This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It's interesting that, throughout your (well-written) essay, you consistently refer to Jews as being an entirely separate ethnic group from Whites. This is not how they're treated in mainstream discourse, or in most Jewish writing. Officially it's a religion, not an ethnic group, but generally they're seen as a type of White people, at least in modern mainstream western society. (Other societies of course had different rules)
My opinion is that Jews are a sort of "Schrodinger's race" in modern American society. Sometimes they're a separate ethnic group, sometimes they're not. Conviently, it seems to go back and forth depending on whichever interpretation is the best for them. When it's time for the special ethnic groups to get their own special recognition, they of course deserve deep honor and respect for their unique history and culture- they're not one of those shitty bland stale whites who have no culture. But when it comes to break out statistics by ethnic group, they usually blend in with the general "white" category. It would make organizations like the Ivy League or Big Finance look absolutely ridiculous if they had to disclose how importunately higher they were hiring Jews than any other ethnic group.
My opinion is that... it's a bit of both. To some extent, it's like you say, they just have high IQ because of HBD reasons. I also think that, some extent, they have a great culture which emphasizes education and family in a very positive way. I admire and respect their accomplishments.
On the other hand... they are also clearly a culture that "takes care of their own, first" and is not shy to throw elbows when necessary. In medieval Europe, that meant taking on the niche of moneylenders when that was a major religious taboo for everyone else, and pretending not to understand why that made them hated. In modern Israel, it means taking advantage of the war in Gaza to accelerate land grabs in the West Bank, which seems to have no end accept to take all Palestinian land and create a Jewish ethno-state. In the US, it means families network together at synagogues, then use extreme measures to help each other get into prestigious colleges and high-paying jobs. That is not just "having a higher IQ," that's pure cronyism and nepotism.
As a generic White person, I feel like my people were taken advantage of in our naivety and gullibility. It's time for us to wake up and embrace ethnic tribalism just like everyone else is. Seeing the numbers for how disproportionately Jewish some of the more important job sectors are should ring massive alarm bells in everyone else.
I was thinking of this reading the WSJ this morning. In the Op-Ed section under Notable and Quotable they cited a Manhattan Institute Poll showing a purported rise in right wing antisemitism:
The confusing nature of their definition (what purpose does self identification have if it can be skipped?), is used to smuggle in a mild definition to the major heresies. Colonial is at most a totally mild critique of Israel actually. It's mostly a neutral, factual description of the country's history: Israel is a country that grew out of a colonial project. I would actually expect that the word Colonial, a pejorative in leftist faculty circles, is fairly neutral in conversation for a lot of Red Tribers. It mostly has positive associations in New England, the Colonial militias fighting the redcoats, various high school mascots and college sports conferences are the Colonial so and so, the Colonial Inn or the Colonial Diner is just an early American theme restaurant.
I could maybe see saying calling Israel an apartheid state is anti-Israel, though I would still bristle at calling it anti-semitic. But Colonial is a totally neutral definition to most Republicans. Trying to portray that statement as anti-semitic is clearly trying to massage the statistics.
Yeah that's weird. It's like they're combining a far-left and far-right criticism of Israel. Maybe it's something like:
Either way seems like they're trying to brand leftist anti-Israeli types as being right-wing anti-Semites
The more I think about it, it's probably a cultural failure, the Manhattan institute is a conservative think tank, but its workers and interns are still blue tribe college graduates, who understand that the statement "Israel is a colonial state" is associated with leftist critiques of Israel, which I don't think most normies would understand that way.
I actually think you could use a much more inclusive definition, like some that I'd fail, that I'd agree with more. Like "Imagine a woman close to you was dating a man and considering marrying him, and came to you for advice. Would your advice change if he were Jewish?"
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The very successful American Jews are mostly non-practicing; they’re probably not any more liberal than non-practicing urban Christians on the east coast, but they’re definitely not networking at the synagogue.
More options
Context Copy link
This "schrodingerism" goes even deeper. At face value, Israel is absolutely an archetype of your cookie-cutter ethnonationalist state. Their declaration of independence from 1948 officially calls it as a Jewish state. It also gives a lot of authority to religions, for instance Israel does not recognize secular marriage, thus effectively banning any gay marriage- as no faith in Israel officiates such unions. And on the other hand you have your modern leftist progressives shilling for it anyways.
