JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
Leftists hate Jews for being perceived as right-wing (economically and socially) oppressors.
Ironically, most of the American Jews (excluding Hassids and similar groups) are in deep love with the Left and especially the Left's economical and social doctrines. Not all, I'd say but the majority, especially the prominent Jews that show up on TV.
Many black men (famously Kanye) and poor whites fit this bill.
Kanye though is not poor and hardly unsuccessful. While black antisemitism has long and sordid history (which mostly resides on the "convenient proxy for oppression" part) I don't think alt-right antisemitism comes from that angle. Rather, it comes from resentment with the general power structure setup in American society, which many people, especially on the right, are feeling, and instead of doing proper intellectual work of figuring out where that comes from, reaching for the ages-old convenient explanation. Of course if shit's going wrong, it must be the Jews! It's always the Jews! Everybody knows that! And of course, the thing I mentioned above - many American Jews being in deep love with the left, even while the Left hates them - doesn't help since it automatically codes them as "the enemy".
If the new Israeli leader lacks big-dick-energy, the incels will mark him as effeminate and move over to their next source of resentment.
There's always "Mossad". Mossad has a ton of big dick energy, and you can blame them for literally anything - after all, not having any evidence just proves how cunning they are, you didn't expect the Mossad to leave any evidence, are you stupid or what?!
People are saying this about the Jews for three thousands years at least. Yet the Jews are still around.
Do we really need a complex explanation of why a young woman appears attractive to an aging man?
I think it is better than a horoscope or tarot, because it's based on the actual individual patterns of behavior, instead of something that has no relationship to the actual person. But of course attempting to reduce the infinite human diversity to a handful of broad classes would be very imprecise and frequently misleading. That said, there are people that can be described as "phlegmatic" or "sanguine", and that's not entirely wrong, even though nobody believes in the humoral theory anymore. It's clear that there are some patterns in people's behavior, and those can be to some measure classified. My type on MBTI comes out as INTJ and it's roughly matching my behavior and is probably useful to a certain measure - you wouldn't know everything about me, you won't probably know any of the important things about me as a person, but you would understand roughly how my thinking and approach to things works. I think that is useful, though one must always understand that this is very imprecise and not to put too much into it like "I know how you think now, you're totally transparent to me". No classification system is ever going to do that.
Yes, PA is not a full state, because any solution that was designed to get them to full state and permanent resolution of the conflict has been thoroughly and consistently rejected by the Palestinians. And when Gaza was made an experiment in de-facto evolving towards full self-rule without a formal agreement, what Israel got as the result is October 7. There's absolutely no desire in Palestinian politics to reach any permanent solution that involves Israel existing in peace. Given that, any additional sovereignty level that Israel allows would only lead to more casualties on Israel's side. Gaza demonstrated it (and continues to demonstrate, with Hamas' thorough rejection of any arrangement that requires Hamas to give up on killing Israelis) very convincingly, and demanding from Israel to be more suicidal than it already is does not sound like a fair demand.
If we're being fair, that's partly because the PA is supposed to be in charge but actually are mostly grifters, so they've delegated blame, but ultimately you don't really see Israel trying to expand citizenship to more Palestinians
Given that PA territory is under full civil administration by PA, I'm not sure how would you expect Israel giving citizenship to Arabs living there. Security arrangements are more complex, but for this it doesn't matter - PA enjoys pretty much complete self-rule in civil matters (and so did Gaza btw) so calling Arabs living there "second class" compared to Israelis is just bizarre - they are not Israelis at all. As for PA leadership being grotesquely corrupt and indifferent to the needs of the population - that's extremely common situation in the Middle East, and Israel can't really fix it. It could annex the PA territory, kick out the PA and provide its own institutions, but nobody wants that. Short of that, the Arabs will have to do with the institutions they can build for themselves, and if those are not great, it's not Israel's fault.
