#because at the end of the day we're all Jews and the same people want us equally dead

[etz-ashashiyot]

Guys I know things are really stressful and have been for a while now, but it only helps the antisemites if we are at each other's throats.

[fairuzfan]

If you can't see the difference between a diaspora Jew who has seen the violence inflicted on their community throughout history and the world for their entire existence since childhood and genuinely believes they will never be safe until they have somewhere to go that is made up of mostly Jews (and thinks that place might as well be 'where they came from'), and a Christian who wants all the Jews and Muslims back where they belong so that Jesus will come back or just so that 'their country' won't have Jews or Muslims anymore, and you believe those two people deserve the same scorn and violence, and that their Zionism is virtually indistinguishable, you're not a good person. I'm sorry you're just not.

My relatives aren't evil for thinking Israel should exist, they're just scared because they know what an angry, hateful world has done and can/will do to scattered Jews. They want to believe that there is a place in the world that is safe for Jews to live. (Whether Israel actually is that is beside the point- it isn't but that's beside the point).

And I'm a Bundist (not explaining it look it up idc) but with how things have been lately (and always really) I can't say I don't see the appeal.

Obviously Israel's government in general and the Likud party in particular is steeped in genocidal intent and abhorrent racism. Obviously the discrimination, colonization and brutalization of Palestinians should end. Obviously Israel should no longer be what it is- a militaristic puppet state by which the US keeps its hands in the middle east/swana region.

But don't you dare say that the Hobby Lobby CEO and my sister have the exact same Zionism or reasons for it.

I only say any of this bc you reblogged a post essentially saying all Zionism is the same and deserves the same treatment and seeing as diaspora Jews are neither the biggest material nor political backing force behind Israel, and also our fears are completely founded, I can't let you express that belief without at least making an effort to correct it.

(Also my sister technically just believes that Jews should be able to safely visit or live in the Levant, which we're indigenous to- and if you don't believe that where tf do you think we came from bc we didn't just grow out of the ground in NYC one day holding bagels I'll tell you that but I digress- but doesn't like the Israeli gov or its actions. So that may not even be Zionism according to you but that's what she calls it.)

Ok. Right now journalists are live blogging the massacre of my people and no one is lifting a finger and in fact sending them bigger and badder weapons. You're very heartless. I don't care if you don't think I'm a good person but I'm sad that you're not one either.

[caffeineandsociety]

I think there are a lot of people on the left who WANT all the antisemitic conspiracy theories to be true for exactly the same reasons a lot of people on the right do.

There are lot of people who WANT it to be true that "billionaires" is synonymous with "Jews"; that the greedy "elite" can be identified by demographic data. Who WANT it to be true that both major US political parties are the same because in the end, they're all part of the same unified hive mind of greedy power-mad misanthropic mutant lizard people - figuratively or literally, doesn't matter. Who WANT it to be true that all of Israel's few allies are ultimately just puppet governments of theirs (even though the opposite is much closer to being true), and the REST of the world is NEXT to fall to this horrible hive of evil.

Because, many people don't realize this, but conspiracy theories are PLEASANT to believe. It's exciting to think you're onto a deep truth that most people aren't privy to, especially when it sounds like something straight out of a scifi thriller. It's empowering to think the solution to all of society's ills is simple, staring you right in the face, and as soon as you just get enough people together to smash some crucial load-bearing element it will all come crashing down and lead us to our "natural state" of utopia like in an action-adventure epic. Even the helplessness of feeling like it's insurmountable has its own satisfying bent as a gateway to an extreme "positive" nihilism - if we're all fucked regardless, if (((their))) power is just too overwhelming, then nothing we do REALLY matters - we're free, we never have to do anything we don't want to again for the benefit of the world around us, because it won't change anything~!

Sound uncomfortably familiar yet? Perhaps like some arguments about voting, environmental protections, or local initiatives beyond libraries and public transit you've seen floating around right here on tungle dot hell? About the struggle of relating to "normies" and recognizing where the Overton window sits at any given time, even? About the prospects of getting ranked choice voting nationwide?

It doesn't matter who you are, or what your beliefs are, or how "smart" you are - at the end of the day we're all just hairless apes capable of falling for the same brain chemistry tricks as any other, and bullshit can be spun in leftist flavor just as easily as it can be spun to appeal to the right. You are not immune to the feeling of "awww yeah, it's all coming together~" over what you might realize, out of the moment, is a complete nonsequitur or cherry-picked to hell and back. You are not immune to the thrill of believing you're basically Neo The Matrix. It's hard to build resistance, let alone immunity, to the siren call of alleged easy solutions to complicated problems, or to the sweet relief of helplessness. The internet is doing a great job of making recreational outrage more and more appealing to more and more people.

I only beg more people to be willing to recognize those facts and TRY to course-correct when those feelings start to take them to some dark places.

[jewish-sideblog]

"Both indigenous and colonizers" CAN PEOPLE STOP TALKING ABOUT SHIT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND PLEASE

This wave of antisemitism and bullshit about "indigenous vs colonizer" makes me so scared as an indigenous person in the US of what will happen when Land Back movements do result in actual sovereignty restoration and then tribes do what people do and disagree over land and resources, like we were doing for thousands of years before Europeans arrived. Will we be reduced down to colonizers too??

It feels like Westerners, especially USAmericans, have such a black and white idea of what it means to be indigenous and what it means to be a colonizer/settler (because those terms are always conflated) and it makes me so angry and frustrated to see people apply those standards and lines thinking not just to complex sovereignty movements in their own countries but also to incredibly complex conflicts and wars happening on the other side of the world.

The damage I've seen done to sovereignty movements here in the US alone, people going around claiming that we want all "settlers" to go back to Europe or that we're going to start massacring people, has been horrible and the fact that it's all just to justify antisemitism makes me sick.

Genuinely. They're blocked now, but that same person said something to the effect of "Would an Iranian praying in a Mosque built on the ashes of a former synagogue be decolonization?"

And that was the point at which I was like. Ok. It seems like most people genuinely don't actually know what the terms "colonization", "colonizer" and "coloniality" mean. Obviously, that wouldn't be decolonization, because the Jews never colonized Iran. Emigration and colonization aren't the same fucking thing!

I used to have so much faith in my generation. I thought we were critical thinkers, capable of flexibility and engagement with new ideas. But I'm realizing now that we're basically just rebranded boomers. Back in the day, anybody you disagreed with was labelled as a "Communist". It didn't actually fucking matter if they were communist sympathizers, Soviet sympathizers, or even if they were remotely allied with socialist ideals. You could just call them a "Communist" and be done with it, without even understanding what that term means.

It's the same shit today. Instead of a HUAC witch hunt targeting communists, it's a social witch hunt targeting "colonizers" and "Zionists". I am terrified that the moment indigenous rights movements in the Americas and Oceania start making practical strides in Land Back, regaining rightful control over the ways your own land is used, you'll all be labelled as "colonizers" or "imperialists" or whatever the bad buzz word of the month turns out to be.

People simply can't wrap their heads around the idea that indigenous decolonization doesn't have the end goal of ethnically cleansing non-native people from the Americas. And it's because they're so absorbed in colonial thinking. They can't even fucking imagine what sovereignty could look like beyond an authoritarian structure based on control and violence. It's the same with Israel and Palestine-- they think that Jewish sovereignty must look like complete Jewish control to the detriment of Arabs, and they think Palestinian sovereignty must look like total Arab control to the detriment of Jews. The idea that a shared state or a two-state solution is "racist" stems from that false dichotomy.

Establishing an ideological binary of violence that pits "indigenous" against "colonizer", "native" against "settler", and "us" against "them" with no room for cooperation or collaboration is the core of colonialism. Because the core of colonialism is the idea that only one group can have true power at a time. And that's just not the way the world has to work.

