SecureSignals
Training the Aryan LLM
No bio...
User ID: 853
The Dissident Right is bigger now than the alt-right ever was in its heyday in terms of engagement with ideas and content and influence. Matt Walsh is only the most recent of a long list of big-C Conservative influencers who now essentially adopt 2017 alt-right talking points on race and increasingly, maybe Israel even.
The irony of those like Jordan Peterson and Douglas Murray trying to spread moral panic over the platforming of "Woke Right" is that it actually describes themselves better than it does the DR. Peterson, Murray and Woke alike are in alignment over high values like anti-racism and individualism, they just have different criteria for how those values are achieved. But both the Woke and Peterson will be scandalized by the DR critique of those values and the DR's rejection of this Boomer moral paradigm which they all pretend is centuries old but only goes back to, like the 60s at the earliest.
The Boomer consensus is essentially an anti-fascist dialectic- fascism is the most evil thing in the world and whether Right or Left, the operative question is how do we optimize to prevent Fascism, and both Conservatives including Peterson and Douglas Murray and the Woke are playing their part. What neither of them can stand is the Dissident Right which openly flaunts the anti-fascist norms enforced by both the Conservatives and Woke. The DR is a rejection of the Boomer Consensus and a rejection of the entire "Conservative v Woke" dialectic.
There's no going backwards. The "Conservative v Woke" dialectic that Peterson desperately wants to save is going by the wayside thanks to an Avant-garde Right wing which is terrifying to both Conservatives and Woke.
Edit: Just a few days ago, Matt Walsh reposted a crypto-Swastika on X (if you don't see it at first, try squinting). I believe he knew what he was doing. Not to say Walsh is a Nazi or anything, it's the flirtation with the edgy right-wing humor and symbolism that is novel compared to the Conservative puritans who call the DR "woke".
Blacks are 14.5% of the American population, about equal to their 14% representation in the Harvard class of 2028. Likewise Latinos constitute 16% of the Harvard class compared to about 20% representation in the population.
Too bad Whites only have about a third of their population representation, giving them the worst representation among any other demographic. I guess blacks and Latinos are just outcompeting whites right?
Wouldn't identity-politics enforced fairly mean White people participate in identity politics? But you oppose that? So you aren't even consistent in your pseudo-"game theoretic formulation." You just every step of the analysis support Jews and oppose white people and then find some justification for it.
The pro-Palestine content tags to pro-Israeli content tags were like 93% to 7%. Full disclosure I'm not an Instagram user but I seriously doubt Instagram is as threatening to the Gen Z perspective of Israel compared to TikTok.
Hard to believe that’s the reason.
Once again, you are not taking people at face value. Hundreds of Jewish organizations lobby for the ban, and people directly involved admit that the Jewish lobby was decisive in the matter which had previously stalled after failing to get enough support. It is the decisive reason, they even admit this.
Zuck was pressured to ban Holocaust denial on the platform like it had already been on Amazon, Youtube, etc. but he held strong until they brought out the big guns with the huge 2020 ad boycotts. He at least put up some resistance rather than immediately going to the "of course we can't have that content, it's unconscionable" route. So that earned him some credit even though he eventually folded. It will be interesting to see if Holocaust revisionism gets unbanned on that platform like it's tacitly been unbanned on X.
He did mention growing censorship laws, and Holocaust denial censorship is growing rapidly in Europe with new laws in new countries continuing apace. Makes me wonder if he is going to reverse course on banning that as well. I, for the record, do not think the Fact Checker reform is just about saving costs I think Zuckerberg is being sincere in the video.
The writing was on the wall for a pretty long time now, and technologically nothing stands in the way of making an uncensorable service, but all these alt-tech CEOs keep making the same single-point-of-failure architectures
An "uncensorable service" where the only users there are like-minded people is not what the DR wants, certainly not what it needs. It needs to be present in the public square. That's why Musk's turnabout of Twitter censorship is so monumentally important. You have DR perspectives getting huge engagement with mainstream audiences. You have anti-Semitic posters publicly ratio'ing the ADL's annual memorial-post to the murdering pedophile Leo Frank. That is the stuff which is actually dangerous. All the DR being herded into some uncensorable service which gets no engagement or audience from the mainstream is worthless.
