directly back to the "Semitic" race angle, the Arabs, and brown people of the area are truly Semitic; I guess since European Jews have trademarked that though, the brown people are only 'slightly Semitic', and second class, when talking Semites, huh?(actually by MSM standards, to note the arabs are Semitic is somehow antisemitism, strange, no?)

The fact is, the world is run by assholes; who own the game, and have the rest of us chasing our tales. They're not Capitalists, Fascists, Socialists, nor Communists; they're slave masters running their traditional games of divide, and conquer. They keep us always guessing our individual rights, and our individual identities, WHY? Just like the military, they need to destroy individualism, and rebuild us into 'citizens', aka slaves; the ones in power are the slavers, and always have been. And yes, not all, but a great deal percentage wise have been, and are Jewish.

Is it wrong to note a trend? <<<----if anything of my post is answered, this is the question I would favor.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed Sancho. Awesome comment! No it's not wrong to note a trend.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Is it wrong to note a trend?

By pointing out this "trend" – which might not even be one; analysis of the selection biases involved is interesting but iirc hasn't been done for this yet – you're furthering that "divide and conquer" approach.

[–]HeyImSancho 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

By choosing to at least entertain information, I'm furthering 'divide, and conquer'? Whizz, that's silly, and on par with the govt. status quo; which usually dictates that no one is intelligent enough not to have a nanny; nanny state.

As long as my breath flows, there won't be a topic I won't discuss; that's freedom, and it must be exercised. Stupid people, will always be stupid, and do subsequent stupid stuff; people who can control themselves; why should they self limit when fate obviously rules the day?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Everything you say has a consequence. I don't think through everything I say, but I have pre-prepared rules that – if followed – limit my "frivolous speech" to stuff that likely won't have lasting negative impacts. I re-evaluate these aperiodically.

If you're not going to limit yourself to such rules, please consider considering the consequences of everything you say to a large audience. You could adversely affect your ability to achieve your goals, otherwise.

[–]HeyImSancho 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh Wizz, don't you comprehend? You can never silence, or quell anyone's ability to speak their mind.

Take whatever rules you think you're showing people, they'll be twisted, and exploited, until discarded. The establishment is also trying to get people to obey some sort of command protocol in regards to what can be said, or not said; yet it's lacking. The organic rules of the natural world, which do trump all, dictate you cannot control all things.

I mean go for it, but at the end of eternity, everything that could be said, will have been said. Life's not about being afraid of offending others, it's about living, and knowing that what others have to say, don't have to impact you; 'water off a duck's back'.

Weaklings unfit for life are who need safe places; I don't say that lightly, but through my years have seen it play out; just my experience I guess.

[–]dark_devil_dd 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I think that if u unsubscribe to s/conspiracy it should do the trick. Not saying I agree with what they say, but if you're reading a sub called s/conspiracy you should expect crazy shit.

[–]Zombi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I mean, I find it entertaining in some odd way and every now and then conspiracy theorists will be on to something. My point was that I don't think we should ban a sub just because it says things we don't like to hear. I think we should tolerate eachother so long as we aren't calling for violence or infringing on other's rights.

[–]dark_devil_dd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree, although there seems like a disproportionate content comes from there, and I never said to ban it, just that you can unsubscribe to it so that certain content won't appear on the front page.

I love a good conspiracy theory but it seems like there's a lot of quantity over quality.

[–]HeyImSancho 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Perhaps somebody wants to push all the non-racist people off the site?

Weak argument, designed for sympathy where none is due; last I checked, and read, most here get along. Grow up, and pick better arguments.

I could easily have said, 'i've noticed a continual parade of all the Sjw's offering advice to a new forum, which usually takes the form of, 'if you allow content like this(XYZ), then this site is doomed'....(presenting your basic premise, but from the other direction)

Yet, I've never come close to any absolute like this, and others with their own varying beliefs aren't saying this. It's the folks with the obvious PC, SJW, Libtard, MSM, and 'status quo Millennial', who're trying to paint the black, and white pictures of doom-nation for allowing 'topics', and the manner in which 'posed'.

I mean, yeah, I guess this post is a little harsh, but damn, quit using the arguments of websites like, 'lesswrong'; LMAO, it shows.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

last I checked, and read, most here get along.

