___
5d ago
The Jewish political machine organizes itself through an oppressor/oppressed narrative, which makes Holocaust denial somewhat analogous to disputing the King's bloodline.
Because we live in a progressive-dominated society where these narrative frameworks carry legitimizing weight, if you view yourself in opposition to this machine then opposing these becomes the pragmatic approach regardless of their veracity.
___
1mo ago
To add, Sam Walton continued to walk around his stores in his overalls assisting customers during the 80's after becoming a billionaire.
Latinos are largely deracinated
This is not true. Latinos express their race through their nationalities, the same way Europeans did in older times. You don't see a coherent concept of an overarching Race from them for similar reasons that a White European Identity would have been strange to a European commoner in 1600 - "I am French, what do you mean?"
The Latinx and La Raza stuff is a failed effort to force a singular Hispanic Identity by woke types, but that doesn't mean they don't share a common identity or that one won't form more naturally on it's own as they become a larger cultural block. Younger hispanic kids, IME, do see themselves an being in an ingroup opposed to everyone else, despite longstanding hostilities between some of their origin countries.
___
4mo ago
An attack where one party has not agreed is considered a self defense situation and there is no culture that has existed that I'm aware of where escalation on the part of the defender is considered unmasculine.
Your example of a shove can either be
- A challenge, in which case pulling a knife as a prelude to a mutual dual is a reasonable response (in earlier more masculine cultures), and an example of the sort of situation the Bowie knife was invented for
- The opening attack of an aggressor seeking bodily harm against an unwilling victim, in which case attacking them with a knife in order to force them to stop would be a reasonable response pretty much anywhere throughout history, excepting case of great physical disparity such as a small woman attacking a large man.
___
4mo ago
Bowie would have never drawn his knife to "protect" himself from a shove.
The Bowie knife was a dueling knife intended to settle such disputes, yes. What are you talking about? If you are referring only to a self defense situation, pulling a knife or gun is a reasonable response. You aren't obligated to stop a knife attack only with another knife, nor are you obligated to stop an unarmed attack only with your fists.
___
4mo ago
Except when the culture was more masculine they solved the problem by simply allowing the use of both.
This is a non sequitur. The person you are responding to isn't claiming the victory was illegitimate, he's making a claim about the level of force that was needed in order to win.
___
6mo ago
So when you protest the actions of, say, the Chinese government in West Turkestan/Xinjiang, the appropriate action is to vandalize the local Szechuan takeaway joint just because it happens to be run by a coethnic? That's stupid.
Sure, this is a good point and I'll concede that the first link you posted was reasonable evidence.
The two window smashing examples are still very weak. There are many reasons a business might sustain that kind of vandalism, - an interrupted burglar, a homeless drug addict, a irate employee or customer, etc. This kind of thing is not uncommon and it should not be a surprise that the target would be a Jewish owned business from time to time. The dubious "eve of Kristallnacht" connection does not strengthen the case - the sort of person who might smash a building is very unlikely to even know what that is.
In the case of the 4th example, we don't need to speculate. We know the reason wasn't because it happened to be run by a coethnic, because we know who the culprits were and they told us exactly why that specific business was being targeted.
For your second paragraph I find the argument sympathetic, "tokens in the anti-zionist movement providing identitarian PR cover" is a reasonable perspective to me, but the implication proposed by the Democratic Party at Prayer article seems to be that these same Jewish progressives would be against the removal of Jewish spaces on campus or if the Jewish identity itself was under attack, so the DiAngelo analogy isn't wholly isomorphic in a way that actually matters to Satanistgoblin's original claim.
1: Historic L.A. Jewish deli hit with antisemitic graffiti
Okay, but the graffiti shown says "Free Gaza", "How many dead in the name of Greed?" and "Israel's only religion is capitalism". All of these are congruent with the claim that "America enabling Israel's treatment of Gaza is what's being protested."
2: D.C. kosher restaurant vandalized on Kristallnacht anniversary
I don't see a culprit mentioned or any evidence for a motive given, is it your contention that Leftists are commemorating Nazi events by targeting Jewish businesses? Does that even seem like it would be on the top 5 Occam's Razor reasons for a window getting smashed in crime filled DC?
