hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
A short introduction to Liberal Zionist rhetoric, and why they usually just keep quiet.
A day ago a very interesting interview between Krystal Ball and Rep. Adam Smith took place. The topic of contention was Israel.
tl;dr: Openly defending Israel as a jewish ethnostate is OK as a democrat.
The interview starts off cordial enough. Adam establishes himself as the typical neo-liberal everyman who can sympathize with the plight of the downtrodden AND the military industrial complex (What a guy!) whilst Krystal fronts the now typical faux radical left 'not everyone in the DSA is insane, actually. At least I'm not' media personality that goes hard on the issues that pull on the heart strings.
Where things go south unexpectedly is around the 11:30 mark. Krystal compliments Adam on his recent strong voting pattern against aid to Israel, specifically the Thomas Massie amendment, and asks him to explain his thought process and change of heart. Adam waffles on a bit about his opposition to the Netanyahu government, a typical Liberal Zionist talking point, but then suddenly veers off the rails:
So you know if you have a situation where Israel is threatened on all sides and, I know it's like well no it's not saying they don't have right to exist, just they have to let all the Palestinians back in and then effectively the Jews no longer control Israel. Okay.
This is not out of context, this is the argument. Yes, Liberal Zionists are democrats. Yes, they are against the Netanyahu government. Yes, they believe in the concept of Israel as an explicit ethnostate. He believes it is not possible for Palestinians to represent jews in Israel. Two ethnic groups can not coexist. They are definitionally in a zero sum game of survival. That's the establishment democrat Liberal Zionist view for jews in Israel.
Understandably, Krystal catches on to this Neo Nazi Zionist talking point that's somehow found its way into her otherwise progressive liberal leftist studio:
Well, I'm sorry, but don't you like equal rights for all ethnicities? Like, Something that you in theory support as a Democrat?
Adam replies, a little more flustered than before:
Well, well, well, sure, but, but the, the practical result of this is if you say there should be equal rights within Israel, but if Israel allows [equal rights] they cease to exist as a country.
Mein Kamerad... Krystal replies:
No, they cease to exist as a Jewish ethnostate. That's very different from ceasing to exist as a country.
To which Adam retorts:
Oh, come on, come on!
Which is the extent of his argumentation that isn't a soft recital of the many permutations of ethno nationalism argued for on the old /r/AltRight, RIP.
Krystal, to her credit as a host, tries to segue this into something else and asks why the US taxpayer should care about a jewish ethno supremacist project in the middle East, which Mike Huckabee would have been happy to answer. But Adam can't really seek refugee in the Scofield Bible so he doubles down on Neo Nazism Zionism for jews:
We, we, we, we got to, we got to drill down on that. Okay. Okay. All right. They cease to exist as an ethnostate. So basically, Jews would live in Palestine and be governed by the Palestinians, by the Arabs. Okay. And, and maybe that's just what has to happen in the minds of some people, but understand the consequences of it. Understand why Israel was created in the first place. So that the Jews would have some place to go. Okay. And to just blithely say, "Well, yeah, it'll go away and it'll be fine." So that's point.
Well OK.
To all the Adam Smiths of the world. Why is having an ethnostate good for the jews but not anyone else? Why don't jews benefit from diversity in their western style open democratic society like everyone else? Why doesn't the magic freedom dirt in Israel transform your third worlders into engineers and scientists like it allegedly does everywhere else in the west, who would be just as jewish as anyone else in a few years. How is it possible to represent anything the Democrats have represented the world over and then believe this for Israel in the back of your brain?
Adam arrived to this interview ready to earnestly make the point that ethnonationalism is good for jews. He wanted to say this and he did. And I get it. Because he's not wrong. It's just that he believes it's wrong for everyone else. Most Liberal Zionists must understand that this contradiction is impossible to defend, which is probably why they don't talk about it at all. Hell, I'm starting to believe they can't even conceive of it. The Dual Morality is so strong it probably doesn't even register as a contradiction. But to hear it from the horses mouth is flabbergasting.
This statement might be even worse than the current state of academia.
'We feel that it might be of concern to those it might affect towards matters of their interest that it perchance could perturb them to stumble upon the consequences of our actions biting us in the ass.'
