coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2hr ago
Maria Farmer was a graduate art student who was pressured to sell her work to Epstein at a discount by her school's dean, Eileen Guggenheim. Giuffre was a spa attendant at the Mar-a-Lago. Jennifer Araoz was recruited outside of her high school.
You do not need to blackmail rich Jewish-American billionaires to support Israel
Well-connected Jews have attempted to blackmail Jewish billionaires before. Rabbi Balkany tried to blackmail Steve Cohen into funding yeshivas. Balkany was famous for being a DC “fixer”, so this may have been par for the course for Balkany. There are some billionaire Jews who are unaligned with Zionism. I recall reading the Wikipedia of a Hollywood talent management owner who had no confirmed philanthropy whatsoever, but for the life of me I can’t remember his name, and there’s also Zuckerberg whose donations to Jewish causes are a pittance relative to his philanthropy.
The substantial majority of those alleged to have been victims of Epstein's supposed blackmail scheme were Zionist Jews
Source? If Epstein is meeting with Zionist Jews in private, this is not evidence that he is blackmailing them. Do you think he used a separate private jet to do this or a separate island? Even if they were raping the girls, do you think Mossad would prefer this to happen under the auspices of a Mossad handler, or do you think they’d prefer that they try it elsewhere? You have no evidence that the majority of blackmail victims were Zionists. The only confirmed blackmail case is Bill Gates.
He’s a liar
This is like saying James Bond is a liar. Epstein lying to his clients about why he’s loaded and what connections he has is exactly what he would do if he were Mossad. This cannot be used as evidence that he was unprofessional or untrustworthy, or that he wasn’t Mossad.
You are also ignoring very important evidence:
-
Despite having connections to Israel, none of Epstein’s victims were Jewish. Even Jerry Seinfeld was dating a 17yo Jewish girl at this time. I imagine this will be excused away on account of Jewish girls not being as drawn to wealthy men, but Instagram attests to this not being the case.
-
According to Maria Farmer, a victim, there was a theme of Jewish supremacism that pervaded Epstein’s circle, among Epstein / Ghislaine Maxwell / Eileen Guggenheim. “You’re nothing because you’re not Jewish”, “useless white girl”, “anyone who was not Jewish, the way they spoke about them was really horrifying”, “it was every one of them, the way they spoke”. If Epstein’s circle was Jewish supremacist, this would explain his link to Mossad.
-
You are forgetting that Wexner was linked to Mossad by way of the Mega Group, and Epstein’s connections were throughout the Mega Group.
The spy said he was tasked by the Israeli ambassador to get a copy of a secret letter given to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat by then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher for a source identified only as “MEGA.” “The ambassador wants me to go to MEGA to get a copy of this letter,” the Israeli spy said, to which the superior replied, “This is not something we use MEGA for.”
The counterintelligence report was an embarrassment for the NSA and Israel sought to deflect the identification of MEGA by claiming it referred not to an individual but to the CIA. The leak set off a major hunt for MEGA, believed to be an Israeli mole in the State Department and other agencies.
Then, in 1998, The Wall Street Journal solved the mystery. The newspaper published a story on U.S. titans of industry working for Jewish philanthropy that called themselves the “Mega Group.” It included 20 of America’s wealthiest and most influential Jewish businessmen who met twice a year.
Among the members of the group were Hollywood director Steven Spielberg, Seagram Chairman Edgar Bronfman Sr. and former hedge fund manager Michael Steinhardt. The group was founded in 1991 by two billionaires: Charles Bronfman, Edgar’s brother and Seagram co-chairman, and Mr. Wexner.
Also, 4. the attorney handling Epstein’s 2008 case was told that Epstein belonged to intelligence: In 2017, "a former senior White House official" reported that Alexander Acosta, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida who had handled Epstein's criminal case in 2008, had stated to interviewers of President Donald Trump's first transition team: "I was told Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and to 'leave it alone'", and that Epstein was "above his pay grade".
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
15hr ago
It would redistribute from “all consumers” to “lower / middle class”, because more competitive lower wage job openings would have a domino effect in that whole class but not above it. In effect, it redistributes from rich to poor and middle class. There’s a cut-off, because our professional classes seldom consider managing a retail store or something instead of entering finance or law. But the retail store manager had considered being a teacher, the teacher had considered working in hospitality, the […] down to agricultural workers. Any small scale model you imagine would show this effect. The same happened with the peasantry after the plague, when the number of agricultural workers decreased so they could compete for wages, but there was a social cut-off preventing nobles and traders from ever considering any work beneath their social level.