3: Brick thrown through window of popular Jewish deli in Tarzana
Nearly identical incident as 2, except this time in LA.
The owner, David Laredo, told Eyewitness News he isn't sure whether it was a targeted attack.
"It's possible with... what's going on today everywhere," he said. "It's possible... but nothing was left that indicates that it was a hate crime... I don't know."
4: Antisemitic mob targets Jewish falafel restaurant in Philadelphia
These protests were started by employees (who presumably aren't anti-semitic enough to not work at a falafel restaurant) who were upset that the owners - Israeli citizens - were donating restaurant profits directly to Isreal. Link
5: 'Same as the KKK': New SJP-affiliated group works to remove Hillel from US campuses
Subtitle:
Drop Hillel claims to be campaigning for non-affiliated Jewish spaces without Zionist connections.
Drop Hillel calls itself a “Jewish-led campaign... advocating for divestment from Hillel” that wishes to “weaken Hillel’s grip on Jewish campus life.”
The call is coming from inside the house.
___
6mo ago
This would be consistent with the Wong Kim Ark ruling
Wong did have connections and loyalties to his homeland though. He had a Chinese wife and children who were living in China at the time.
___
6mo ago
That's fair. A Yankee-Doodle style "We are taking it back" approach to has been successful in the past for sure.
Do you have concrete examples in mind?
our resident witches
This is a good one. Scott's Seven Zillion concept has normalized deprecatory terms towards those people that would be auto-banned if used against other groups.
Do you think Cirrus is a witch?
___
7mo ago
It is far better, morally speaking, to be a virtuous loser than a vicious winner.
This philosophy, like the Amish, can at best only exist surrounded by the guns of those who don't share it.
___
7mo ago
The obvious play here is for Trump to gift Netanyahu a gold plated copy of the The Protocols. As a joke, of coarse.
___
7mo ago
The irony here is that the Nazi's themselves were a larp of another historical group. Perhaps it might help clear up the confusion if we started referring to the latter group as Neo-Neo-Romans instead.
___
10mo ago
There's a widespread belief held by urban Jews that rural whites areas are heavily anti-Semitic (which is untrue), I would guess that it's probably related.
___
1yr ago
53 Year old Brian Malinowski was killed in an ATF raid. He was a director at the Clinton National Airport in Little Rock. (This airport was named for the Clintons but is unconnected to them personally so we can put our tinfoil hats away for now.) We have no body camera footage of the shooting, they claimed he fired at them and they fired back during their 6am raid.
The search warrant, partially redacted, was released to the public. In it we find they raided him due to his frequent activity of buying and selling firearms without the required FFL licence.
Selling your private gun collection without involving the state is something that has been legal in the US forever, but buying and selling as a business is not. The law is written such that Grandma may sell her deceased husbands musket collection without fear of state reprisal, but you cannot buy bulk AR's and distribute them to the local gang for a big profit. What counts as a business? How many guns can you sell from your collection before you cross the threshold? How fast can you turn around and sell a gun after you buy without fear of breaking the law? This law is ambiguous on this, it is what politicians have referred to as "The gun show loophole". The idea being that you can take your personal firearms and sell them at a gunshow booth (or anywhere) without having to do a background check on potential buyers.
Brian Malinowski is a novel case. He bought and sold 150 guns over a two year period, some of them sold fairly quickly after he purchased them. This was high enough to get him on the ATF's watch list - they tailed his vehicle and observed him at his job at the airport. His job seems unconnected to his firearm hobby as the warrant never accuses him of smuggling through the airport. It heavily implies this is what was happening, mentioning the airport frequently throughout the warrant, but they never suggest that he actually did. It does, however, mention his selling his collection through booths at a gun show to undercover ATF agents.
So what of downstream crimes that have occurred from Malinowski selling these firearms "off the books"? Here the ATF's case seems very weak. Out of the 150 guns sold, only 3 have been directly tied to crimes stated in the warrant. The crimes? All three are marijuana possession during routine traffic stops (marijuana still being very illegal and heavily policed in Arkansas). Personally I think this is extremely petty and very favorable to the late Malinowski's case. There is one other mention of an undercover informant in Canada having a photo of a firearm with a serial number that ties back to Malinowski, with no additional details given.
