Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:13:21 JST ≠

   • A. Linder
   • Partisan Night Slut :pns:
   • Richard
   • Ambassador Plebeian A∴A∴☑️ ☑️
   • SenatorGeoJigsaw
   • EvolLove
   • AuthoritativeJew™
   • Autumn
   The Jew Question
   ================
   
   I had an interesting weekend, part of which involved speaking to four people who were articulate defenders of their positions.
   
   These were:
   
   1. A Christian anti-Semite who fully believes in the JQ and sees a metaphysical dimension to it.
   
   2. A Jewish person "but I eat hot dogs" of a relaxed interpretation of the religion but still faithful to its core.
   
   3. A pro-Palestine whitish (quarter-Italian, rest WASP) woman with a degree from Columbia and postgrad at UT (pronounced "oot").
   
   4. A fellow black metal fan who is neither fond of Abrahamism nor egalitarianism, altruism, and empathy (roughly: liberalism).
   
   Not surprisingly, all three differed from me on some crucial issues.
   
   I ended up telling people several times that my position is nuanced, but the basic attributes of reality on which it is based are not.
   
   #christianity #israel #jews #antisemitism #blackmetal #palestine #christianholocaust
   
   @SiRrogueKnight @truthbait @Autumn @Richard @Electronwarrior @EvolLove @Alex_Linder @PNS
   • Embed this notice
     Dad (noyoushutthefuckupdad@shitposter.world)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:13:19 JST Dad

     in reply to
     @amerika I was gonna favorite this post, but then I saw you use "BCE" and that is gay
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:13:20 JST ≠

     in reply to
     Next I spoke with another woman who is Jewish but of the nuanced variety. She is both relaxed about dietary rules and rituals, and hardcore about her interpretation of Judaism.
     
     She does not use terms like tikkun olam, at least around me, but her philosophy is fundamentally progressive: nature hides devil demon darwinist gods, and humanity is found in fixing this situation with empathy, kindness, altruism, and so on.
     
     I mentioned the conversation with the pro-Palestinian lady, and said that the problem with empathy is that it applies to all parties, even those behaving badly.
     
     She responded with something out of Karl Popper: Palestinians are intolerant, therefore to protect tolerance, we must tolerate the intolerance.
     
     I came back with the obvious, that then we were no longer talking about tolerance, but one morality of many. I mentioned my paganski triumf morality of "good to the good, bad to the bad" which I see as halfway between the third world "do what is good for me and my buddies only" and the Abrahamist/Bureaucratic "do good to everyone, especially the bad, so we can train them to be good."
     
     I added that I embrace the obvious, and that is that if we leave the Palestinians and Hizbollah next door to Israel, the terror attacks will continue, and no nation can thrive under the constant threat of an October 7th, Holocaust, or 9/11.
     
     She was surprised that I was a Holocaust Revisionist. I said the official story -- soap, gas chambers, lamp shades, ovens, bending guns, shock ponds, and occult sacrifices -- was obviously just as much nonsense as the Blood Libel, and anyone who believes Russian propaganda or Russians is some kind of mental defective. (She is a Europeanized Jew, so nodded at my opinion on Russians, who in my experience are criminal untermenschen like most of the third world.)
     
     I also separated out Aktion T4 from the anti-Semitic activities of the Nazis for her, since this is an important distinction. Aktion T4 was the purging of the weak -- career criminals, the insane, the promiscuous, and the retarded -- and did not consider ethnic origin.
     
     I added that, however, whether the Holocaust was one Jew thrown in a labor camp for being Jewish or six million Jews getting gassed for being Jewish, the problem was the same: this was a diversity conflict that, instead of being resolved through ethnic separation, had turned into a murder festival. I pointed out that both Palestinians and Jews have been accused of the same, and both accusations have "some" merit, and does pointing out that the Nazis were removing gypsies, Jews, and Italians from Germany as a type of self-defense. To avoid genocide, they had to commit genocidal relocation; such is the paradox of diversity. However, they did not need to enslave and kill Jews for being Jews. That strikes me as an emotional tantrum.
     
     I also mentioned the partisan killings and barn-burnings in Poland; to me, I said, this is evidence that Jews were broadly unpopular with their European hosts, and so it is as stupid to keep them in Europe as it is to keep Palestinians in Israel.
     
     She said she was shocked at the amount of Nazi imagery out there, but that the people who were supporting it seemed to have shifted. It was not skinheads any longer, but college students from comfort class origins. Yes, I said, this is the problem with empathy and altruism; they always go seeking someone who is a bigger victim. After WW2, Jews had victim cred, but now they have been replaced by Palestinians.
     
     I further opined that what Palestine needed was to develop some kind of functional economy, and that south Syria was ironically a better place for this than Gaza, which has probably been a tourist destination since 6k BCE.
     