Hey, I didn't say it was working! I put forward a hypothesis as to the intentions of a mysterious, unidentified figure behind the scenes… Ok, I heard it that time. Poor argument.

quit using the arguments of websites like, 'lesswrong'; LMAO

Hmm… This confuses me. Is there any particular argument from LessWrong that I've been using that is flawed? If so, I'd really like to know.

(LessWrong doesn't really have stock arguments, by the way; that's not what it's about. It's more… techniques, for identifying flawed arguments that humans regularly produce. The ultimate goal is to notice them before you make them when you're making internal decisions, and so become less wrong.)

[–]HeyImSancho 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Hmm… This confuses me. Is there any particular argument from LessWrong that I've been using that is flawed? If so, I'd really like to know.

(LessWrong doesn't really have stock arguments, by the way; that's not what it's about. It's more… techniques, for identifying flawed arguments that humans regularly produce. The ultimate goal is to notice them before you make them when you're making internal decisions, and so become less wrong.)

Wizz,

Other than many people calling you a 'shill', there's nothing wrong with your arguments; except for they seemingly, and continually get you labeled as such. I can see why they do label you though, as often enough, you're arguing what most would believe the 'status quo' narrative, or perhaps, 'the establishment narrative'.

I actually find value in that, in numerous ways; yet, again, I can see where others may blurt out, whatever it maybe, so that in their minds, they possibly 'saved' someone else who might not be as savvy as they perceive themselves.

On the topic of 'identifying flawed arguments that humans regularly produce', that's just life. Usually the real decider of any argument is who can simply sway enough people to agree in mass; that is easily accomplished with money. Money rules the world; after all, it's written right on the US Greenback(world reserve currency still), "In God We Trust".

The problem I see with lesswrong, and the rest of those types of sites, they never spill the beans on the injustices, and lies revolving around the power of money. When a site like that fails to talk about the ugly side of what we call 'factual', yet claims to be dedicated to 'finding truth', you just know it's full of something stinky.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Wizz has numerously called out the facts when others wouldn't. Just becaue someone posts a conspiracy article doesn't mean it is true just because it is against the status quo.

Though, he s getting carried away with trying to paint this as something intentional.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

they never spill the beans on the injustices, and lies revolving around the power of money.

The site aims to be non-political (teaching a man to fish, not giving him them) but, I can assure you, the techniques I know allow me to draw that conclusion from the evidence available to me.

[–]HeyImSancho 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The site aims to be non-political (teaching a man to fish, not giving him them) but, I can assure you, the techniques I know allow me to draw that conclusion from the evidence available to me.

That's good whizz, I'm glad to hear that you possess the ability to discern what may, or may not be correct; innovative! However, on that note, I don't know why you mention 'political', as being excluded, or included; I was saying money dictates most decisions across all boards. meh.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The writings on that site are generally about a set of techniques that apply to things other than governments, economics and politics just as easily as to those things.

[–]HopeThatHalps 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Can someone explain what fuels modern anti-semitism? I've seen people say "they want someone to blame for their own failings", I can understand blaming immigrants who might take up the low skill labor opportunities in a region, but blaming Jewish people for anything seems odd and arbitrary to me.

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Fake Jews masquerading as real Jews are using antisemitism to prevent anyone from questiomimg their illicit activities or dual loyalty towards Israel at the expense of the US citizenry. Jews are cool but in this collective, tightly knit group is a subset of so called Jews who could care less about mosaic law. They'd rather like, you know, terrorize the public with false flags.

Honest Jews have it the hardest, that's why we can't generalize. It is inseed true to say 75% of the Bolshevik goverment in 1920 were Jews but that doesn't mean all Jews associate themselves with the thuggery of red terror. Most are nice people. But the well placed scumbag human beings that use judaism as a pedastal to further their goals of Greater Israeli Expansionisit policy, ethnic cleansing of Palestinian muslims and Christians, very well could lead to the destruction and indangerment of the normal Jew.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I could relate this thinking to how homosexuals rape /molest young boys at a freequency far outpacing heterosexuals who rape young girls. Do more girls get molested by heterosexual men? Yes, of course, because the pop. per cap is much greater than that of the homosexual population. However, homosexuals comprising only 3-4% of the total US population rape boys at a frequency extroadinarily greater and with multiple repeated offenses than the heterosexual pop. It would take over 80,000,000 of the heterosexual population to rape the same nmber of young girls as it does for 4,000,000 of the homosexual pop. to rape the same number of young boys.