In my opinion, I believe Malinowski was technically legally in the right despite the high volume of sales. There is no indication he was attempting to profit from selling to criminals/gangs etc. Many people collect firearms and enjoy buying and selling them as others would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on motorcycles or pokemon cards. There is no law in Arkansas against purchasing a handgun and deciding you don't like it for whatever reason and selling it to your neighbor the next day. That said, Malinowski is reported to have been somewhat of an asshole by those who knew him, having previously lost a lawsuit in 2018 in which he sued someone over a mailbox in front of an empty lot after confronting them pretending to be an attorney. Given this and that he was on record stating that his activity was legally protected private collection sales when pressed, and the ATF suggests he continued his activity after he knew they were tailing him, I think it's highly probable he knew what he was doing and was intentionally skirting the boundary of the law in order to provoke a legal confrontation.
This is a good culture war inflection point in the gun control debate. Leftists can point this case as an example that the Gun Show Loophole is in fact, real, and is being exploited by so-called hobbyists selling bulk firearms. Rightist can point to rogue federal agencies abusing ambiguous laws in order to infringe 2A rights by routing around political representation.
*Disclaimer: IANAL etc.
___
1yr ago
hill people proud ignorance and shiftless rebellion against anyone who might have gotten any of that big city 'lernin.
Is this sort of demeaning caricature where we mock the accent of our outgroup and misapply the things they believe acceptable now? Because while the response you tagged wasn't great, at least he wasn't "we wuz kangz n sheeit" posting.
___
2yr ago
You might be interested to know that in 1953, the then world record grizzly bear was killed by 63 year old women with a single shot .22 held together with duct tape.
___
2yr ago
Someone suggested to me they believed switching from revolvers to pistols in the police force was a mistake, that having fewer, higher caliber bullets ready to shoot had a psychological effect on police officers that translated to fewer missed shots, fewer bystander fatalities, and more deliberate, accurate shooting on behalf of the officers.
I've never been able to find any concrete data on this, and I'm not sure if it's true or just something the person made up after watching Dirty Harry.
___
2yr ago
Sure, that's a valid point, but in practice recognition is largely enforced through whatever borders a polity is capable of maintaining militarily (or having another nation maintain on their behalf). South Vietnam and South Korea are good examples of this playing out post WWII, their differing outcomes being a result of how their respective wars played out. Had Russia enough power to project their will, it's not clear to me that the rest of the world wouldn't just quietly drop recognition of Ukraine, since it wouldn't serve any benefit to them. (Thankfully for Eastern Europe, this doesn't seem to be the case.)
For the CSA's part, every other country remained neutral. CSA had powerful trading partners in Britain and France and they opted to wait to see how it played out, not wanting to upset trade deals with an emerging nation in the event of a CSA victory, or hurting relations with the Union by backing a rebellion in the event of a CSA loss. This is a similar diplomatic stance that the US held towards Europe as well, attempting to remain neutral as possible in 19th century European wars.
___
2yr ago
My point is that we didn't end up in a world that was opposed to boat tipping on principle, but rather other effects came into play that made tipping the boat a generally undesirable activity. In other words, I think you are mistaking description for prescription.
The evidence for this is that modern society venerates people who conquered and annexed their outgroup using very similar rhetoric to Putin, and I believe they would very likely do it again if the situation allowed for it.
___
2yr ago
The point can be made without bringing Lincoln into it. If you were to poll liberals and ask "Nation A finds out their neighbor Nation B is has been raiding and enlsaving members of a foreign nation. Do you think it is morally acceptable for Nation A to invade and annex B in order to prevent this from occuring?" My priors here are that you'd get an overwhelming yes, in direct contradiction to the claim Steffari made.
Don't project lack of principles onto other people with this sort of flat characterization.
Sorry, I meant the general you, since you are arguing on behalf of a society that does think those things. I don't doubt that your personal views are more nuanced. What I don't understand about your point of view is whether you believe secession was simply the incorrect mechanism for the Southerners to use or if you hold a more general stance that the Southerners should not be allowed to self govern (but the Ukranians can).
Intersectional street cred is not granted based on legitimate claims, but effective opposition to white heritage Americans - a largely philosemetic group without whose support the Jewish political machine would not be able to operate.
More options
Context Copy link