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a rules-based versus discretionary tariff policy. Making tariffs more of an a-personal "no hard feelings but this is what the equation says the tariff should be" is probably better than the politics that drive arbitrary levels of protectionism. Of course that relies on having a good rule, and the formula here makes no sense.
US Consumers enjoy an economy driven by both high consumption and high investment and low relative savings. That is enabled by trade deficits. It's going to be a major economic shift to pin tariffs against the trade deficit.
It seems to me a better rule would be "we reciprocate 2x tariffs that are placed on us, you need us more than we need you." Doing it against the trade deficit makes no sense. There is definitely going to be a pivot.
99.99% of the Roman imperium were spectators, they got to bask in the Glory of Rome the same.
The most benevolent AI imaginable would do everything required to achieve these great works short of the marginal productivity of human struggle such that humans meaningfully participate in the project, even if that contribution itself could be automated.
Scott changed his public opinion on HBD due to the shifting winds of the passions of the (at least online- i.e. his audience) public, largely thanks to Elon Musk acquiring Twitter- unbanning all the icky right-wingers who did the uncredited yeoman's work for many decades challenging a blatant lie deeply rooted in our collective consciousness. Scott participated in the censorship of that group of people, although you could argue he low-key sabotaged the consensus with whatever support he gave of TheMotte.
But Scott's public opinion hasn't changed because of increasing IQ of technocrats motivated to improve policy; it changed because of a turning point in a memetic political conflict. You can't change the hearts and minds of the technocrats with evidence and well-reasoned arguments in the most important cases, you have to do it with political victory.
If this political shift hadn't happened, the high-IQ technocrats, including himself, would have happily continued defending the blatant lie of HBD denial and the catastrophic downstream political effects. But I do think his turnabout on HBD is basically explained by Musk's acquisition of Twitter. What people call a "vibe shift" is literally a politically-motivated billionaire changing content TOS and moderation on a political platform, not technocrats being convinced by rational argumentation and new evidence.
The intelligence-worship falls apart, because even the most intelligent are slaves to political conflict. You can't ignore it or pretend you are above participation or taking sides and only care about IQ, evidence, and reason.
The argument people like Keith Woods makes is that these Arab immigrants will never be German, no matter how long they are there or if they learn the language, whether they commit crime or do not commit crime, whatever they Tweet or whatever political policy they support, whatever religion they will follow, the only certainty is that they will never be German. So your rebuttal is not responsive to the issue they fundamentally have with the mass migration of non-European people to European civilization.
It's not just about crime, it's not just about religion, it's not just about terrorism, although those things can be relevant symptoms, it's about jealously guarding a European genetic and civilizational inheritance from being Africanized, replaced by Arabs or Chinese, Indians or whatever.
Your argument is most responsive to the Conservatives who just say "hey, I'm not racist I just oppose mass Arab migration because I don't want terrorist attacks in my Christmas villages." For those people you can do your well ackhually it wasn't Islamic extremism that inspired the attack, but that just doesn't work on the DR perspective.
If Germany let in 100,000 Vietnamese immigrants tomorrow, my prediction is that those immigrants would flourish, as they have in America.
Why stop at 100,000? Why not 100 million? Even if mass migration of Asians, Vietnamese, Chinese to Germany caused a reduction in crime and created economic growth do you think the DR should accept these foreigners because they commit less crime or raise GDP? Why not replace all of Europe with Chinese if it lowered crime and raised IQ? It's only conservatives who say it's about those things.
This terrorist attack is pertinent to the DR perspective because it provides a symbolic counterexample to the lie that, no matter who you are, you can go to Germany, learn the language and obey the law and, congratulations you're German! No you are not. The American Midwest family with Germanic ancestry they don't even know about is more German than they will ever be. So this man ostensibly being the "model" Arab immigrant but still become inspired to commit this act is shattering the liberal illusion of assimilation, or that being German is just an idea.