[matan4il]

The ICJ ruling went about as well as I was expecting. No call for a ceasefire and no ruling on whether the war is a case of genocide, but Israel still has to send in aid (which it was already doing) and try to contain civilian deaths. All in all it said nothing new, made no decisive decisions and it just feels like we're back where we started but now Israel has to send in a report in a month. What are your thoughts on the ruling?

Hi Nonnie! Thank you for this ask. Yes, it went just as we thought it was most likely to go, and the explicit decision on the case was never going to be given during the decision of the provisional measures. If it's okay, I wanna combine my answer to you with this ask as well:

I've seen a few people mention that the ICJ not calling for a ceasefire probably indicates that the judges don't think a genocide is occurring at all. After all, if they believe a genocide is actively going on, why would you allow the side committing it to continue the fight? Granted, I'm seeing both sides claiming the ruling to be a victory for them. So, who knows at this point what any of it means?

Okay, so my feeling about this is complex. I mean,

On the one hand, I very much acknowledge that this is the best resolution on the subject of the provisional measures that we could have gotten. Anon, you're right. If there was any indication of an actual genocide, the ICJ would have decided in favor of Israel having to stop its fighting in Gaza. There apparently is a precedent, the ICJ did issue a provisional measure deciding on the end of Russia's fighting in Ukraine, based on the convention for the prevention og genocide. So yes, there's no reason why the ICJ wouldn't do the same here if South Africa had a strong enough suggestion of a case.

The reason why I still don't feel great is that I think the very discussion is a perversion of justice. It's like... think of a situation where you know there can't be a just result, because the court is biased. Think of a scenario where a political rival of the government is put on trial for murder in North Korea, where the judges are known to serve the interests of the government. To not be executed would probably be considered the best possible result, but it's still wrong that such a biased trial exists, that someone would be put on trial for merely being a political opponent.

Yes, each side got some things it wanted and lost some stuff (SA got the ICJ to ignore its abuse of the genocide convention, and got some provisional measures when legally the whole case should have been thrown out, while Israel got the fact that the provisional measure to stop the fighting, the only one the ICJ could grant that has real weight and impact, was not issued), but at the end of the day, Hamas celebrated the decision. Because it understands that even if no practical change comes from the ICJ's decision, it's another step in its war, which it runs parallel to its terrorism, to delegitimize Israel's very existence in the global public's mind. And on the most basic level, if an antisemitic, genocidal terrorist organization is happy with the ICJ's decision, I find it hard to be.

I hope this kind of explains why, even though I'm aware that the result was the best one we could get, it's still awful. To go back to how judge Aharon Barak, the survivor of an actual genocide, put it, the whole trial was like judging Able for Cain murdering him. Hamas should be put on trial. Hamas should be called out on, and persecuted for its genocidal intents and actions against Jews around the world. Hamas should be put on trial for crimes against world peace when it intentionally started a war against Israel. Hamas should be put on trial for war crimes perpetrated against its own Palestinian population when it has killed them intentionally, and intentionally put them in harm's way, to get killed in the fighting, when it used them as human shields. And anything less than that is a perversion of justice.

Thank you both, like I said, I do hope this helps. Take care!

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[rainofaugustsith]

So in the conversations about cures, there is one thing I'd like to reiterate: It is absolutely bleeding exhausting to have abled/not chronically ill people going on about cures and how they can fix you.

It's often the first fucking thing people do after you tell them what your illness is - they immediately pile on with the unsolicited advice about just how you can fix yourself. And 99.9% of the time, I guarantee you it's absolute trash that shows no understanding whatsoever of your condition.

Prayer. Kale. Juice fasts. Untested supplements not approved by the FDA that somehow manage to cure things like sickle cell anemia. Have you found Jesus (and I specifically say Jesus because Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists - well, just about everyone else - usually will NOT try to convert you or insist you just need to pray harder to their god to be magically cured)? Maybe if you lost some weight or took up yoga? There's this guru I listen to. On and on and on.

And often, if they don't think you are desperately trying everything and anything random people throw at you, why, you must not really be sick. You don't WANT to get better because you're not trying organic lettuce fasts and crystals to cure your genetic disease that isn't even understood well by most doctors.

Most of us get angry about even one unsolicited comment or criticism. We think it's rude when someone snipes about appearance or clothes. So why is it okay to pepper disabled and chronically ill people with your half-baked cures, or think they even want them?

Imagine how you'd feel if the moment you left your house, people started picking at, say, the shape of your eyebrows. Maybe you could bleach them? Shape them? Shave them off? If only you'd let us help you! It comes from a place of love! Imagine that's all you heard all day long the moment someone saw your eyebrows. You'd get sick of it really damn quickly, and you'd probably really resent that people's first instinct was to tell you what they felt was wrong with you and that they were within their rights to tell you how to fix it.

You might feel angry or upset that they were not accepting you as you were.

That's how it goes with cures, folks.

The only time I as a chronically ill and disabled person am interested in hearing about treatments is if it's coming from someone with the same/similar condition and we're talking and comparing notes. But interesting thing, then it's usually shop talk, it's not 'BUT YOU NEED KALE AND PRAYER.' Do I talk to other people with my illness about the meds they take, what works, what doesn't? Sure. But key things: we've both agreed to participate in that discussion AND we both have the condition in question, AND nobody is picking at anyone else to do anything. Those discussions often end "well, that's great it works for you! Good luck with it!" and it's fine.

I'll be honest, if you could tell me tomorrow "Rain, we have a 100% certain cure for something you have" would I sign up? Fucking yes. But am I waiting around for that cure? No. Because most illnesses don't have cures. Some have treatments, and some don't. Some of us know this. I'm doing my best to live my life as it is, as I am, in this moment, and that's what I want people to understand. I want to be accepted as I am in this time, just as we all do.

[gaelic-symphony]

hi!! :)

i hope this isn't weird, but i love reading your posts about judaism to learn more from it. i don't follow any religion but i love getting to know them from people who do

and if you don't mind me asking, what are your favourite things about it? <3

i hope i have expressed myself well and you don't mind this 🫶🏼

I actually love this ask, and I'm so glad you sent it! There are so many things I love about Judaism, it would take me forever to come up with a list of them, but here are a few of my favorites:

I love our everyday rituals. I love keeping kosher and going to the kosher supermarket. I love that every time I eat or go grocery shopping, I'm affirming my connection to my people and my ancestors. I love that we have blessings for the most mundane human activities like washing our hands. I love ending every week with Shabbat. I love how it gives us a day to rest and reflect and be thankful before we start a new week, and I love having the weekly marker of Shabbat to track the passage of time. I love that you don't have to subscribe to any particular version of Jewish theology or believe that we do these things because Hashem commanded us in order to participate fully in these rituals. You can do them just because you find meaning in them. You can do them just because you're proud to be Jewish and follow the traditions of your ancestors.

I love our holidays. So many of them commemorate our survival against those who tried to wipe us out: Purim, Chanukah, Passover. Every year, we tell the story of our peoples' perseverance. We reflect on the strength and courage of generations of Jews before us that allowed our continued survival into the present day. Other holidays are seasonal markers of time. Tu B'Shvat is a little over a week away, and it's our "new year for trees," the time of year when the earliest trees start to bloom in the Land of Israel. Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur mark the end of the old year and beginning of a new one, and give us the chance to leave our mistakes of the past year behind and learn from them moving forward as we start fresh with a brand new year. Sukkot is a traditional celebration of the annual harvest. And other holidays, we're just so happy to be Jewish that we need to throw a party about it! Shavuot celebrates the Israelites receiving the Torah from Hashem at Mount Sinai, and then we celebrate the Torah again on Simchat Torah, when we read the very last verses of the book of Dvarim and start all over again with Bereshit.