They shook hands with the devil and outlawed the academic pursuit of things that didn't line up with their personal politics and preferences. Observations, methodology, objectivity and facts be damned. They reaped the benefits in all aspects of life. Taking great emotional fulfillment and joy, pride and status from the whole thing. Reveling in it for decades. But the devils grown hooves and wings and they don't know how to deal with him anymore.
They deserve no sympathy because they are pretending to speak against this ridiculous state of affairs whilst trying to hold on to all their ill gotten goods without acknowledging it's all tied up with the devil. As soon as they leave they hold no leverage and they know it. That's why the sordid evidence of their activities is proudly on display. Professor of X from the prestigious Y University. That's their argument. 'Look at all this that the devil gave me'.
You would think a university professor had some knowhow, prowess or power by dint of their personal excellence regardless of their title, but no. They can't even leverage the fundamentals of objective academic rigor to half the students that graduate from these institutions in the first place since their conception of academic rigor depended on the exact opposite. Those are your students. This is your product. This is your ideology in action. You are the professors. You did this.
The only dignified thing for these people is to resign. Or be placed in a Jubilee style debate chamber where they have to debate 20 ethnocentric black people that have been rigorously educated by America's top professors to believe that their identity is the best way to understand the world. I'd wager these professors last 10 minutes before their own ethnocentric bias starts leaking out.
Maybe we can nip this new 'Intellectual Dark Web' wave in the bud and finally get a definitive answer of whether the victimary narrative of our time should be slavery or the holocaust. Which is what I'd wager this all comes down to anyway. So many wonderful choices.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Somewhere where they can act peaceful and dignified and not murder tens of thousands of innocent civilians, lobby for wars that kill millions and displace and disrupt the lives of even more.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
It's an illegal occupation of Palestine. If we're concerned with using the correct terms. If your argument against SA apartheid is that it's just internal election laws then I'd want you to also recognize that SA wasn't an apartheid state either.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
It does. But it seems like a necessary step to take to prevent more genocides.
I mean, if you're suffering from FOMO and it's your wish to get the last one in before we stop you're welcome to make your case.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I don't know. Is there apartheid lore I'm missing from the middle East?
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I'm OK with the existence of a jewish homeland. Israel as a particular project is problematic as it infringes on another peoples homeland. I'm also reluctant to offer much support for the Israeli side in that dispute given how belligerently zionists have behaved.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Unlike the many zionists and jewish people I've interacted with online over the years who continuously argue against ethnocentrism, national security and sovereignty for people who are not jewish, I'm supportive of all nations having a secure homeland.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
There's nothing interesting to that objection. It's the equivalent of stating that a labrador and a border collie can not both be dogs since they're not exactly the same.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
The argument following those admissions is that either Israel is an apartheid state because they don't intend to ever return sovereignty to the Palestinians. Which is what has been the de facto state of affairs for decades. And no one has any reason to believe otherwise.
Or Israel is placing Palestine under a prolonged illegal occupation. Be that the discrimination, illegal settlements and de facto annexation or whatever else. In either case there is nothing positive for Israel here.
But that's the argument: Its not apartheid, it's illegal occupation. Fine, say that. But the argument is not 'actually it's not apartheid when we do it because we rewrote the laws so the words don't line up 1:1 with South African law'.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I'm sure we can all appreciate the real world difference between the Russian owned coal mining outpost of Barentsburg, hosting a population of ~300 that operates on Norwegian land, and Palestine.
Or appreciate that refugees from the Israeli Palestine conflict are not the same as Palestinians living on their own land.
Pretending that no one understands what apartheid means is just annoying wordplay. Israel occupies land and legally distinguishes between the populations within using various criteria and discriminates accordingly to maintain control for the designated ethnicity, just like SA did. They employ de facto separate voting rolls, just like SA. They even deploy the same alleged tokenism SA did. It's as close as you can get to the original to the point of parody. But regardless of that, the practical effect is the same.
The Israelis as they exist today never intend to relinquish any relevant representative control over the explicitly racially defined jewish state of Israel to anyone other than jews. They define themselves ethnically. They define their state ethnically. It is not possible for Israel to exist without jews. It's not possible for the state to be jewish without jewish sovereignty.