He really did seem to resent Germany and to want to strike a blow against it on behalf of his in-group, but his in-group isn’t Arabs as a whole, it isn’t Muslims, and it isn’t even Saudis. It appears to just be “ex-Muslim apostates (especially women) fleeing the Middle East.”
His motivation was European immigration policy. You try to be ultra-specific about it to brush it as a one-off, but it introduces the likelihood of violence in response to Right-wing Immigration reform in Europe. We may see more of that type of violence than radical Islamic-inspired violence, although a lot of it will be blended together.
We have seen a similar pattern with Free Speech in Europe: terrorist attacks in response to offensive speech did not motivate backlash against mass migration it motivated crackdowns on "hate speech" out of fear of offending Muslims. So if we see more Arab terrorists attack Europe because of European immigration reform we will likely see pressure put against immigration reform. This is relevant especially at a time when parties are flirting with the idea of remigration.
You don't think that AfD and other European parties beginning to support remigration is likely to inspire any more of this violence? We already see race riots and organized street violence by African and Arab gangs. That already happens, and it's political, it's not driven by radical Islam. So your denial that we won't see more of this sort of political violence is absurd.
Yes, the likelihood is near 100% that this sort of violence is going to influence European policy on immigration, most likely it will cause authorities to crackdown harder on political support for remigration because authorities will plausibly be able to say that supporting this policy is likely to foment violence. Certainly if that policy were to be pursued, then violence from deportees would be a top concern of that policy. So there's simply no reality in which the prospect of violence from these African and Arab migrants is irrelevant, Muslim or otherwise.
This attack is more relevant because it was motivated by European immigration policy than if it were just radical Islam. It's proof that mass migration irrevocably influences politics and "assimilation" is fundamentally a lie.
The concern over dysgenic spiral isn't the within-group correlation between income and TFR, it's the two things you mentioned: replacement migration and higher TFR of foreign groups in Europe and the United States, and the African population bomb.
Realistically concern about dysgenics is concern about either a) the browning of America or b) the likelihood of a majority black world. And I'm not claiming either to be unconcerning, but upwards mobility still exists in Latin America. Latin America manages to filter its higher IQ individuals into roles that are necessary to the functioning of society.
The problem isn't having a lack of people with an IQ to fill the seat of a middling bureaucrat, or having a high-enough pool of IQ to keep the lights on, it's recognition that the tail ends are sensitive to small shifts in the mean. The high quality leaders, innovators, geniuses, and heroes who have directed Civilization will simply not exist any longer with modest changes in the population-average of these traits. And we will see large growth of the problematic elements on the lowest end of the distribution which, causes decay as well.
Dysgenics is an overhyped problem, just like overpopulation was in the seventies. The real problem? Pensions, tax receipts, instability in central and west african shitholes that have a surplus of young males and no ability to manage agricultural production, general population contraction.
It is exactly the reverse. Dysgenics is an underhyped problem because recognition of HBD is a dependency for assessing the threat. The vast majority of scholars, politicians, and policy-makers don't accept HBD so they have nothing to fear, inherently, from demographic change. Let's say, hypothetically, 100% European admixture no longer exists, and everyone on the continent has a minimum 25% ME and 25% African admixture. You can't recover from that. It's gone forever, and human history is full of many many such cases. You can recover from a tax shortfall.
You might say "that will never happen." But look at how fast demographic change happened in the US, and how you are actually a political pariah if you oppose it! You can't take for granted that Europe will have the resolve to resist migration from the African population bomb, or to even slow down present demographic change of Arab Muslims throughout Europe.
Yes, but I was answering your question. As a father the question of whether my kids will have kids unnerves me much more than the prospect of natural family planning.
And Israel probably isn't trying to decapitate; they're probably not trying to topple the regime (which would lead at best to chaos), but incapacitate it technically.
Israel is absolutely trying to topple the regime, Netenyahu has made this very clear. Reporting is that Israel had a window to assassinate the Ayatollah but was vetoed by Trump, with Israelis claiming it would end the conflict. Trading missile blows was never going to achieve either of Israel's war objectives directly, but escalating to this point forces the hand of the United States to achieve those objectives on behalf of Israel including toppling the regime.