In a sense this is remarkable achievement of Jews and their version of nationalism - Zionism. Their early leaders ranged from your cookie-cutter 19h century progressives like Theodore Herzl, socialists like David Ben Gurion, as well as "fascists" - or ultranationalists if you will - like Menachim Begin, a proud member of Irgun and youth leader of Betar movement. And yet the latter two both served as prime ministers of Israel. Despite ideological differences, all of them were able to work together toward the national project of Israel: Herzl was an example of your educated international elite, making diplomatic deals with power brokers of his time. Ben Gurion was your charismatic labor leader organizing Jews all around the world. Not many of Jewish refugees and young settlers had any experience with agriculture and hard labor, and yet Ben Gurion motivated them toward creating Jewish working class in order to form a complete nation - as opposed to some sort of Oligarchy like South Africa, where elite Jews rule over native Arabs in some sort of apartheid - with his slogan of one more acre, one more goat. And of course Begin was your enforcer, willing to do the dirty work during wars and times of conflict.
As I said, the whole thing is remarkable example of modern ethnogenesis and state building, that puts all other romantic national awakenings in 19th century Europe to shame - including reviving liturgical Hebrew as an official modern language by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda and of course carving patch of foreign land as their own. It would be as if some forgotten tribe of Romans in Romania and Greece created a modern Roman Republic somewhere south of Rome in Italy, using Latin as their official language.
As with many other things, there is a lot of admiration even when it comes to enemies of Zionism, Israel and Jews. They really achieved something unique, including ability to unite disparate ideologies that ultimately ended up benefiting their national cause. I'd say that people like Fuentes would salivate if they could create something like US version of Christian nationalism akin to Zionism.
Israel recognizes foreign marriages, including gay marriages.
Yes, but they do not perform them in their land as marriages in Israel are officiated by religious authorities. A very ingenious way to solve the problem if you ask me.
Most Israelis marrying outside Israel are heterosexual secular Jews who don't want a religious marriage for one of any number of good and sufficient reasons, or who the official Rabbinate refuses to marry for reasons which I am sure the Rabbis find very persuasive. I have met multiple couples in such marriages, including one case where the Israeli Rabbinate considered a British-born Reform Rabbi insufficiently Jewish to marry an Israeli Jew.
That Israel recognises foreign marriages, including foreign marriages between Israeli Jews, and therefore including same-sex marriages, is a load-bearing part of the social contract between secular and religious Jews in Israel.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Every ethnic group and every culture does this. Hell, every individual does this. Humans as a species like being around people that a similar to each other. This is a human thing, not a Jewish thing. Surely many Christians are set up with work opportunities, internships due a "a friend your dad knows from Church". But the difference is that only Jews get vilified for this behavior.
I'm not sure I buy the hypothesis that Jews are tend to lend themselves to cronyism or nepotism than average. I think that both Cronyism and Nepotism imply that the people who are benefiting from those "-ism's" aren't otherwise qualified for the opportunity that they're being given. In a community of Jews, the average IQ is 115+. There's going to be a lot of people in this community who actually are extremely qualified to work in a variety of complex jobs.
If there were a "Society for White Engineers", I would definitely also join it :)
well, part of my post was that generic White people don't do this, at least not in modern times. Do you disagree with that? It's also laid out in the article linked in the comment above yours. The older White guys in management positions are patting themselves on the back for "doing their part" by hiring other ethnicities over their own. And there is no "White person church."
In practice, there are many churches for high status white people. They’re just boomerlibs.
More options
Context Copy link
This ties into the Nick Fuentes issue where he is crudely outlining these sorts of arguments. In addition to the lack of (or deliberate multi-generational suppression of) ingroup ethnic solidarity, White men in positions of seniority have pulled a 'Fuck you, got mine' and pulled the ladder up behind them, leaving the field to 'minorities' (a group that includes women somehow). Basically, throwing the next generation of young white men to the wolves in order to ensure that their own positions are unchallenged until retirement.
Its not fair competition, its DEI discrimination, combined with 'you need to compete with the best from the entire world'.
Edit: More fuel for the theory that JD Vance reads this forum here.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link