The eminent refused to take on menial roles, not because they could not perform these “unskilled” tasks, but because to do so would be unworthy of their social rank, and it was unthinkable to abandon that social and labor hierarchy. Farm work was peasant work, whether performed by serfs bound to a particular manor, tenant farmers or wage laborers hired by the year or the season. But the staggering mortality of the Black Death reduced this previously sufficient peasant population sharply enough to create a severe labor shortage.
This is because we have an enormous amount of wealth “stuck” in the upper class. You can unstuck it by making them pay more for things, sending the payments to those poorer. There was a brief period where this was done with programmers during the dot com boom, but now there is an excess of domestic programmers and also they are importing overseas semi-slave labor.
your argument implies that minimum wage increases are a pure upside policy
If you have too many workers it would leave many unemployed. Hence the whole “deport 22 million and stop letting more in”.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
So your answer to the question of how White Americans can compete with semi-slave illegal workers is
-
Go ask around a Waffle House
-
Look around on Craigslist for illegal housing
-
(Ignore remittance payments)
-
(Ignore cultural and early life influences involving manual labor, eg that some of these Hondurans have been doing it since 12)
-
(Ignore crucial cultural factors related to social wellbeing like finding a wife)
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2d ago
There are reasons to “uplift the in-group” and you need to articulate why this is an innoble goal in and of itself. They are citizens; they have more in common with you if you are a wealthy white person; for evolutionary reasons, it is natural to have an interest in uplifting those that are similar to yourself; for reasons of national security, you do not want so many citizens who believe that the American project is not worth investing in; they may have a higher IQ than Hondurans; they may have different levels of compassion or a different taste in aesthetics which may be informed by genetics.
Is there any wonder high-income whites are moving away from the Republican Party
College-educated White males lean toward Trump. It’s just women who shifted a lot toward Harris.
Working-class whites, too, don't want their sons working casual labor
This may have something to do with the millions of migrants brought in to undercut wages, the exact thing we’re talking about. No, you can’t ever compete with them, because —
-
Remittance payments mean that they can afford a higher quality life while temporarily living a lower quality life in America
-
They are raised with values that are de-socialized by our ridiculous mandatory education culture, and this isn’t the kind of thing you can arbitrarily re-socialize at will
-
They often live in illegal accommodations, requiring less funds, and these require a network that natives aren’t a part of
-
They live within a culture where the women expect to marry laborers
I’m also not sure if you’re agreeing with him that it would increase wages, and just disagree that this is important, or if you think it won’t increase wages.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
You’re missing the entire substance of the argument, which is that the reason the QoL of agriculture is too low for natives is because of the migrants. If you deport them all, ag needs workers, ag must increase QoL, it looks more like WOOFing which white people love doing.
If I could immediately hire foreign English-speakers as paralegals, importing them in and keeping them in cramp accommodations and ensure they are afraid of leaving the job because finding work as an illegal is tricky, the paralegal market in America would implode. There would be no American paralegals left. So the American paralegal cannot compete with the migrant worker driven paralegal industry.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2d ago
I think uplifting the in-group by getting them jobs sewing bras, picking fruit, hauling equipment, and digging ditches in the rain is pathetic.
Why? It works incredibly well for China, who has seen consistent gains in QoL. It worked well throughout the history of the West. Sewing bras is more conducive to wellbeing than stacking them on a shelf. Picking fruit is so Edenic that it’s the first recorded activity of humanity. In what world would “picking fruit” be pathetic? I think you are having trouble dissociating the image you have of these things now, with what they would look like if employers didn’t have a semi-slave class. There’s a farm near me where people — college-educated, white, smart — sign up to plant and reap for free. Because in return they get free room and board, and most importantly a social environment filled with other young white people. They work quite hard, then they drink in the evenings and dance and fuck and make music and so on. This is exactly what agricultural work was for nearly all of history. Not for the slaves, of course, but for the non-enslaved.
I'm not concerned that these Guatemalans coming across the border are going to out-compete whites because they have a "better" culture.
Well you ignored all of my points regarding this. If I also ignored all of the points I would agree with you.
What can we learn about optimal cultural leadership in light of the 2013-2021 social justice period?