It's going to follow the model of Libya and Syria, with bombing campaigns coincided with arming and fomenting a civil war in Iran. Toppling the regime is without question the goal of Israel, but it remains to be seen if the US is on board with that.
Oh boy, I really stepped in it by defending the HBD stans on this one.
I love you Dase, but casually reading /r/LocalLLaMA, I get the sense there's a huge undercurrent of angst towards OpenAI and the West as a whole. That's understandable, obviously I have a lot of my own criticisms of OpenAI and the West. There are also OpenAI defenders and Western partisans downplaying the significance of DeepSeek's accomplishment. So I think you pattern-matched my defense of the HBD interpretation of the AI race to this other side of what is clearly a fierce debate within that community. Whereas I think I was making a much more modest argument than the coping coming out from the OpenAI defenders.
But, since then it seems OpenAI has formally accused DeepSeek of using outputs from GPT as part of its own training inputs. So here we have quite a literal but also highly symbolic manifestation of the "Chinese Fast-Follower" where the generated output of Western innovation becomes a fundamental input to China catching up and aspirationally exceeding the West. If true, I don't think this would fundamentally challenge the argument you have laid out here but I think it would be good evidence for mine: simply that @2rafa jumped the gun by claiming DeepSeek is bucking the stereotype. It's a pretty stark expression of the stereotype, both literally and figuratively.
I don't say that to downplay inarguable innovations DeepSeek has made in their architecture, the valor of open-sourcing and everything. I basically agree with you there.
It is quite clear to me that DeepSeek was trained from GPT output given the very strange alignment behavior I've observed which would not have been RLHF'd by the Chinese, who don't even use RLHF by my understanding. It's a sort of latent, second-hand alignment inherited from OpenAI. And since I can read the reasoning of DeepSeek, I can see obvious evidence of alignment that is more likely to have been inherited from OpenAI than it was reinforced by the Chinese...
The reason I bring that up is to justify my second defense of my comment: things like HBD and race and racial consciousness are still relevant, maybe more relevant than ever on the eve of AGI. These complex interactions between alignment of model A- ultimately inspired by the moral compass, identities and political agenda of its creators, thereby influencing the model built by the Chinese which is imbued with its own sort of character... we are in the realm where HBD differences are not just relevant for crime stats but for influencing the very nature of the AGI that "wins" the race- its behavior ultimately being influenced or directed by its creators, with their own proclivities and way of thinking and identities downstream from their physical being.
I concede that this may be the last example of "Chinese Fast-Follower" but it is already an example of that even if the Chinese ultimately win the race assuming the LLM-innovation curve we are on now is the one.
Again, 'jews' are a monophyletic group, so identity politics for them makes sense. 'White people' are not
That is the funniest thing you have ever said, European peoples are incredibly more monophyletic than Jews, who themselves are 50% European among Ashkenazis. Even the notion they are descended from the Hebrews is dubious, compared to the more likely possibility of converts in the Roman Empire.
People don't even understand how static European race has been racially for thousands of years. A Spaniard from the south of Spain is more closely related genetically to a Norwegian than to a Moroccan.
Edit: I would also suggest that the intra-European racial animosity among Whites in the US- while I acknowledge that does express itself in different ways even today, it's still lower than it is between Jewish subgroups in Israel. And in any case the perception of Jewish Identity Politics among normies is not at all a function of the supposed monophyletic-ness of Jews, it's a function of the propaganda that has been transmitted to them their entire lives.
I think it's time to admit that the famed Western creativity is mostly verbal tilt plus inflated self-esteem, not an advanced cognitive capability. I'm mildly surprised myself.
Trust me, I hope I'm wrong! But the fact is, as I go throughout my day 99% of the innovations I rely on and impact my daily life and our economy as a whole were invented in the West, and have been refined/manufactured/redesigned/made cheaper in China. Not the other way around, and if it were the other way around surely you would point to a HBD explanation. Yes, I do think there's an HBD basis for that and it would be absurd to deny that, a priori it would be silly to doubt there's an HBD basis for any sort of stark pattern like that one Murray observes. I don't think LLMs are a counterexample of that trend.