I love our music. Our daily prayers are set to music, with special nusach (melodies) for Shabbat and holidays. When we read from the Torah or the books of the prophets, we chant the words to the same melodies our ancestors have done for centuries. We sing as a way to connect with each other and with Hashem. We sing the psalms of King David, and we sing wordless melodies we call niggunim. We've developed our own styles of secular, non-liturgical music and dance: klezmer and canciones, the horah and the Yemenite step, and many, many more!

I love our scholarship. Our scholarly tradition is one of questioning and arguing, neither of which are viewed negatively in Jewish tradition! We love to ask ourselves "what if" and "why," and the point isn't so much finding a singular answer as it is the process of engaging with the text. Does it really matter as a real-world issue whether there are any Pokemon that would be kosher to eat? Of course not! But that's exactly the type of thing we love to argue over, and if the ancient rabbinic sages like Hillel and Akiva and Rashi and Maimonides were alive today, I guarantee you they would have opinions on the matter.

I love our joy. There is so much joy that comes with being Jewish, a joy we feel just for being alive against all odds. Most of our prayers are not asking Hashem for the things we want, but thanking Hashem for the things we have. We have a brachah we say specifically to thank Hashem for the opportunity to fix what is broken in this world. Our history has rarely been a happy one, but we have always found reasons to rejoice. We danced and sang and celebrated our holidays and life events even in the Warsaw Ghetto. This past December, during one of the saddest, heaviest, and scariest times for our people since the Shoah, Jews all over the world celebrated Chanukah like we always do. In the midst of our mourning, we found joy. Literally and figuratively, we came together as a tribe to create light in the darkness.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

What Future Historians Say Will Shock You | Real Time with Bill Maher

And finally, New Rule: Someone, maybe AI, has to figure out a way to slow down time. Because what everyone has been saying to me lately is, "I can't believe it's May." Oh, Americans, we do nothing but bitch about everything under the sun, but damn it, life goes by too fast. It's Memorial Day in a week? Christ, I might as well start my Christmas shopping.

But it is, it's May. A month I have been anticipating for a long time because my book comes out next week. A book I have waited my whole career to write. One that is based on collecting the creme de la creme of these end of the show editorials and reimagining them, but also cover some virgin territory.

For example, I'm kind of obsessed with the idea of what historians of the future will say about us. Imagine it's the year 3024, and you're living in a colony on the planet Musk, formerly Mars. What will the historian say about the Americans of 2024? Well probably, that we were self-absorbed, algorithmically enslaved, on drugs and worshiped a god named Apple.

But what they won't do is write about the very thing that consumes us: our petty squabbles. In the myopia of the present our partisan differences make each side believe they're nothing like the other side. Libtards and deplorables. Historians will disagree. They won't see red on one side and blue on the other. You're thinking of Jaws 3D.

But historians see the character of a people as a whole. The Scots were clannish, the Spartans stoic, the Mongols expansionist, the Greeks were too into anal. And for us, it will be no different. Historians will say, we're also too into anal.

But also, the other thing. They will see us as a singular people with the same pathologies and unappealing traits on both sides. Traits that simply manifest themselves differently. For example, I believe, they will say, Americans of our era were unscientific. One side thought, climate change was a hoax. One thought, gender was a construct. One warred against Mother Nature. One against motherhood. One doubts Evolution, one wears masks when they're alone in the car. Which is kind of like wearing a condom to jerk off.

In medical schools now, professors are so fearful of being labeled transphobic, they have to apologize for saying words like male, female and pregnant woman.

Katie Herzog writes, "Some of the country's top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like other mammals, a species comprising two sexes." "The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation."

Okay, but generally, the people with breasts and vaginas who give birth are the women and the ones with the penis, hogging the remote are men.

Historians will say that as a people, Americans lost our rationality. They'll say, we were conspiracy theorists. The right wanted to believe that Obama was born in Kenya. The left wanted to believe in Trump's pee tape. We have January 6th Truthers but the Washington Post reports that there are also now October 7th Truthers who believe Hamas never raped anybody and the hostages all died of natural causes. Now, does the right do conspiracy more? I think they do. QAnon and Jewish space lasers. Hillary's pedophile ring, microchips and the vaccine, Sandy Hook didn't happen, the election was stolen, Jews are trying to replace us. Yeah, but of course, on the left… Jews are the Nazis now. Somehow even enemies always find a way to agree to blame everything on the Jews.

I think, future historians will see us as a sad people, saddled with a genetic predisposition to always break into factions and then be consumed with the hate that engenders. Each side in America right now considers the other an existential threat. To the point where both camps literally collaborate with foreign enemies over fellow Americans.

Republican news channels use Russian talking points. Their voters wear t-shirts that say, "I'd rather be Russian than Democrat" and their leader sides with Putin. When today's Republican watches Rocky IV, they root for Ivan Drago.

Meanwhile, on the left this happened. Americans chanting death to America. College professors and their students exhilarated by aligning with a theocratic murderous terrorist group with values fundamentally opposed to our own.

Finally, I think, the people of the future will ironically be puzzled by our common desire to live in the past. On Fox News they're always pining for 1950, to make America great again. And in The Huffington Post it's always 1619, and nothing has changed.

For people so being into the moment, nobody seems to wanna live in the year we're living in. Trump's entire shtick is to return America to some idyllic time when the traditional family was a husband, a wife, a couple of kids and a porn star on the side. A time when America was the only Superpower and you could drink at work. When a cheeseburger cost a dime and a girl brought it to you on roller skates and she liked it when you complimented her ass. Nikki Haley says, "America was never racist." And then there are voices on the left saying racism has never been worse.

And the normies in the center say, "how hard is it to meet in the middle and just not be stupid about shit?" And that's who my book is for. People who don't wanna be stupid about shit.

[socialjusticefail]

I've mentioned some double standard on here before, but it just doesn't stop baffling me how large the double standard is when it comes to the Arab Muslims invasions.

White European Christians colonized and invaded other countries and oppressed them.

Brown Arab Muslims colonized and invaded other countries and oppress them.

White Europeans just ended up pulling back, and aboloshing slavery, and now at large do not do that anymore. Sure it wasn't because of empathy or kindness that the colonies were abandoned, and they still caused immense suffering. The let go because they had to, and growing tension between the European powers being one of the reasons. But it did stop. Europe didn't want to let go of their colonies, but at least they did. It caused suffering, and the after effects still exist to this day. Christianity has been used as a cheap excuse of faith to do this horrible acts, and people call it out every day with no repercussion. As should be allowed everywhere.

The Arab Muslim invasions did the same thing, they still do, they still slaughter and murder indigenous people. They take away the rights of people who are viewed as lesser, and those who refuse to follow Islam. The Muslim invaders accused India of being "Islamophobic" for allowing people of Non-Islamic faiths a refuge in India from a Muslim-neighbour. How does that make sense? And people eat it up. They do all that, yet in the West they're portrayed as world victims because... The West did bad shit? But is that enough of a reason to literally woobify the Arab Muslim invaders? Is that really enough to say that all these people, Indians, Kurdish, Jews, and so many more tens, hundreds of tribes and people should be allowed to be slaughtered? Oppressed? Because the narrative "White people bad" is more important than all these people? Because if it's "Brown against brown we don't care." We already see that with how little attention is paid to the brown people being oppressed by Islamic fundamentalists, like Hamas, or the Gray wolves or whatever. It doesn't matter that women are forced to wear headscarves and killed for fighting against it. That a woman is worth less than a man, and that the voice of 4 women is needed to be even just close to equaling the voice of 1 man. The moment they can cheaply slap the label "White" on some ethnicity, they become awoken from their slumber, and no matter how brutal, how vile, or disgusting the Arab Muslim invaders have been towards the indigenous population, now they're the victims? After centuries of oppression, they're the victims? Because that's the narrative in the West. The Arab-Slavic slave trade took Slavic people and sold them into Muslim slavery. WHITE PEOPLE btw. But it doesn't matter the history of Islam in the world, or even the suffering they brought. Islam is a brown religion so we're too afraid to call it out in the West, because in the West they aren't the dominant power that can just decide to slaughter like in the rest of the world.