BUT WAIT!!! I know homosexuals (Jews) and they are really nice, good people you might say. And I agree, they are; the majority are. However, in the homosexual (Jewish) community there is a subset population, very small in size, that rapes (controls the media [5 of 6 television news corps. owned by zionist Jews, the 6 a so called jewified, zionist gentile] conduct false flags like 9/11, extracts and leaches on the American people, indebts economies, basically rapes countries) and molests boys at an unprecedented level. And because of this the majority of nice homosexuals (Jews) think you are a homophobe (antisemite) for mentioning these facts (even, sometimes the very people involved), or that you may have generalized all homosexuals (jews) with the actions of a few thousand dangeros homosexual (Jewish) criminals. Think the Zionist, and internationalist Jews; and even in those groups the majority, although holding a warped ideology are law abiding. Think the Jewish mob. There's a great book about the internationalist Jewish mob, something JFK and RFK wanted to rid of, as did they Israel's nuclear program and making AIPAC a foreign agent. Anyway, the book was banned in France, the author arrested and jailed 13 times for writing it. How nice.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is it is okay to generalize. When I talk about the crusades I say the Christian crusaders, Catholic crusaders, etc., obviously, not all christians nor catholics supported the crusades. Is this retoric antichrist?

I think it's important to name the people involved in what ever matter you write about. If they are all Jews, then you're allowed to mention this fact. If some are, that's fine too. As long as your not advocating genocide or threating someone or an ethnic group with violence than who really cares.

Not to mention most Jews are not semitic. And palestinians are semitic in origin, so are Zionist Jews antisemitic?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well stated.

[–]d3rr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Honest Jews have it the hardest, that's why we can't generalize.

Amen Lord. You reminded me of one of my favorite reddit posts "Zionism is the most prominent antisemitic ideology alive today" https://web.archive.org/web/20190507061340/https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7uesbo/im_going_to_explain_something_that_i_fear_many/

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, for the majority of the ordinary Jew is hopelessness... helplessly propagandized on all sides; left, right, center, up and down. The Likud, the comintern... whatever they front this decade or a century away, the Jew wll be scapegoated at the expense of human dignity. Like we cheer for a false war on terror, the Jew will disregard completely or chant for the coming destructon of Israel. A fervent, zealous agenda. Luckily, many Jews are waking up to this deception and thus preventing their destruction and the destruction of Israel (and Palestine).

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Where are these examples of antisemitism? Is it anti-Semitic to criticize lobbying interest groups?

[–]HopeThatHalps 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

People saying "the jews will not replace us" for example, where does this idea come from that they will?

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It comes from forced multiculturalism. Or kalergi plan (white genocide), research the Kalergi plan. Is it true, maybe, who knows. As I understand it some Jews do in fact advocate for the white being a minority in his own country. Many internationalists who happen to be Jews push for this. But so doesn't the Club of Rome.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've never heard that, so i won't comment.

[–]HopeThatHalps 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ahh, but that was a psyop. The chant is in reference to the Kalergi plan.

The entire nationalst populist movement in the US is hijacked by Zionist Jews anyway. Think rebel media, lauren southern, Jones, Zionirt Tommy Robinson, Richard (I take pictures with the Bush family) Spencer, etc,.

[–]dark_devil_dd 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I wouldn't say anti-semitic necessarily but recently someone called me brainwashed and asked if I was from Israel. Let me make this clear, what we were talking about HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ISRAEL, not even close.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

True: but stuff like this should be allowed even if you disagree with it - https://codoh.com/library/document/4056/

[–]dark_devil_dd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Not saying it can't be discussed, just that's weird that, in some cases, people will link an unrelated event in a college in the US to Israel. It's like a spontaneous rorschach test on steroids.

[–]Jesus 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What? Israel has lobbies that directy prey on our youngest andbrightest in schooling. The lobbies even pay upwards a hundred thousand dollars to students to act as agent provocateurs in response to palestinian rights campaigns.

Watch the banned documentary - THE LOBBY

[–]dark_devil_dd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

yes, I've heard about "public diplomacy".

That has occurred to me, not just the case of Israel, even considered posting it on s/conspiracy . How often people are pushed to a side because how insane some people on the other appear to be?

Makes me wonder if some people views are legit or an underhanded campaign of people impersonating the opposing side to drive people away.

[–]swordofdamocles42 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

P A L A S T I N E

and being able to get away with it. it makes everyone know the truth.

also someone is printing the money and not sharing it properly.