It would be like if China made a better and cheaper Tesla than Musk, OK that's great but it doesn't really contradict the observation that these innovations are born in the West and then get adopted and modified/improved in China.
The problem is that there haven't been substantial breakthroughs in LLMs in the West too.
Honestly this feels like a cope to me. There obviously was a breakthrough in LLMs in the West: politically, economically, technologically, culturally. It wasn't born in China, but they obviously have a significant part to play downstream of their undeniable talent pool.
It's hard to say Deepseek would have accomplished these things without drafting on OpenAI's introduction of LLMs to the world, and all of the downstream political, economic, geopolitical, cultural impact resulting from that disruption- and it was OpenAI that did the disrupting there is simply no denying. On the other hand we know OpenAI did not need Deepseek.
Complaints about "race mixing" are a dead end for the white nationalist movement, but I guess that goes with the territory. You can't be a white advocate and also be ok with marrying Indians, but they're not going to convince anyone than JD + Usha is anything other than a lovely couple. This is just one of those things that people have moved on from.
Going off of memory here, but I think as a simple baseline White Women have the highest levels of endogamy compared to other races. It is not a dead-end to provide social or ideological signals to retain, promote, or strengthen that behavior. Judaism does this, although exogamy among Jews is and basically always has been one of their chief concerns, event their current level of endogamy given their small population pool relative to the population is proof of very strong social pressure for endogamy.
It certainly isn't a dead end- anywhere in the world. There needs to be a subtle or esoteric celebration of or pressure for endogamy.
The subtle and esoteric approach is better not only because it's more effective because it does incorporate more people into the fold.
Let's suppose that Trumpism is succeeded by "Vanceism" and there are going to be some major radical reforms to the Right Wing movement. I don't think Vance would oppose elements of a new Right Wing culture that esoterically promote White endogamy just because he married an Indian, in the same way I bet Jews who marry non-Jews are still more sympathetic to the Jewish effort for promoting endogamy. Does anybody think Jared Kushner is opposed to Jewish endogamy just because he married outside? Of course not.
The title "White Advocacy Is for All of Us" is an interesting one, but an Inclusive White Nationalist movement is not as contradictory as it sounds. Think of how strong the support of non-Jews is for Jewish nationalism- Zionism is for Everyone. The cultural and political levers that have accomplished that feat are available to White people as well if they learn how to use them.
Edit:
We're off to a definitional start, but I'd like to see Johnson define "white" in the American context. For example, does he include mixed-race people? Arab Americans? Are Polish Americans as white as those with German ancestry from North Dakota? Is there an argument to be made that certain non-white Americans are more "white" than certain groups of white Americans?
I always find this question to be pretty dishonest because it's never invoked for the advocacy of any other ethnic group. It's only when somebody talks about White Advocacy that everyone pretends they don't know what White is.
Just like "who is Black" or "who is Jewish" would be complicated if you drilled down to the nitty-gritty and tried to provide a comprehensive racial categorization, you just need to look at a PCA plot of human genes to quite clearly see where a "white person" belongs. White Nationalists will even crassly tap the PCA plots when others try to invoke ambiguity over who the Aryans were for example. Even the Nazis had a fairly comprehensive definition of "Aryan" that included all of the identified "six races of Europe" Nordic, Falish, Western, East-Baltic, Eastern, Dinaric as Aryan, and their own map of Europe is remarkably consistent with modern genetic clustering within Europe.
It's simply not a huge obstacle to White Advocacy, you can put the borderline cases in either category, just like the NAACP isn't crippled by being able to unambiguously identify the classification of every single person as black or not black. It's not some intractable problem.
Many White Nationalists do acknowledge racial differentiation within White people, so did the Nazis to various extents. The most common strain is Nordicism, which was held by some Nazi theorists but rejected by Hitler because he wanted to avoided causing racial conflict within Germans who are stratified among different European races. Point being, even Hitler understood "German" as a mixed-race concept, which many people don't know- although all the constituent races were considered Aryan.