-
Religious leaders did not adequately stand up against the mass movement. Although many conservatives see value in religious institutions as a cultural defense, mainstream Catholicism and Protestant denominations did not substantively address the social justice craze. In some cases they placated or even promoted it.
-
Academics did not adequately argue against the mass movement. It is not the case, for instance, that the experts in western history, literature, or philosophy were more likely to argue against the mass movement in any substantive way. This is problematic: if learning the best of western culture does not lead to protecting said culture in any genuine sense when it matters the most, then how great is the actual utility of such learning?
-
The main “public critics” of the period have little in common except that they were passionate and somewhat neurotic men. Yarvin, Peterson, Weinstein, Scott Adams(?). My memory of who was most dominant in this period is somewhat hazy, maybe someone with a better memory can correct me. There were more psychologists among critics than philosophers. You had people like Stefan Molyneux passionately criticizing the proto-movement well before its zenith. His Twitter attests to his neuroticism.
-
Random people online were able to sense a threat that leading experts weren’t able to sense, and made arguments that leading academics did not make. Why?
It’s difficult to come away with clear takeaways. IMO: (1) it is beneficial to increase anonymous discussion, as this laid the groundwork for future criticism, and allowed for arguments to spread which would otherwise be banned. (2) It may be essential to increase the number of passionate and neurotic men, over men with other skills, as the major critics were more often passionate and somewhat crazy. A “passionate” temperament is occasionally inaccurate, and may result in behavior that leads institutions to weed them out — but their utility in sensing and addressing threats compensates for the occasional bout of craziness.
There is a funny review of Jordan Peterson from 2013, possibly the first time anyone commented about his personality online. It was made on the anonymous literature board of 4chan in 2013, long before his rise to fame.
he's craaaaazy. he so crazy. I had a class immediately following one of his lectures like, his was from 1:15-3:15 in Room 101., and my different classes was from 3:25-5:25 in Room 101 too. ok? So... he would totally bug out if someone opened the door early. Like, screaming fits and stuff. my prof (who was just a postdoc and wasn't going to get tenured at u of t) encouraged us all to fuck with his head because in addition to being a rageaholic spaz, peterson would also leave the podium really dirty. also, he lectures in a cape for some reason. he went on this ontario talk show with his daughter talking about how they're both clinically depressed bla bla, I feel bad that she's his dad, that must be hard to deal with
Editing for clarity
The question is geared toward users who believe that wokeness constituted a threat — to institutions, America, truth, etc. I suppose there are some users who do not believe that wokeness was a threat. I can’t recall seeing such a comment in years on this forum, but if you’re such a user, you are of course welcome to comment and critique in any way that you’d like. Feel free to comment on the premise, the points, a tangent.
-
Why were the individuals leading the fight against wokeness outside of the traditional framework of understanding and designating cultural authority? The study of philosophy, the study of history, the study of great works, the study and authority of religion — these things did not create any of the influential “fighters” publicly arguing against wokeness. If they couldn’t detect, grasp, and eliminate the threat, then how important should we consider these pursuits and domains? Why did they fail when they were needed? Are these pursuits less valuable in moral formation than generally conceived? Many conservatives believe that these mainstays of Western education are important to study; yet the students of these were impotent against the threat. There are conservatives who studied these, and who teach these.
-
”Institutional capture” doesn’t factor in here because there are non-woke members of these domains, perhaps a few percent or a few tens of percents, but none of them were to be found among the influential critics of wokeness.
-
It appears to me that temperament played a larger role than anything else in deciding who was instrumental in tackling the threat. Do you agree? Do you disagree? From Peterson to Musk, the great “defenders” against it were passionate and somewhat crazy personalities. They cried publicly. They had strange personal lives. If that’s the case, should temperament be considered a greater deal in the selection of authority?
I think this clarifies. There’s a mismatch between “the study of Western things leads to great moral conduct!” and the reality of how everyone behaved during a mass movement which veered toward moral hysteria. “Traditional education” did not avail anything. This is interesting, provided of course that you agree with the premise.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
Then consider Japan, which only employs 50k migrants in its agricultural and forestry sector.