Don't get me wrong, I don't care if someone is religious, but the sheer double standard and ignorance of history and world politics is disgusting, and vile, especially when it's used to handwave away and ignore the ongoing atrocities against indigenous people in the world by their Muslim oppressors. Especially when the Muslim oppressors are slaughtering the Jewish people, who's religion and beliefs they so shamelessly stole, and now they want to kill the people who birthed the entire faith they decided to colonize.

Yep.

[antisemitism-eu]

Answer to this comment by vermilionstarlight:

@antisemitism-eu do you truly think the conflict would end if Hamas released all Israeli hostages? Not that they shouldn't, they VERY MUCH should, but an end to the war wouldn't result from that. The rhetoric being spewed forth from Israel's state and military apparatuses is very clearly antagonistic & fascist, just as much as Hamas rhetoric. In spite of the right to safety and autonomy held by Israelis and Palestinians, the fascists have the guns & money on both ends. This isn't anything specific to Israel or Hamas, every government in the world is run by some mixture of incompetence, hatred, greed, and jealousy. Especially so with fascist governments, which I would qualify the state leaders of Israel as, given their observed word and action. No intent to be antagonistic toward you either, btw :3 I'm posing a question primarily, because I don't think ending conflict is as simple as dismantling Hamas. There is ignorant hatred on both sides of this horror, and there are greedy and spiteful leaders spearheading on either end. People have been lied to and manipulated to see atrocities as miracles, on both ends. Hamas is a piece of the puzzle, but people will be spiteful even without Hamas.

I said that the war would end when Hamas surrenders and releases all the hostages.

Every time you say sometime about Hamas, try to pretend we're talking about American White Supremacists, and see if what you say makes sense.

For example: The White Supremacists murdered, raped and abducted Jews. The minute they return the abducted Jews there will be peace.

That doesn't make any sense, does it?

As for the rest of your answer: You're accusing Israel of being Nazis and comparing them to Hamas.

I could answer point by point, but it's very hard for me to talk to somebody who's so antisemitic and yet so clueless about it.

As I said, try to replace "Hamas" with "white supremacists" and see if you still think the same. Now, let's try this: Imagine that in the US there's a community of White Supremacists. They teach their children to murder Jews, they cheer and celebrate every time a Jew is murdered. There's a big statue in every square and plaza, commemorating the successful murder of American Jews. They honor Jew-murderers and pay them a considerable sum every month they spend in jail for their crimes.

In fact, they pay so much money, that the US government helps them out with basic infrastructure, because we wouldn't want them to suffer. When the card-carrying members of this White Supremacist group go on a rampage in a Jewish neighborhood - murdering, raping, torturing, maiming - they are joined by thousands from their community who throng the streets to celebrate and spit on Jewish bodies. They also chop off heads from bodies, so they can remember that great day. They then announce they would do it again and again, until the US is free of Jews No, the conflict will not end when you dismantle the official group.

The entire community needs to be deradicalized

But that's the first step. It's a necessary step. You don't give the community autonomy, expecting them to learn their lesson and become good, productive citizens.

You don't bring in another White Supremacist group

You don't believe a word they say

You don't expect any self-respecting body to condemn the Feds when they go into this community.

You stand by the victims, not by their murderers and rapists.

You don't say describe the White Supremacist community as being "spiteful".

No, the conflict will not end when Hamas surrenders

But THE WAR will end.

This might be shocking to some people, but the reason Israeli soldiers are shooting in Gaza, is because they are being shot at, and because Gazans are still firing rockets, trying to murder Jews.

Nazi ideology is still alive and well. Does that mean that the US should not have dismantled the Nazi state?

Because that's what Israelis and Jews are being told now.

[beardedmrbean]

Hundreds gathered Sunday at a Ventura County, California, intersection where a week earlier, a 69-year-old Jewish man struck his head on concrete and later died after a confrontation with an unnamed pro-Palestinian protester.

Flowers, wreaths, candles and letters surrounded the spot in front of the gas station at Westlake and Thousand Oaks Boulevards, where Paul Kessler sustained his fatal injuries.

One man held a sign that read, "We want justice for Paul," per footage shared with Fox News Digital. Others bandied Israeli flags and sang "Oseh Shalom" — a Hebrew song praying for peace for the country, its people and the world.

PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTER 'TRIED TO BAIT' ELDERLY JEWISH MAN BEFORE FATAL ALTERCATION, WITNESS SAYS

Blood still marked the ground where Kessler's head struck the sidewalk in widely-shared footage from around 3:30 p.m. on Nov. 5 showing medics attending to a bleeding but alert Kessler at the scene as police questioned onlookers.

ELDERLY JEWISH MAN DIES AFTER CONFRONTATION WITH PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTER AT CALIFORNIA RALLY

Kessler was pronounced dead at nearby Los Robles Hospital about 10 hours after the incident. Per the Ventura County Medical Examiner during a press conference Tuesday, Kessler's non-lethal injuries were noted on the left side of his face, while internal injuries included skull fractures, swelling and bruising to the brain. 

Kessler's manner of death was determined to be homicide, Medical Examiner Christopher Young said. 

A 50-year-old pro-Palestinian protester is now a suspect in Kessler's death, the Ventura County Sheriff's Department said. An arrest has yet to be made pending further investigation of bystander and security video footage. 

On Sunday, concentric hearts drawn in a rainbow of chalk surrounded the lingering stains. Rabbis prayed with Tefilin, black leather boxes containing parchment scrolls, and invited attendees to do the same. 

JEWISH COMMUNITY IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 'TERRIFIED' AFTER DEATH OF PAUL KESSLER, RABBI SAYS

Steven Schneider, an attendee who shared footage with Fox News Digital, said the gathering was "healing" for the community. He only saw one agitator drive past during his several hours at the event.

"At the end of the day, he's a Jew and he stood with what I agree with — we agreed that we need to stand and fight in Israel," Schneider said Tuesday. 

Rabbi Ari Averbach from Temple Etz Chaim — Kessler's synagogue for several years before his death — told Fox News Digital that their community held their own vigil last Wednesday. 

"We all moved here because our community is known for being so welcoming, so safe, so mixed. Now we're questioning: ‘Is it safe?’ ‘Can we live here comfortably?’" 

Schneider said the Jewish community in Westlake Village is "shocked to hear such [a] thing could happen" in their quiet home.

"They showed up to support Israel, they showed up to support the hostages, but they also showed up to support Paul," Schneider said.

PROFESSOR WHO PRAISED HAMAS 'RESISTANCE FIGHTERS' ON GLIDERS NO LONGER EMPLOYED BY EMORY UNIVERSITY

Last year, area residents banded together to protest books and videos about being transgender shown to Conejo Valley Unified School District children, as previously reported by Fox News Digital. 

"It wasn't too long when the Muslim community was with us on our schools for what they were doing to our children," Schneider, who was interviewed by Fox at the time, recalled Tuesday. 

HILLARY CLINTON CALLS FOR HAMAS' ELIMINATION, SAYS ALL BLOODSHED IN GAZA IS ON ITS HANDS

"[The Hamas-Israel conflict] puts people in a strange position — this is bigger than a school, this is bigger than what happened previously. This has to do with real hate, it has to do with the consequences of life," Schneider said. "This is dividing communities all over the United States."

Per a Tuesday interview with the Ventura County Sheriff's Department, deputies are still interviewing witnesses coming forward about the incident and reviewing a "large amount" of footage. 