But when you live on the same land as a population group that is not jewish then you either make your bed as an apartheid state to maintain your ethnosupremacy over the land or you let everyone vote. There's no argument for why West Bank jews can vote in Israeli elections but West Bank Palestinians can not that is not de facto apartheid driven.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Outside of the oil sheiks, all of them are already either in open conflict, proxy conflict or cold wars against the US. I don't think it's selective at all to go after Israel given the US is already going after everyone else. Outside of the oil sheiks, of course. But they, despite everything, managed to play the PR game better than Israel so it's hardly a mystery why their heads are not on the lefty chopping block first.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
If we care about doling out equal punishment to all at the same time based on nothing but moral intuition then the same logic applies. Doubly so if we pretend we are not human beings with agency and capacity for strategy and understanding of context but instead mindless automatons that have to follow every possible strand of 'logic' to its conclusion or our heads blow up. But that's obviously not the case so no.
The current issue being focused on is Israel. The current strategy is aimed at disrupting and ultimately stopping the regime. If the power of anyone relevant can be leveraged to that end in any relevant way then that should obviously be done so long as it's beneficial to the cause. To that extent everything that's going on with this political theater is 'logical'. Mamdani has to demonstrate ill intent towards zionists at the behest of his electorate. And if you asked the NYC electorate if risking the sanctity of the UN was worth disrupting the Israeli government that is terrorizing Palestinians then the answer would be yes.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I'm not seeing a failure mode for Mamdani voters here. As far as they are concerned their moral principles are the reason the UN exists in the first place. If the UN is not serving those principles then what's the point of venerating it? Create a migrant hotel for Palestinians out of the headquarters instead. Host an annual anti-zionism conference. Do something that lines up with the morals of the demos.
To steelman the lefty base, Israel has been waging its ethnocentric terror campaign against the Palestinians for decades. The time to invoke the sanctity of our international institutions passed us by a long time ago. The moment Israel stopped pulling their punches after Oct.7 and the UN did nothing, any surface argument for maintaining the pretense that these institutions matter went out the window.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
The hysteria over this flies both ways.
The DOJ has no grounds to take any action against Mamdani as he has only said that he was in active conversation with the legal team over whether or not he could arrest Netanyahu. That can't be illegal, can it? Following that the law apparently says he can't arrest Netanyahu so this is just PR for the lefty base.
That being said, Israel is an apartheid state engaged in terrorism against civilians in large areas that it wants to ethnically cleanse and settle with the genetically correct people. The UN is by their own standards denigrating itself via inaction against such a regime. As is the rest of the world who holds on to the pretense that this is bad under any other circumstance.
To that extent the UN can not act as if their own inadequacies and failures are excusable when they fly in the face of the moral decency felt by free and democratic societies that are fast seeing their electorate turning into single issue voters due to the corruption and crimes committed by zionists and Israel.
Maybe the people of NYC don't want to host the UN if this is what the organization stands for.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Who are those leaders and what is their relationship with the US and the UN?
It seems pretty obvious that what's driving the negative PR hounding Israel is decades of hawkish zionist aggression that's been destabilizing the middle East and killing millions. Their most recent outburst of killing Palestinian civilians and dragging the US into conflict with Iran doesn't help either.
But on top of all of that zionism, Israel and Netanyahu still hold on to reverence and support from many western elites. Who constantly belittle themselves in front of their own people to suck up to zionists like beaten dogs.
So it's hardly a mystery then why far left candidates like Mamdani signal hostile intent when the entire far left wing hates Israel.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
The USS Liberty is the case in point example for zionist influence in American politics. If zionist influence had vained or stopped being a relevant factor then yes, bringing it up constantly would be a little off. But zionist influence has only grown.
To that extent JIDF posters can only pretend to not understand the context or attempt to denigrate those who do.
I guess it really has been a hard time. Now that I think about it It's been a while since I saw subscription box videos on YouTube. But looking at the data, the market has been growing...
Edit, looks like it's the general geeky and more frivolous 'loot box' side of the equation that has crashed. But people still sub for makeup and razors at a growing rate.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
The Funko Pop economy is booming.
The point is not that they were 'slow' to develop. Rooney, for instance, was very mature physically as a teen. The point is that they demonstrate a development curve that doesn't peak at 18 but rather ~25. Unlike many of the African prospects that go through academies as stars and then seemingly plateau or completely fall off after 18.
So if we take that concept and apply it to a more average European academy player, how are they supposed to demonstrate their 'potential' if they are competing against players who've already peaked? If both are similarly skilled at 18 but one is done developing and the other has years of improvement left then we're reaching closer to the issue.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Why would that make them bad examples?
