Crowstep
11d ago
I'm not sure I buy that we need noble lies of this kind to hold society together.
One thing I've found interesting is observing when non-Anglos are open and honest about ethnic differences. The two that come to mind are a (Romani) entrepreneur I saw on TV saying that he won't hire other Romani, only Romanians, because Romani will try and cheat him. The other were a group of (heavy drinking) natives in Siberia saying, seemingly without bitterness, that Russians were richer than them because they (the natives) drank too much. And the fact that the Russians were the sober party in that description tells you how much they were drinking. I think in both cases intelligence was mentioned but I can't be sure.
Mizrahi Jews in Israel also seem to be pretty chill with the fact that Israel has never had a non-Ashkenazi Prime Minister, and that the elite is mostly Ashkenazi.
Maybe the real toxic meme is the idea that we need a noble lie. But then there are too many examples of ethnic animosity against the higher performing groups for me to conclude that it's just a western/Anglo thing.
Crowstep
12d ago
I've just realised the link I gave didn't actually show my results, but my 'real' IQ score is 128 and it estimated 127.
Crowstep
12d ago
Interestingly, the IQ estimate it gives is only a point off my actual IQ, or at least the score I got in the only test I ever took.
Crowstep
13d ago
Assuming that you're right, I would think that ads have something to do with it. Youtubers are (were?) notorious for stretching <10 minute videos to ten minutes, because that allows them to include a midroll ad.
Crowstep
13d ago
The first three conditions are already fulfilled
The first two are met, but then they could also apply to literally any violence in any context whatsoever. The killing of Trayvon Martin was an act of genocide according to those definitions.
The third one:
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
If the Israeli government is 'deliberately inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the Gazans', then why haven't they brought about their destruction in whole or in part? You yourself admit that they could inflict a genocide, and simultaneously claim that they want to commit a genocide, and yet somehow they haven't committed a genocide. They haven't even come close. The number of Gazans is higher now than it was before the war.
That being said, I would not care if we use the word genocide or 'ethnic cleansing' or 'politically motivated mass murder on an industrial scale' to describe this.
Words mean things. For the same reason that I'm opposed to the term 'white supremacism' shifting from what the KKK believed to disagreeing with Ta-Nehisi Coates. What's going on in the West Bank could reasonably be described as low-level ethnic cleansing, but nothing in the Holy Land could be described as genocide.
But I would want some reconciliation over the fact that one side is trying to amplify what is going on whilst another is trying to do the opposite.
All the more reason to try and describe things accurately instead jumping on the bandwagon of whoever has the most hysterical rhetoric.
"Genocide" is commonly used without meaning total elimination
Surely the term has to mean something stronger than 'lots of civilians died in a war'? Because if it doesn't, then every large war prior to (and including) WW2 was a genocidal war, as well as many afterwards.
There's a reason we talk about Hitler committing genocides against the Jews, Slavs and Romani, but not against the French, British and Americans, even though the Nazis bombed London and shelled French cities (and the Allies committed similar violence against German civilians).
Activists aren't using the word 'genocide' because it is a meaningful description of what is going on in Gaza. They're using it because it's the worst word they know.
Crowstep
14d ago
If the Israelis are trying to genocide the Palestinians they're clearly not very good at it
I roughly calculated that, before the ceasefire, it would have taken the IDF over 100 years to kill everyone in Gaza, assuming no population growth. Which must be the least competent genocide in history, given that the IDF is a modern military and their targets are kettled into a tiny coastal strip.
Crowstep
16d ago
I can't even imagine how Israel will look in a century
It's a fun thought experiment. On the plus side (for them), they are the only developed country with above-replacement fertility, they have tons of very high IQ people, rapidly growing GDP per capita, low (and shrinking) national debt, a strong national-religious identity and an extremely competent military. I can easily see an expansionist Israel annexing Gaza, the West Bank and southern Lebanon and populating them with settlers.
On the other hand, their soon to be largest religious group reject military service, non-religious education and (to some extent) paid work, they are alienating the world with their treatment of the Palestinians, they are an extremely hot country in a heating world and their growing population is limited to a small sliver of land, even if they do annex territory from their neighbours.
The question is whether they can cream off enough of the Haredim to stop them turning the country into a giant yeshiva.