Schneider urged anyone with additional footage from the Nov. 5 incident to come forward and speak with police. 

"We all want justice for Paul," Schneider said. "But we have to allow [police] to do what they do. I have nothing but faith that they're going to figure things out. If there's an arrest to be made, an arrest will be made."

[rametarin]

The 'man or bear' thing is deliberate shit stirring, yall.

They used to pull shit like this all the time back in the day. The ultimatum is deliberately skewed, because the entire conversation is a stupid illusion of choice. It's the sort of bullshit that gets passed along the Babby Radfem chain because it sounds clever as a meme.

The sort of radfem meme where eventually it culminates in some adult talking to them about it, and it ends with the radfem pouting and going, "I just wanted to have a convuhsayshun about important social issues. :C :C :C :C"

Because if you haven't noticed, Phase #2 has been "UH, TMI. WOMEN ARE ACTUALLY CHOOSING THE BEAR-" (allegedly) "- BECAUSE RAPE CULTURE AND PATRIARCHY."

And there it is. Boom goes the dynamite. You've been lead into a shitty, ideologically slanted conversation that has the same flavor as some ethnosupremacist trying to, "make a point," about how The Jews control everything. Just, switch out Jews for, "white people and capitalism."

The premise is that some random dude in the woods is an unknown and the woman is justified in thinking the statistical probability that she'll be beaten, killed or raped just for being a woman around a strange man, and then not believed, means they're somehow safer with the bear. That they're justified in thinking that way, allegedly, because of the consequences.

And then that absolutely stupid, pathetic "Gotcha" permutation that has come out recently, where they swell up with air and puff, "HAHA, ISN'T IT FUNNY HOW THEY NEVER EVEN TRY TO DEFEND THE MAN!? ALMOST LIKE THEY'RE TELLING ON THEMSELVES!"

There's nothing to tell. Statistically some dude in the woods isn't going to be a fucking rapist or murderer. Just, straight up facts. Statistically, that dude in the woods won't be a rapist or murderer. They exist, yes, and it's always a possibility, but just from the get-go we're taking this conversation from the perspective of a sheltered, gynocentrist perspective where a woman's safety and security is the only factor that matters, and a man's life and worth is entirely disposable.

Statistically, that dude in the woods, if a single father, is still roughly only 25% as likely to murder his own children to get out of the responsibility of taking care of them, as a single mother. And what, 40 times less likely to do it as a single father with a girlfriend, than a single mother. So take that statistic and blow it out your ass.

And a funny thing happens to rape statistics when you consider a strapon or dildo to be synonymous with rape, or list rape as violent sexual assault the equal of just using a strapon. Suddenly women take up a vast amount more of the % of rape statistics, instead of what their behavior is called being different because it doesn't involve a biological penis. Suddenly even coming on a strange WOMAN in the woods approaches the supposedly overbearing risk of STRANGE MAN.

It's a scenario deliberately cooked up from that snide gynocentrist position that puts a woman's safety and humanity many notches higher on the valid ladder than a mans. It argues that you should always listen and believe a woman when she makes accusations, always, in all circumstances, no matter how improbable, above and beyond when men accuse others (falsely or not), that women do not lie or exaggerate about rape or violence accusations, that society should automatically treat what they say as truth or they just hate women, and the expectation should be any accusation made sticks regardless of evidence or due process or trial, or society just hates women.

It creates an unreasonable expectation of security and protection that no one, especially not capital S society, can ensure. You cannot police peoples thoughts or actions proactively, you cannot indoctrinate out the desire to rape or hurt from someone that is already broken and bent on doing that, and this stupid conversation or some variation on it crops up every few years to pose these stupid questions and make foregone conclusions based on how they perceive thing.

Inevitably it tangents into the conversation about rape, where the people that whine about bears or men in the woods will makesome soapbox speech about how rape only happens, not because people are mentally broken and monstrous individually, but that rape is a societal problem. Caused, "because we live in a PATRIARCHY that says this is okay!"Offering women this ridiculous, romantic delusion to grasp onto and feed, because it gives them both an explanation they hope to be true because it offers what seems like an obvious "solution." Clearly, "men aren't being taught not to rape!" So they willingly engage in this fiction that the only reason rape happens is because those evil men allow other men to do it or nobody told them it's bad, because, "women are hated and feared in this society."

So they entertain the stupid idea the only reason rapists exist is because they, "aren't taught about consent," and then order more fucking teachers and propaganda courses to do their little songs and dances about it. Which helps about as much as high priests ordering people be sacrificed to a volcano to stop an unpleasant, dangerous natural process. It doesn't help at all, and the mental salve of trying to project a problem onto something else you can control doesn't work to resolve it, but it may give the Volcano Priesthood more power in society.

And that's what this is. The people that stand to gain by more women fearing men screaming for what sounds preferable as a reality and to have people magically fix the problem. Clearly, the solution is to "fix Men" (capital M. The platonic, abstract concept of Men. The collective demographic Men.) so they don't or can't rape. They're told "destroying the Patriarchy" will do that, so they're incentivized to share that delusion.

They genuinely appeal to women that already have suspicions and distrust of males and men and give it a rationalization on why that's okay and "the truth, actually." A whole platform and mythology on and for it, the how and why. Women eat that shit up, then they decide to treat men based on this. And those women repeat their fictions as truth to try to MAKE it normalized and true. And it's no different than when it happens to anybody else, be it forms of racism or bigotry.

The people that study this kind of shit for a living or a hobby just decided that it fits their goals if men are made open season acceptable targets for the same treatment they would consider to be prejudiced and bigoted towards any other demographic, because it suits their ideological and political needs. The same technique of social infiltration that people like the Nazis (and Soviet communists, but that's less important righjt now) used to badmouth and scapegoat the Jews for everything. Little jokey-jokes and stupid conversation openers like this stupid scenario of bear or man.

See it for what it is, and treat it like the bad faith method for results that it is. But remember it, and what it was used to do. It'll be back from the exact same people under another form in as few as 20 years.

[hjellacott]

What trans women, feminists and Jews all have in common.

A/N: I originally wrote this as a response to a reblog, but then I realised it's perhaps the most important post I've ever written, and I know it's very long, but I hope that you, whoever you are, will read it. That's why I wanted to give it a voice of its own, shortening it a tad. This post discusses, in a kind, friendly and polite manner the whole fight between trans and feminists, the debate about Hogwarts Legacy and the problems of anti-semitism and transphobia. And it does so lovingly, and without an aim to brainwash, hurt or offend. So please, if you have ten minutes, please do read. Whoever you are. Thank you.

----

1. FIRST LET ME TELL YOU WHO I AM, SO THAT YOU KNOW THE KIND OF PERSON YOU'RE READING FROM.

I am very much sick of the fights between people who at the bottom, all just want to feel safe, and I am very much sick of the lack of actual polite conversation between us. I come from a Jewish background, from Sephardic Jews (meaning ethnically Jews, which makes me ethnically a Jew both in my maternal and paternal lines), but I also come from a city that has historically been Roman, Iberian, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Arabs, Visigoth, Phoenician, Tarshish and many more, which means I am aware that I am only alive because my ancestors mixed with people very different from them, and repeatedly survived persecution because their religion and/or civilization wasn't the "right one" to stay alive in depending on the historical time. My Jewish ancestors were likely prosecuted to such an extent, and not even that long ago, but during World War II, that they hid and pretended to be Catholics and kept quiet to save their lives. And then there's the fact that I'm bisexual, and whenever I've been in a same sex relationship (one of which lasted me several years) I had to hide, keep it quiet, and keep it a tight-lipped secret because I knew even on this day and age a lot of my loved-ones wouldn't understand, not because they're right-wingers (which they're not), but for other reasons. And I'm saying all of this because I want it to be understood that I know what it is like to be persecuted because of who you are and to never feel entirely safe. I never even felt I could hold my girlfriend's hand in public without receiving some kind of backlash. I never even dared to go into a LGBT march without wearing something to conceal my identity. And on top of things, I'm a woman, and I've never, ever in the decades I've been in this world, in no city I've ever visited, felt safe to be alone out in the street at night. I know I'm talking a lot, and I'm sorry, and I know you'all just want to shout terf, antisemitic and transphobe at me and stop reading, but I beg you to keep reading, even if it's long, because I'm hopeful that we can finally reach some kind of understanding.