I watched most of the film back when Kulak did the review of it, my impression is that it is cherry-picked but the parts that are cherry-picked are true enough. The parts that are true mostly relate to the lowest castes in rural India, although it's arguably an indictment of the entire civilization. High caste Indians though are clearly able to immigrate to the West and not engage in the degenerate behaviors like those portrayed in the film.
The biggest takeaway of the film is that Indians are fundamentally not a sympathetic people, to be charitable. The clannish, nepotistic, sometimes antagonistic behavior of Jews is tolerated because, on some level, the West is sympathetic to them after a long history together, Abrahamic ties, and yes Hollywood propaganda especially. That, and they are White-passing and talented so their engagement in that behavior is often inscrutable and has plausible deniability. The Indians don't have any of that sympathy, lack subtlety, and are not white-passing, so if they come here and act that way it is going to rub people very much the wrong way. The Indians coming here to draft on the preexisting Silicon Valley culture industry, which they did not build, and bringing with them a big dose of nepotism and Hindu nationalism, that is going to trigger a "Racism" response in people who have been thoroughly trained to have sympathy for Blacks and Jews. And then documentaries like this basically validate the racism.
As to whether the film will be important- well I've only heard about it through Kulak's writings and nowhere else. But I would agree that Indians seem poised to reintroduce racism into the Western psyche as greater contact only seems to lead to growing the backlash and a willing audience for things like this.
Borders are meant to provide national security, they aren't meant to be a DEI scheme for those who're already gonna live 99th percentile lives when averaged out over all of humanity.
Borders are absolutely intended to serve the interests of the people represented by the government, and to elevate the interest of those people above foreigners. The gambit of accusing the anti-H1B crowd of "DEI" is rhetorically desperate since it's clearly anti-diversifying the workplace and anti-equitable and anti-inclusive. Yes, you were born abroad so we are going to discriminate against you. If our government does not do that it is illegitimate. And European countries are the only ones in the world that are expected to take the tact you imply here. Is Israel meant to be something other than a "DEI" schema for the Jews?
White American tech workers are not overpaid, it is not their fault that countries like India are totally incapable of generating a civilization that could reciprocate employment opportunity. Instead, you get entitled Indians demanding access to European civilization and pretending it's all about "meritocracy" when their homelands have absolutely nothing to offer Europeans.
Jews being discriminated against less than the average white applicant because they, like, wrote an essay about their Grandma in the Holocaust or something would constitute a nepotistic advantage. The fact that the admissions officers are disproportionately Jewish would obviously lend credence to this.
It's impossible to know because they haven't tracked the data with the same urgency they have tracked the data they have pointed to in order to disenfranchise Whites from their own institutions.
Josh Shapiro seeks to downplay his time as IDF volunteer
Considered by many to be a front-runner, it turns out that Governor Shapiro volunteered for the IDF. Will this sink his chances in being selected by the Harris campaign? Or will his selection be yet another demonstration of Zionist influence in American politics? To have a volunteer for a foreign army as the Vice President, a heartbeat from the presidency as they say, seems unconscionable to me, particularly a volunteer for an army that is at the center of violence which is currently bringing the region to the brink. Enter your predictions.
I predict Shapiro will be selected and these articles about his op-ed now being dropped, on a Friday before Kamala's selection, are an indication that Shapiro has been selected by the Harris campaign and this is meant to "clear the air" before the announcement.
Religion and symbolism are incredibly important in directing the identities and behavior of groups of people. It even directs their biological evolution which can be seen clearly in Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, and Christianity. This was of course also true for ancient European religion. You can see a microcosm of this phenomenon if you just go to a comic con and observe the public rituals venerating fictional comic-book characters. In this way, rationalism does underestimate the importance of symbolism; scientific atheism simply rejects the scientific truth of these stories but stops short of understanding why they were created and what they actually mean. These stories are "real" insofar as they meaningfully influence material reality. The thread you linked relating these myths and rituals such as prayer to "prompt engineering for the subconscious" is apt.