Crowstep
17d ago
Governments around the world have wanted to implement persistent online ID for a while. Companies know this and want to use it to build deeper moats as well as maintain relationships with the government.
Most internet users already use persistent online ID through their Gmail or Facebook universal logins and have done for years. This hasn't lead to governments using them for any nefarious ends.
Porn verification wouldn't even be a good way to do what you're claiming. People watch porn in incognito mode, and so aren't logged into their other accounts, and the age verification software almost always uses facial age recognition rather than ID card verification.
Governments that do have digital IDs invariably just use them for taxes and stuff, they're not persistent across the web.
Governments are looking to prevent kids from watching porn because...they don't want kids watching porn. Underage porn bans are extremely popular with the public (e.g. 69% (lol) support in the UK). There's no big conspiracy.
Crowstep
17d ago
But just saying "parents should do their jobs", while true (and frustrating, I assure you), is not really recognizing how drastically things have changed, on a technology + pervasiveness level.
The implicit argument that comes with the 'it's the parents' responsibility' position is that the status quo is the best we can hope for. We've had smartphones, social media, fast internet etc for years now, and we've seen what happens. Unless defenders are arguing that this is the best of all worlds given the technology that exists, then we need action beyond that taken by individual families. Whether that's smartphone bans in schools, age verification for social media and porn or whatever, if we want to move away from an anxious, depressed, isolated and screen-based childhood, then expecting every single family to unilaterally fight the flood is asking too much.
There's a reason the Amish reject technologies at a congregation-level. Doing it household by household is impossible.
Crowstep
20d ago
remaining environmental differences between black and white people
Could you be more specific? Are there any 'environmental' differences between Euro-Americans and Afro-Americans that aren't just a manifestation of the different IQ scores that blank slaters are trying to explain away?
But I want to see the genes
What evidence are you waiting for? We already have polygenic risk scores for intelligence. We know that intelligence is mostly heritable, and that this doesn't differ by race.
Crowstep
26d ago
Judge Dipti Pidikiti-Smith
Crowstep
26d ago
I'm a huge Firefly fan, but I hope this doesn't go anywhere. In the list of shows brought back from the dead, it's rare to see a successful one. Twin Peaks, Arrested Development, Futurama, X-Files, all terrible after they were brought back. The final season of Community was good, but I attribute that to no time having passed after it got dropped by the network.
Crowstep
27d ago
a literal spooky doomsday clock
Did you just...add a word to my quote? I don't know if that's against the rules or not, but it's definitely poor form.
Their official stated policy goal is to leave the fate of Israel up to a democratic referendum which includes displaced Palestinians
I genuinely don't know what this is based on. I've Googled around and all I can find are articles about Iranian proxy war strategy. That is, a war with guns and bombs and rockets. Nothing about referendums. Indeed, I'm curious how exactly invading Israel and destroying its military could lead to a peaceful referendum?
Israel has been waging a proxy war upon much of the Middle East through her greatest proxy America
Iran is not the Middle East, Iran is Iran. And the Iranian regime has been dedicated to the destruction of Israel since it took power in 1979. The idea that Iran is standing up on behalf of the greater Middle East seems like a stretch, given that Iran is currently bombing every Middle Eastern country it can reach, and has spent years funding paramilitaries in them.
Crowstep
28d ago
Iran can’t be blamed for defending themselves from an unjust attack by Israel.
Iran has been waging proxy war against Israel for 44 years via Hezbollah, Hamas and their other paramilitaries. it has a literal doomsday clock counting down the days until Israel's destruction. If the regime didn't want a war with Israel, they've been going about it a funny way.
And it's not as if Israel is a threat to Iran. They're seperated by two countries and hundreds of miles. If Iran wanted peaceful relations with Israel, all they would need to do is stop funding Hezbollah and Hamas and stop threatening to nuke Israel.
There is a lot to criticise Israel about regarding Gaza and the West Bank, but Iran's conflict with Israel is one of Iran's making.
Broadly speaking, I think the failure mods of prejudice against women (or indeed men) are less bad than prejudice against an ethnic, religious or economic group. The worst outcome we've seen for the former is the Taliban, the worst outcome we've seen for the latter is genocide. Not even the most he-man woman-haters social regime is going to kill all the women, but killing all the Jews/Tutsis/Kulaks can and does happen sometimes.
More options
Context Copy link