Let's forget what divides us. What unites us is that we all feel unsafe. We all, women, gays, trans people, POC people, Jews, we all feel like just because there's something about us that we can't change, we're more likely to die than anyone else. To be raped, beaten-up, abducted and taken from the face of the Earth, just because of who we are.

So what I'm saying is, you're afraid? I understand. So am I. Too afraid to walk alone at night, too afraid to date anyone who isn't a friend of a friend (therefore pre-approved), too afraid to go around in my real life outside the internet telling people how multi-ethnicity I am, simply afraid. All of the time.

I am a fairly cultured person. I'm not the kind of person who simply goes online, believes whatever without evidence, and on and on. I am the kind of person with several higher education certificates, with studies both locally and abroad, the world-traveller, the ferocious reader, the one who reads all the news every day (Spanish, English and French) in several newspapers both right wing and left wing so that in the end I have all sides of the story, I come from a well-educated and very humble family, and I am not someone who blindly decided to support J. K. Rowling. I was horrified when I read the first people saying she was transphobic. But hey, I'm the kind of person who, if I disagree with someone, I read them to bits, because I want to know exactly what they think and why, and why I think differently, and I know that's not something a lot of the people you read do. And I'm in the arts, so half my friends are gay, another are trans, and a very small minority are straight and cisgender, so I promise you, that if I had any sincere belief that Rowling went against any minority, I would've been ferociously against her. I would've. And with that aim I set out to read her every tweet, and you know what I found?

She never actually says anything wrong about transgender people. Never. In fact she doesn't speak against them, she speaks in favour and defense of women and against sexist, violent men. Not against trans people. And I had this conversation with my transgender friends, asking them why they'd gotten offended exactly, and when they looked at Rowling's tweets, you know what they told me? That that wasn't what they'd been told she'd said. Because like many of you, they'd read some rumour in social media, some article in the press, and got so angry they never bothered to actually read what she'd really said, in their context (meaning, following the Twitter conversations and everything, not isolated tweets either). But when I showed them? They were baffled. And they understood she wasn't transphobic. It's been years, and I still don't have a friend who does not stand with J. K. Rowling. And that, listen, that includes Jews, trans, gays, lesbians, and so on, because like I said, I work in the Arts, which as you know is one of the most diverse collectives. And another thing that I noticed was how much had been lost in translation. English is not my first language, but as you can see I mostly manage all right. But when I read translations into Spanish and French, they missed so much about what Rowling had really said, and twisted so much. So let me give you a brief summary of what she actually believes:

2. LET'S DELVE DEEP INTO ROWLING'S ACTUAL WORDS.

Sex is real. If you're born with female or male sex that cannot change. We know this to be scientifically and medically true, which is why when you have surgery to transition, for which a friend of mine is preparing right now, you need to have lots of hormonal medications to try and keep your body behaving as the gender you identify with and against your sex, and the minute you stop, your body will naturally begin behaving like your sex again. And this doesn't change even if you have surgeries, this is for life. If you don't believe me, simply check medical websites, I promise you this is true.

It is dangerous to have transgender women who have not undergone a physical transition in the same private spaces as women. I know this point is very contentious, but before you get angry, hear me out. This is not because anyone thinks transgender people are dangerous. This is because men have proven to be dangerous. What's more common, for a man to rape a woman, or for a woman to rape a man? how often do you hear of women who were murdered by their male exes or even partners, or relatives? I mean, I've gone to several of those funerals and vigils for women and girls killed like that. So the idea behind not wanting trans women and women to share spaces where trans women might have it easier to rape women is that perhaps those trans women, if they haven't physically transitioned, still have the physical advantages of the male sex: more strength, bigger body, and a penis. Imagine my shock if I was getting naked in my prison cell and then I found a person physically stronger and bigger than me, with a dick, naked next to me, in a perfect opportunity to rape me. Would I call them a trans woman? No. But they would call themselves that, and use it to get into that space. That's why Scotland had to backpedal in their laws allowing people to identify themselves as trans women and go into female prisons, because they had several cases in which this resulted in women being raped by trans women, or by people who claimed to be. Because as we all know. plenty of men who are sexual predators will identify as women not just to have access to women, but to have access to transgender women as well, and rape them, and kill them. So it appears that in order to keep trans women and women safe from male predators, we need to make sure that no one with biological advantages of men can share private spaces with them. And if this means having a separate prison for people with the physical built, strength and sexual organs of men, so that they cannot predate on anyone, I vote we do it.

Women won't wheesht. This refers to the fact that achieving rights for someone shouldn't mean removing them for someone else. So in order to give transgender people rights, we cannot take them from another collective, in this case, women. If women are shouting they're terrified of being raped and killed, we need to listen. It is a disrespect, a sexist, female-erasing, cruel thing to do, to ignore them and force them to accept sharing spaces they don't want to share with anyone else. And the only thing that imposing transgender women in their spaces is going to cause is what's happening now: violence, harassment, and an imposibility to have peaceful conversations, not to mention an immediate dislike and fear of transgender women. So instead of achieving transgender rights by harassing someone else, we need to give them their own things. For example, say you have a sibling and you want their room, right? well, harassing them into letting them share it is not going to work. You'll never again get along with your sibling. But asking your parents to build you your own bedroom will keep both sides happy. That's what Rowling and people like me believe in. That fine, if you don't feel safe sharing spaces with people with a dick because you don't want to be raped and murdered, hey, neither do we. So why don't we respect each other's fears and safety wishes and each have our own spaces? And then we can all feel safe around people exactly like us.

Transgender CHILDREN shouldn't be able to go through life changing, irreversible surgeries to remove their sexual organs without plenty of check-ups with doctors and psychiatrists or psychologists who can make sure the child fully understands the risks. This is due to the avalanche of feedback we have from detransitioners who spoke up about having been brainwashed, having given "informed" consent that wasn't actually very well informed, and having deeply regretted surgeries they did without really knowing what was going to happen, and that have now caused them chronic pain that cannot be cured and irreversible physical, mental and emotional damage.

That's all Rowling has said. Nothing against transgender people. She's only worried about the safety of children and women. Period. And I can tell you that with my hand on my heart because I have read her every tweet, and I have also read her open letter against cancel culture, and plenty of articles on the matter.

3. LET'S TALK ABOUT JEWS.

Now about the Jewish thing. Rowling is NOT an anti-Semitic. The first person who called her anti-Semitic was a Jewish man called Jon Stewart, who did so jokingly, and who was immediatelly appalled by the harassment Rowling received from people that took him seriously, forcing not just him, but also multiple Jewish celebrities, Jewish organisations and Jewish charities, to speak up in support of J. K. Rowling and publicly state that they don't believe she's anti-Semitic.

I bet you've only been reading from people who think like you. Many of you, the second you've heard something you didn't like, shut the other person out, called them insults and names, labelled them as Terfs, transphones and anti-Semites, and refused to listen. And if you never hear the people you disagree with, you're never going to hear anything but validity, even if your ideas are insane. Like the flat-Earthers. And all you've been reading from Rowling have been things taken out of context, or told to you by someone else. Do your people ever encourage you to read extract from the source? no. Do they ever show you receipts? only if they've been carefully trimmed.