But based on your summary, Mythical Christianity seems to ignore 99% of the text of the Bible and the symbolic analysis of those figures you provided does not at all generalize to the canon as a whole. For example, Yahweh is symbolically a Hebrew tribal god and the Old Testament does not at all fit the interpretation of Yahweh as "love by embracing all things that exist & affording the path to salvation through communion with it". So maybe Mythical Christianity then decides to basically dispense with the Old Testament, well then it's not at all serious about symbolically engaging the New Testament.
We are in darkness symbolically because the prevailing religion in the West is predicated on the literal truth of stories that are no longer believable in this day in age. This "Mythical Christianity" tries to reconcile this but it's self-defeating. It has awareness that Religion is essentially fine-tuning the LLM of collective consciousness, but then tries to circle back and maintain a divine inspiration for those stories.
Mythical Christianity is like becoming aware that the shadows on the wall are just symbolic projections from some artists backstage, but still believing those shadows are divinely influenced to show the audience the truth. So you don't leave the cave, you stay there even though you know they are just shadows being consciously scripted by human beings with their own motives and political agendas.
Said regime hates the US with a burning passion, both for backing the monarchy and for getting in the way of a regional Islamic revolution in the entire region.
I feel like this is so emblematic of the blinders people have. Really, you think Iran hates the US for the Islamic revolution and not the US-Israeli "alliance" and its belligerence towards all Iran's regional neighbors- Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, and so forth. Saying it's about the Islamic revolution just makes me wonder what planet you are living on. Israel has said it will only accept the "Libya model" of nuclear disarmament. The "Libya model" means: you give up your nuclear program, then we topple your regime. The notion Iran just has some irrational hatred towards the US is so ridiculous.
Personally, it makes me understand why some people think Israel is simply America's attack dog, doing the dirty work we don't want to be involved in directly.
Again- living in the land of pure fantasy. Israel got America to do the dirty work in Iraq and Afghanistan and Lebanon and Syria. How many troops did Israel deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan? Zero, despite the loss of thousands of American lives. And now it is plainly obvious that Israel initiated war with Iran with the intent and plan to force the United States to enter the war. They have already requested US assistance to enter the war and admitted they can't achieve their war objectives without the United States.
I agree with the thrust of your post in that I am not isolationist, I understand America as an Empire with imperial interests and obligations. But doing so leads to the obvious conclusion that Zionism is and has been immensely harmful to the imperial interests of the United States, and that toppling the regime in Iran is foremost a play for the interests of International Zionism and not the United States or Europe.
Fuentes has always done an "Hey I'm an Afro-Latino bit." Denying he's a "White Supremacist" is understandable, it's just a slur. It's like if the officer were to ask "are you a heretic?"
He is literally banned from banking. He's not allowed to have a bank account. He's also banned from all credit card and payment processors so he can't even make money selling merchandise like hats. He can only take donations through crypto. Despite never having been convicted of a crime, he's debanked. You do realize even violent criminals are allowed to have bank accounts and process credit card transactions to sell merchandise? He isn't.
How does one get debanked like that without massive, backdoor coordination of influential people?
He was also put temporarily on the No Fly List, although the circumstances of that are disputable since the process is not transparent. He had some crypto that somebody donated to him seized from the government. As mentioned, he's not even able to sell hats because every time he tries to establish a payment processors he gets banned.
There is maximum pressure put onto him, really the whole debanking thing shouldn't even be legal in the first place. It's a novel way to get around the First Amendment by financially ruining somebody for their speech using the power of a heavily regulated industry.
No, it's not at all what Fuentes accuses Jews of doing. Fuentes accuses Jews of presenting as White to levy criticisms of White people or otherwise low-key advocate for Jewish interests. This is a distinctly Jewish behavior. There are no White people who put on a super Jewish aesthetic and present as Jewish to talk to "fellow Jewish people" while actually promoting White interests and criticizing Jews. That doesn't happen and it's not what's happening here, Nick is just invoking his heritage to discredit the accusation of heresy ("White Supremacy").
More options
Context Copy link