People who have the option to be laborers in cities will prefer that to being agricultural laborers
And if there is an absence of agricultural workers, the wages for agriculture go up, meaning the conditions become as desirable as WWOOFing, meaning people return to work in agriculture.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
The Middle Class already does crappy work for a living. I don’t think farming is grunt work — if I had a choice I would sooner enslave the financiers than the farmers. I would rather import Chinese and Indians to take the jobs of White financiers than the farmers, because that is truly innoble work. The Western Christian legacy is considering this work as innoble, as beneath human dignity. Even programming demeans humanity more than “picking fruit”. Look at how they write on Twitter. They are halfways to the singularity and I pray that their wishes come sooner and they become fully machine.
a few Oaxacans and Hondurans
Right, it’s obviously an incredibly larger amount than this which can easily make the White population dwindle to 5% by the end of the millenia.
better for everyone
Not at all. Actually, there’s a good argument to be made that deportations could increase all the wages of the lower middle class. But if we’re really basing things off of “better for everyone” we need to talk about waste among the .1% income level.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
They do it for years at a time. It’s called WWOOFing. Lots of the scions of high human capital humans do it.
Perhaps you find it hard to believe because, like the person above, you can’t imagine that QoL and wages for farmwork will increase if the semi-slave laborers are deported. When conditions improve, more people will be willing to do it, and more places will look like WWOOFing.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
And the Japanese? How about the Japanese in the 80s?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
requires non-free or at least desperate labor to get done in sufficient quantities
What is your excuse for why China is able to do it while having a one standard deviation higher median IQ over America? Even Japan does not utilize as many foreign laborers as America.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
Do you think that the Honduran or Mexican illegal tenant housing advertises their roommate openings in Craigslist, in English? No. This is absurd to believe. Especially not around farming operations.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
My comment on WWOOF was made to argue that White people — even some of the pristine “human capital” that sociopaths autists certain people value over others — are willing to do genuinely difficult farming for long hours when the social conditions are right. One WWOOFer I know is the son of two high-powered lawyers. I know someone who runs a place and she’s a very intelligent pianist. They would never in a million years do it if they were only around Hondurans who barely spoke English, and if there were zero breaks and harsh foremen watching them. Just like, in the South, not many White people were willing to “compete” with slaves in agricultural work.
Re 1: WWOOF is usually done for many months at a time, probably no more than a year at a time, but you have WWOOFers who do it for 5+ years along different locations as a way to travel for free. Why wouldn’t agricultural work look more like WWOOFing in the absence of a semi-slave class? Do the Chinese working in agriculture today have the same conditions as 1950? Of course not, because wages and benefits have increased. Really we’re just asking, “how badly can we get away with reducing QoL for the poorest using semi-slave labor” which is the wrong question to ask in the face of Jeff Bezoses.
Re 4: I know one place that sells lots of their products at a local market. I know another which is a kind of co-op farm where local people “invest” in a portion of the crops. I am probably describing this poorly.
I am not saying that WWOOFing is the future, I am saying that agricultural work will look more like WWOOFing in the absence of semi slave labor.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
We should make national policy decisions based on the projected wellbeing of citizens. That would include the psychological theories of Csikszentmihalyi, which shows that certain occupational activities are more conducive to happiness.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
It’s crucial to understand why this isn’t the case. The mechanic competes in wages with the fruit picker (in an economy with an absence of illegal labor), not directly but transitively, because the mechanic competes with somebody who competes with somebody who […] competes with the fruit-picker. Increasing opportunity for the lower class increases it for the lower-middle, which increases it for the middle. Everyone’s QoL and wages increase. Food prices increase, but wages increase higher than they for the lower and middle. It won’t increase wages for the upper white collar professionals, because there’s a strict barrier where they simply would never consider entering a trade or working as a chef even if wages in these places rose considerable, which is because of the class association. (And remember remittance payments: 66 billion yearly just for Mexico!)
They would love when the price of consumer goods go up if their wages go up as well.
What is the source that they fled for work at factories as opposed to increases in efficiency of agriculture and an absence of employment driving them to work in factories?
Any amount of physical labor is backbreaking if you have a supply of illegal labor that you can abuse. Even retail would involve an inhospitable amount of bending and lifting if the employer could abuse them without the public seeing.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
In the 2016 and 2020 elections, white non-evangelicals with college degrees and even white non-evangelicals without college degrees supported Biden by a wide margin
The arbitrary filtering of one of the largest religious groups is silly. The shift to D is mostly among women, not the men. If you’re like me, and think politics should be reserved for the male-brained, women shifting D after a media propaganda blitz that utilized emotional propaganda about victimhood is not at all persuasive in regards to any trend that matters.
less than 50% of Republicans are now in favor of decreasing immigration, down from 88% last year.