But people have agendas, you know? That's what happened with Nazism. So you get a collective of Trans Radical Activists, radicals who might not even be actually trans, but know that if they fight women, people like Rowling, and put enough pressure in the governments, they can make laws change so that men, not trans women, but men pretending to be trans women, have easy access to rape women and trans women. Think about it. Wouldn't it be incredibly smart for alt-right men to infiltrate the Transgender activism to start violent fights against women, calling them cunts, telling them to kill themselves, and telling them to suck dick, making women the bad guys, convincing trans people that women are out to get them and to kill them, and getting lawmakers to make laws that allow anyone to simply say they're women and go into female prisons or lockers? Hold on. That's exactly what's happened. I don't believe for a second that the TRAs are all transgender. I believe many of them are alt-right men. And you'll identify them easily by their sexist, violent behaviour and speech, and their whole discourse against women and claims that women like Rowling actively threaten trans people's rights, when none of it is true.

So now say the TRAs, who want women to have less rights and men to have more, and who want to easily be able, as men, to infiltrate spaces that were previously private to women, so that they can no longer have their own spaces, find something else that gets people furious towards their enemy. Rowling has stood against alt-right men her whole life. Naturally, when they saw someone call her anti-Semite, they jumped into that waggon. Another opportunity to get someone cancelled. To demonise a defender of women, until there's none left. So that's what they did. They called her anti-Semite, came up with the whole BS about the goblins, made lots of things up, took more stuff out of context. And because they were in the trans collective, aka, "the good guys", the perceived victims, people have been far more inclined to believe them, to listen to them, and to be compassionate to them. But let me tell you, if these men are allowed into female spaces, and actual trans women find themselves in those spaces with them, they'll be in as much danger as any other woman, if not more.

Now you probably think we're crazy and paranoid. Question. Is the transgender collective telling you that? and if so, isn't it a little suspicious that someone wants to convince you that someone else is being paranoid? that they're out to get you? Because that's what they're doing. Me? Rowling didn't convince me. Nobody had to. I just had to read the news, like I told you I do all the time, and see all of this coming true. See women being repeatedly harassed, sexually and physically, threatened, often by men, far-right men who are strangely, suddenly, very interested in trans rights (isn't that also suspicious?), and seeing all the news and personal stories around me of women being raped because a man was allowed to identify as a trans woman and put into their space, where they had freedom to rape and murder. This is out in the news. The real news. And it's happening all over the place, which tells you I'm not being paranoid or dellusional, I'm telling you what's going on.

This is how Nazism worked as well. It started with Nazis who wanted a kind of economical power that at the time was in the hands of Jews. Do you remember when people tell you immigrants take jobs! women are transphobic! black people are criminals! All that is classic far-right speech. And it's all studied in the Nazi propaganda techniques, which had been long studied and employed by all politicians across the globe. What you do is identify one minority you can blame for current problems, and turn the world against them, in such way that the public doesn't realise all you're doing, supposedly to erase the problem, that is actually just to make you more powerful. The Nazis decided Jews shouldn't be having so many businesses and thriving economy, so they demonised them, said they were greedy, thieves, the inferior race, less good than aryan people, criminals, that they didn't deserve to live. The Nazi was a legal party that was elected to remove the problem, much like Trump was elected to end the problem of the immigrants and the POC. And legally, Hitler got his people to vote for him to have more and more power, until he could rule the world, on the basis that he'd do it to rid them of the Jews. Only that then he didn't stop with the Jews. He went after "traitors", after gypsies, after LGBT, after POC, and so on. And they took or burned art and books along the way.

So now think again of who's supporting Hitler-like conducts. I'm not supporting anyone who's telling me not to listen to opposing opinions, who's telling me to spread a message of threats, harassment and sexual insults, nor who's telling me to burn books, culture, and cancel, silence, erase, eliminate anyone who has an opinion other than mine. You are. And that's what's Hitler-like. That's what's fucking dangerous, and a threat to freedom of speech, to democracy.

Going back to the bloody videogame. You know why they call it anti-Semitic or blood libel? first was with the goblins. Now that speech seems to have died down because we're pointing out that seeing goblins as Jews is more Nazi-like, than non-Nazi. That they're simply folklore. So now they shut up about that. Now they tell you that the Avalanche developers (that's the company behind Hogwarts Legacy) are anti-Semites. That's based on the fact that an alt-right, Troy Leavitt, was the lead designer of Hogwarts Legacy. Well, you've been pleased to know he's lost his job now, and also, that Avalanche is full of normal people just like us, and that the alt-right was a minority. This guy, perhaps one or two more we're yet to know about, which, given the amount of alt-right worldwide, it's safe to say that every big company has at least a small amount of alt-right employees or even bosses.

But it takes thousands of people to make a videogame as big as Hogwarts Legacy, and just because two or three are alt-right, it doesn't make the game anti-Semitic. We're taking the game from them. We're making it ours. And personally, I've been playing for a few days now, and there's nothing even remotely far-right or anti-Semitic. Any war game I've ever played is far more anti-Semitic and racist and sexist than this one will ever be.

And in any case, before you go like dumb sheep simply believing what people say, I encourage you to make your own informed opinions. Don't be lazy. Empty your brain from judgement and make your own research. Be like scientists. But believing whatever BS you hear from people who've never played the game about said game, from people who've never read Potter about Potter, and so on... That is such a stupid thing to do. Such a brainwashing. You don't believe someone can cure you if they don't show you a CV and reputation as great doctors, so why do you believe a word from people who haven't even researched the thing they criticise, on their own, not through other's comments and ideas?

But hold on! Don't just take my word for it. Don't just believe me. Please, do research. It's time-consuming, but you're going to want to read the news, who are TRAs, their links to the alt-right, Rowling's actual tweets, who Troy Leavitt is, what Avalanche Software is, and you're going to want to read the news about female violence, legal changes, and detransitioners, and a horrible thing called transmaxxing, which will really open your eyes. I won't tell you to burn books. I'll tell you to open books, newspapers, everything... And get really informed. Knowledge is power.

[lunarsilkscreen]

Hitler Committed Suicide

"Say what you want about Hitler, at least he killed Hitler" - Norm MacDonald

What would you do if this giant cultural phenomenon got out from under you, and all of a sudden, there were people killing Jews (Your Mother's Religion and/or Ethnicity) in the country you were trying to rebuild?

If your actions took such a wide berth from your original intent, so much so that you could no longer control it; What kind of toll would that take on you as a person?

There are of course; a lot more people listening to media personality or a politician than there are of that singular politician. At some point, you have to acknowledge; they have the power to influence people, but they're also a giant megaphone. (It's why people support them after-all).

And like a megaphone, or a microphone, when it gets too close to the speaker, you get feedback. And you have to consider which parts of what you are saying are responding to your own discourse, or to the words of listeners.

A common phenomenon that many young influencers are struggling with right now, on Twitter-Tok. This might be why a lot of politicians sound like they're addressing arguments from last week. Trying to avoid getting caught up in that. Because technology has gotten so much quicker and better tho... You sound your age doing so.

Four year election cycles mean that pundits are still saying the same thing they started saying four-years ago..hell, we're still talking about prohibition despite the 21st amendment.

I digress.

Hitler was on antidepressants. I believe because of what he saw happening and his inability to control the Mania of the German people. (Sorry modern day Germany. We know you're trying, but you're still "Aryan" flavored. It's seeped into American culture as well. America has a bad tendency to reflect the bad parts of every single culture in the world..because we do everything better.)

If your life's work was the genocide of a people; how would you feel at the end of it all? If you had irrefutable proof, that the world would have been better off without you. (Or at least preferred you should've been swallowed before birth)

Who knows; if Germany had less stringent Abortion laws, maybe we Hitler would never have been born.