50 thousands Arab Christians would be very surprised to know they are "mostly gone". Gaza, indeed, was pretty much cleansed of Christians by Hamas, which is what happens when you give Islamic fundamentalists free reign of the territory, but in PA, where comparatively less insane Fateh is ruling, Christians still exist. Of course, just as all the good-wishers of the world totally ignored what happened to Christians who used to live in Gaza, if PA decides to cleanse all Christians from PA territory, nobody would even squeak, no Jews - no news. Things like that happened many times in other places (in the Middle East and outside) and no students on college campuses ever protested about it. You all know why.
Capital was a critique of capitalism and the social systems that it encourages that is largely correct.
Nah it's completely false. In fact, it is the failure of Marxian approach that gave birth to wokeness, in a sense. According to Marx, capitalism, with time, was supposed to lead to worsening conditions of the proletariat and making workers extremely poor, so that the capitalists would own all the means of production and the workers would literally work there only because the alternative it dying from hunger, and only paid as much as to allow them to barely not die from hunger. Which eventually would cause the desperate masses to revolt. That part kinda makes sense, if I were in such situation I'd probably revolt too. Except that it's totally not what happened in the developed capitalist countries. In fact, even in the countries where the revolt did happen - like Russia - not only it could not happen by Marxian theory (Russia was way to underdeveloped to progress to that point, it barely crawled out of feudalism by then, and there was a lot of confusion among Russian Marxist theoreticians about what the heck Lenin is thinking when Marx clearly says Russia is not ready) but it was largely perpetrated by the intelligentsia, with the proletariat taken along for the ride and used as a figurehead. And it went worse from there, because the masses of the workers under capitalism liked their 401k and ESPP much more than preparing the glorious socialist revolution. And if you look closely at who we see as self-described Marxians today, you'll see a distinct scarcity of factory workers and large prevalence of college professors and their brainwashed students.
And that was the reason why the Left needed something different from the classical Marxism. Because building a movement based on wage workers eager to overthrow capitalism was not viable anymore. That's why Gramsci invented cultural Marxism, which eventually performed a hostile takeover of civil rights movement and ecological movements, and evolved into wokeness. This all was because Marx's theory completely failed to predict the actual events.
the Soviet Union and China very clearly still engaged in capitalistic commodity production
I don't know much about China, but I will get into a debate about Soviet Union, because I know quite a bit about it. And in Soviet Union, they actually tried to implement Marxian economical planning as much as they could, completely honestly, and involved such mathematical powerhouses as Kantorovich, and after they got over the idiotic rejection of cybernetics, also all the computation resources they could muster. Only after it became absolutely clear to them there's no possible way they can make it work they started to let some capitalist elements in, such as khozraschyot, cooperatives, economic incentivization, federalization of economic planning, etc. They tried Marx as hardcode as they could afford without causing famine.... oh wait, scratch that, including causing famines that cost millions of lives - and still could not make it work. Nobody can.
If you're implying the policemen specifically look for people like George Floyd to abuse them, this does not sound plausible. I mean, did you see the man? His standard description in the woke media is "gentle giant". I am not sure about the gentle part, but he's 6'6", played multiple sports, was employed as a security guard, and he doesn't exactly look like something you'd describe as "weak". And, of course, if you wanted to target somebody weak and unable to resist with violence, without the possibility of punishment, would be a public street, in presence of your peers and multiple witnesses possessing recording devices, your preferred venue for that?
What do you mean by "isolated" and "stigmatized"? Floyd certainly weren't "isolated", given how much resources have been spent on defending his cause and lionizing him, including burying him in a golden casket, all DNC leadership kneeling to apologize for whatever happened to him, and erecting a monument to him. And anybody alive in the last 20 years would know how such things work. So if you think the policemen were on the lookout for some helpless victim nobody would care about, it's literally the worst choice in the history of bad choices. And they would know it very well. Neither is he "stigmatized" - if anything, all his past as violent psychopath and drug addict is completely forgotten and any discussion of it is now considered "downplaying the problem of police brutality and similar abuses of power" and definitely means whoever discusses it is a racist.
- Prev
- Next
More options
Context Copy link