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Yeah, Rooney is not the clearest example as he probably matured faster than most in his age group, and he was physically capable enough at 16 to play with adults. But as you say, he kept on developing mentally. He wasn't just his physicality and I'd argue that many of his best performances didn't even revolve around his goal scoring ability which is what defined his earlier years.
And whilst it is of course true that youth stars of all stripes don't always live up to the hype, there's a difference between talent like, for example, Januzaj and the examples I gave. Whilst Januzaj had a lot of hype, he ended up being a middling player at the top level. That's a far cry from never even making it to the top level after being sandwiched in accolades between Toni Kroos and Bojan at 17 like Macauley Chrisantus. Not that a professional career in 2nd division football is a failure by any means. But it's certainly not living up to the imagined potential.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I don't think many people notice that American soldiers are blacker than the general population, where the armed forces are 17% black and the general population 13%. In fact I'd wager most would not think such a thing at all considering blacks are underrepresented as frontline troops, sitting at around 10%.
A quick nitpick:
Every European country values youth football. Nations like Norway and Croatia are not exemplifying a distinction by having a good run this WC. Smaller nations periodically field strong teams, usually due to a coincidence of a talented generation synergizing at the right time to fit the right tactic. What historically separates the "big" football nations is their sheer depth.
A larger talent pool allows managers to select players who fit a specific structure, rather than being forced to field every decent player they have out of necessity and then organize around it. They are also more tactically flexible, whilst the current Norway squad, for instance, would find itself lost without Haaland at the top, there would be no lack for creative midfielders for Spain. Ultimately, no country in Europe treats football as meaningless. Every major club and most minor ones run professional and serious youth academies.
A more general thought on youth academies and the representation of foreigners:
What the mainstream often ignores about youth development is the role of HBD.
Many Sub-Saharan African players mature physically at an earlier age, making them dominant in youth cohorts. Whilst undeniably talented, their early physical advantages can skew academy recruitment. As clubs increasingly fill limited academy slots with these early-maturing players, local European prospects find themselves competing for fewer opportunities.
This can manifest in predictable ways. Where, to take an American example, dynasty establishing talent like Tom Brady can only shine through via high resistance to adversity. Or where team defining players like Travis Kelce are far from first picks. This early peak contrast becomes clearer in adulthood. Players who relied on early physical dominance at the youth level and are described as having a lot of 'potential' often plateau after 20. Meaning there was no 'potential'. They were at their peak at 17 to 20.
The most extreme examples being Freddy Adu, Macauley Chrisantus and Dominic Adiyiah. All extremely accomplished on the youth level with golden boots and the whole charade, but falling off a cliff when the physical advantage wasn't there for them to rely on. Compared with European players with 'potential' like CR7, Messi or Rooney that had 'potential' as teens and then hit their stride in their mid 20's. There is an obvious skew there despite the many variables and complexities of football.
Under no modern liberal definition is the direct continuation of distinct ethnic groups genetic lineage necessary. Jeet and Muhammed can be trusted to carry out your traditions just fine.
This is just low brow racism. If you can teach them to hate you can teach them to love. Israel needs to open its borders, but most necessarily Israelis need to open their hearts.
How will we make that happen? As the morally good, we will implement desegregation and forcibly integrate the schools at gun point if need be. You will also share prisons overcrowded with Palestinians who will rape and torture you to death because it makes them feel happy but we won't make a big deal out of it or change anything because segregation and apartheid is the greater moral evil.
We will create media that promotes ethnic grievance directed against you to remind everyone of your physical and moral crimes. We will make media about how morally good and righteous Palestinians are. We will make media about how Palestinian men and jewish women are romantically made for one another. We will make vague pseudo-scientific genetic arguments about hybrid vigor and how mixed babies are superior. We will make pornography specifically depicting the act of copulation between the two ethnic groups and make it de facto accessible to children.
We will be lenient on Palestinian criminals who rape jewish women and children and outlaw media that tries to highlight or speak against this. And we will at every turn promote the idea that this is morally good, brag about the fact that we've done this and proclaim that any jew who thinks otherwise is a malignant tumor besieging society that must be ostracized, forcibly reeducated or otherwise destroyed. It's also actually a mental illness to believe any of this is happening, or that it's bad, planned or that you don't deserve it.
You fail the liberal test. Ms. Greddle would like to have a word with you after class.
More options
Context Copy link