[papirouge]

Did that anon really say it’s biblical to slaughter humans, leaving not women and children alive 💀 meanwhile the COMMANDMENTS BY GOD has us to not kill?? Clear as day for us to obey.

Sorry but this worship of violence christians have has to stop. It’s obvious how these people are blinded by Satans lies to justify their carnal desires. In the end times we are told that many lukewarm christians will be led astray by false prophets who are actual demons. Gun worship is demonic and gun culture is idolatry

Hm, to be honest, that's what one of the few things he got right actually 😅

The "Thou shall not kill" Old Testament commandment was for the Israelites treatments of each other (and yet, death penalty sanctioned by God for some sins, such as not respecting the Sabbath) but Israelites definitely had a God given license to kill (a good chunk of the OT are undless wars tbh). God occasionally told Israelites to even kill women and the child for when at war against specific countries, while for other He told to only kill (male) adults.

And yes, that's the same God we're worshipping today.

I think modern Christians have a very warped vision of who God is. Of course, Jesus happening revealed God Grace and Mercy - but God is also a God of Judgement and Punishment. Especially of His own people. For example I'm baffled that so many Christians seem to ignore that God sentenced to death Moses for disobeying/sinning, even after Moses repented(!!) 😭 But God judgement was done: Moses was sanctioned to never see the Promised Land and God ordered him to go up some mountain where he would die (actually almost all Hebrews died in the desert -minus Jacob and Caleb- because of of their disobedience) And it didn't stop at the OT : the God struck dead Ananias and Saphira (companions of Peter) for lying to the Holy Spirit 🥴 God doesn't play.

And that's also why all the people saying "once saved always saved" are liars because both Ananias & Saphira well saved and yet God still killed them for their sin¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

God hates sin as much as He did back then. So much that people caught disrespecting them was worth death. That's why Jesus got crucified btw. Blood had to be spilled to repay the blood we owed to God for sinning. That's why we owe so much for Jesus who literally sacrificed himself for us to not bear the fate we actually deserved for our sin (eternal death in hell).

But where this user got everything wrong is that you can't feel entitled to Israelites prerogative (using violence) while feeling entitled to CHRISTIAN mercy. WE ARE NOT THE ISRAELITES. God deported the Jews. The Temple got destroyed. Jesus fulfilled the Law. We don't have a land to defend because huh Christians are dispatched across the whole world on different countries, speaking different languages, different political regime (that's why US Americans invoking politics/Constitution/ civil law in their BIBLICAL defense of gun carrying are very stupid - like...it's scary how stupid they are to think such things are remotely relevant to other Christians anywhere else in the world), etc. So WHY cherry picking one Israelite prescription? Remember, disobeying 1 commandment of the law is like disobeying the WHOLE Law.

So yeah, if those gun toting Israelite LARPers want to access the prerogatives of Israelites, they better obey to the same commandments: do the Sabbath (no light, can't get past a given distance from their home), stone adulterers, circumcise their son, not eating pork, pay the tithe....and all the other 600+ commandments of the Law. Oh and they also better keep Jesus out of their mouth since Jesus fulfilled the Law and there's no point to invoke Jesus while still entertaining the very same things He precisely came to put an end to🙃

They can't pick and chose what they want from the Law while leaving out the rest. That's how you know how wack the theology of those people are. And it's tragic how many people get fooled by this. false doctrine. Interestingly enough, they will never answer to this question:

if Jesus refused to defend himself/use violence out of obedience to the Father, what makes you think you can? Where does the entitlement of disobey a commandment that Jesus himself followed come from??

If you're interested I made a very throughout debunking of the pro gun Christian stance on my Christian side blog

[teaveetamer]

The Holocaust thing? Re; Vaush? Do you know what that is? He has a problem where a lot of stuff he says is taken wildly out of context by people that don't like him. He's generally a pretty smart and reasonable guy, just.... edgy. Stupidly edgy.

We all agree he was a moron for the JKR tweet, I think even he admits that now. Though mostly he says he wishes it hadn't been blown up so much it took over more important parts of the conversation.

Okay I dug up the clip I saw originally with the holocaust thing. It's from this video (starting at about 35:13. The clip is just a small portion but I recommend watching until about 41:05, or the end of that section of the video. I think Noah brings up some really good points about why this was such an issue).

Now here's how I interpreted this conversation:

Basically I guess Vaush and Noncompete (? I'm not familiar with him) were having a conversation about something relating to enslaved peoples and violence against their oppressors. Vaush, from my understanding, decided to "challenge" the logic of "enslaved people committing violence against their oppressors is justified" by basically saying "well the Nazis thought they were being oppressed by Jewish people so by your logic that makes the Holocaust okay."

He invoked the ol' "Jews controlled the banks" propaganda point as a justification for why Nazis thought they were being oppressed. When Noncompete explained that it wasn't the same thing because Nazis were not aligned with reality Vaush then doubled down and defended his stance that Nazis thought they were oppressed with "a disproportionate number of Jewish people controlled banks in Germany pre-Nazis".

And when Noncompete basically said "okay yeah we're not doing this" Vaush called him "too stupid to have a conversation with".

And here I'm going to recommend another video: https://youtu.be/wmVkJvieaOA?si=DIrWc7ahIbmJO8pq

IMO I think this conversation follows the pattern described in this Alt-Right playbook video to a T. Opponent gives point -> Vaush counters with something only tangentially related, shifting the conversation -> Opponent counters with point -> Vaush again counters with something only tangentially related, shifting the conversation further -> When opponent decides that the argument is not being had in good faith he disengages -> Vaush basically says "he must not want to argue with me because I'm right!" and considers the debate "won".

I'm not saying Vaush is an irredemable person or a Nazi or anything based on this. Like I said I've only watched him a little bit and most of my other info about him is from clips and the like. I'm just saying that even if I take him in the best possible faith this was an idiotic thing to do, and it puts me off his content. I think you're right anon that it comes off as him being unnecessarily edgy and that is going to lead to some pretty unfortunate consequences if he doesn't think before he speaks.

There's like an actually interesting conversation to be had there. Like they could have discussed the historic oppression of Jewish people and how Nazis weaponized the consequences of their oppression against them in the form of propaganda*. They could have related that to modern day problems. They could have talked about how propaganda works, and how the best propaganda usually has a kernel of truth buried in the bullshit. But he uh, didn't.

But still, I don't think it was unsalvageable until he doubled down on the point later. It was straight up negligent of him to not, you know, acknowledge that he was misinformed or actually correct the misinformation he just shared so his audience wouldn't go spreading it around. He has a big platform. He has a duty to ensure he uses that platform responsibly. I think he has some growing to do in that area.

It's good that acknowledged he messed up with the JKR tweet, but like, I hope he used it as a learning experience too. His tweet took over the more important parts of the conversation in part because he doubled down on it instead of just being like "hey guys I was trying to make a joke but I see it didn't land. My bad. Being misogynistic even for a joke was a dumb call. Taking it down now, sorry to everyone hurt by this." If he'd done that then it could have moved the conversation back to what was really important much quicker.

I mean no hate if you like him anon, that's just one of the reasons I haven't sought out more of his stuff. If you have videos or something from him to demonstrate that he's changed since that stuff I mentioned then I'd be happy to look at him again.

*Jewish people did not own a disproportionate amount of wealth in Germany, and if they were over-represented in the banking sector that's in part because previous discrimination pushed Jewish people into banking-adjacent sectors in the first place. The TL;DR of that is that Christians viewed tax collecting, money lending, anything that dealt with cash as sinful and undesirable jobs, so those were some of the few jobs Jewish people could get for a time (because no Christians wanted them). It has nothing to do with greed or a desire for economic control.