This question doesn’t tell us anything, because it is in regards to the “present level of immigration”, under Trump who has been (at least presenting himself as) deporting illegals. The average has no idea that the country plans to import so many Indians. The average voter has no idea about the statistics related to yearly immigration, like, at all. You’re asking them about vibes. Shame on Gallop here.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3d ago
As our resident holocaust expert: have there been any cases of elderly camp guards admitting to the holocaust? We should expect that some percent of elderly camp guards would admit to a bunch of traumas and atrocities once they develop age-related declines in inhibition. I imagine most of this is written in German, but I could only find cases of the opposite: elderly camp guards losing their inhibition and then expressing a denial of the event.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
7.77 million tons of rice production annually isn’t trivial and neither is 77,000 tons of green tea
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
If it were viable to employ illegal workers as baristas, you would be shocked at how horrible the QoL for baristas is too. Have you seen how bad the QoL is for soldiers? It’s because they don’t have a choice!
Wow, horrible, picking berries. They are performing literally the same physical movements that a grocery stocker performs, except the objects are lighter, they aren’t breathing in microplastics all day, the ground beneath them isn’t concrete, they don’t hear horrible pop music 24/7… how could anyone do this?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
10d ago
The suffering of bees may be important to mitigate (I think that’s true — wouldn’t you care if someone were purposely buying bees only to kill them?) but the author must convince us —
-
the suffering of bees is of such high importance that it is worth writing on it to convince people to place a burden on themselves. (Unlikely. There is worse suffering taking place even if we consider only bees, like the effects of pesticides. It’s not worth discourse hours).
-
that writing something so unintuitive that people ignore what else you write is morally worth the future drawbacks of loss of influence.
-
that the suffering of bees is so important that we should forego the very term of pleasure. This is problematic to his utilitarian ambitions, because our motivation to live well and expand our wellbeing is tied to whether we are able to experience wholesome pleasures in life. If people feel better from a spoonful of honey, not only does their own suffering decrease, but (1) they have energy to reduce the suffering of others and (2) the reason to love bees over wasps is brought to mind.
-
bees are not designed to be destroyed by mammals, given that bears and raccoons destroy them in the wild, and given that fish are designed to be eaten by other fish. If the author does not believe that nature’s design should be respected, then his interest should be ensuring that killer whales aren’t able to kill dolphins in the ocean. But wouldn’t only a senseless person have a problem with the killer whale enjoying his design and eating dolphins, who significantly more intelligent than bees? So the suffering of bees is within our design — we should only guarantee that the suffering isn’t excessive, like with some easy regulations about whether all the young bees are killed off after the honey is made.
There’s possibly an element of Jewish thought in this reasoning + Singer’s. Because there’s an eagerness to heap up behavioral proscriptions, however numerous; there’s the love of rules and the eagerness to find extrapolations to the rules which defy normal intuition; there’s the arbitrary basis to begin morality; and there’s the obsession with trivia and edge cases over more substantive issues. That’s immaterial, but just interesting to note — it’s possible some of Matthew’s moral intuitions come from a different traditional framework.
Jane Doe #200 was told (or given hints) that Epstein was Mossad, but she was dating him. This was not something casually mentioned to a victim.
Hoffenberger was told that Epstein was in “intelligence” and engaged in “blackmail”, but this is when Hoffenberger was a fellow Jew engaged in Epstein-level fraud. He went to jail and converted to Christianity and I suppose had a road to Damascus moment and told the truth:
Ari Ben Menashe, himself a former Mossad spy, recounts that he was told directly by Maxwell that Epstein was Mossad (or military intelligence): [2]
I’m not sure of anyone else that Epstein told was Mossad. In fact, this itself is telling if true. If he is hanging around a Jewish network, he’s involved in Mega even, and he’s going around telling everyone that he’s X and Y, but he selectively omits the very lie that he would naturally tell, which is that he’s Mossad…. If he’s just lying all the time, surely he would tell the victims and the gentiles that he is Mossad. Why only tell the well-connected Jews? Would he really risk lying to two Mossad agents about being Mossad (Maxwell and Menashe)? If I’m Epstein and I’m a random American guy who loves to lie, and I love my Jewish identity, I would be telling everyone that I have deals with Israel — I wouldn’t tell them every lie but this one.
More options
Context Copy link