     She was kind enough to buy us a round of Modelo Especials, and we talked about literature after that. Ironically she likes Ezra Pound (and also Wagner, I found out). A very interesting lady.
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.
     BowserNoodle ☦️ and Forest of Enchantment repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:13:21 JST ≠

     in reply to
     The first on my list was the whitish woman who was pro-Palestine.
     
     She argued very convincingly that Israel was committing genocide in Palestine because they were bombing children.
     
     I countered with the observations that (1) Hamas hides weapons behind children and (2) genocide involves removing large masses of people, not little groups of fifty.
     
     She then said that Palestine was the natural home of the Palestinians and to move them from it was genocide-by-relocation or some similar term.
     
     I countered with the biological, historical, and genetic fact that the hybridization of Jews -- Arabs taking European wives -- occurred in Israel and that Israel is the natural home of the Jewish people.
     
     I suggested also that the diaspora has been an administrative disaster for everyone, not just through various pogroms and holocausts, but the constant diversity conflict it has created, same with the gypsies and Saami.
     
     She hinted that perhaps the Holocaust was fake. I mentioned that whether or not we believe the stories, all sides agree that the Nazis wanted Jews removed from Europe.
     
     She then talked about the Palestinian quest for statehood and how a two-state solution was necessary.
     
     I brought up the constant terrorist attacks from Lebanon (Hizbollah) and Gaza, and said I thought more than one ethnic group in the same society made for horrors. In this case, I said, having more than one ethnic group close to each other guarantees war, doubly so if they are related and one is more whitish than the other.
     
     Since Jews are 50% more European than Palestinians, they are higher average IQ and will always be wealthier, I said, so you have class war in addition to race war breaking out, but you can never fix the race war.
     
     I suggested what I think is Netanyahu's plan, to relocate the Palestinians to south Syria, as a win for all sides. The Palestinians never have to see a Jew again.
     
     The Jews get respite from October 7th, rocket attacks, and frequent suicide bombings.
     
     We agreed to disagree, and then I left to get some French fries. My habit is to mix ketchup with tabasco, and I think I saw her grimace at that.
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:39:15 JST ≠

     in reply to
     When I was turning away from the bar, which is within walking distance of my home and sells $2 beers, therefore is a perpetual favorite, I was hailed by another fellow I knew from time and again meeting in record stores or at shows.
     
     He is younger, and in my view, a perfect representation of that gap between millennials and Generation Zed. I knew he had some "edgy" views and always tried to respect those. We got into talking about the Jewish Question.
     
     In his view, there is something biologically and metaphysically wrong with Jews; without using the term "evil," he said they were inclined toward some pathologies that were really bad like pedophilia and communism, and they had to be exterminated.
     
     I asked for clarification here. Why not just send them off to Israel? If Israel was home to all Jews and only Jews, they would not be a problem for the rest of the world.
     
     "They'll meddle in your financial systems," he said. He offered up that a nuclear Israel could destabilize the world, and how companies like Palantir showed a heavy Jewish presence in surveillance technology.
     
     In his view, something biological in the Jew makes them inclined toward destroying everything good. I asked if he meant good in a competence/darwinist, moral, or metaphysical sense, and he suggested all three were relevant. Now this was interesting.
     
     I brought up the point that Darwin himself would make, or at least Madison Grant would, which is that mixing races produces unstable populations, and even if they move up the IQ chain toward European levels, there might be other mental effects. However, I pointed out that Jews originated in the upper classes of Arab societies who could afford European wives.
     
     I then asked what to me seems the most relevant question: was his objection to the Jewish mentality, or to Jewish intellectual competence? They seem a blessed people, I said, since they are generally higher IQ, intellectually curious, and have an energy that drives them toward areas of mass interest: commerce, science, art, music, socializing.
     
     He opined that there was something metaphysically wrong with Jewish people that made them pathologically destructive. I asked if this was simply the liberal Jews that he knew, since in my view, liberalism is based on reality-denial and therefore, is obsessively destructive.
     
     He reiterated his view: Jews were a parasite, like vines that kill trees, and the only solution is a final solution. I asked whether he was not simply seeing a different culture that had Arabic and third world roots, as applied by people more intelligent than the norm.
     
     Considering this, he allowed that it might be so, but then returned to theme and said that then, the best thing the world could do would be to eliminate such people.
     
     But then, I asked, would that not mean that it was most sensible to eliminate the third world entirely?
     
     He suggested that some third world populations were content to stay in the third world, but Jews had invaded the West, therefore would do it again.
     
     I asked if the diaspora had Roman roots, since after the Masada drama, Jews were driven out of their ethnic homeland by the threat of occupation. If, I asked, there were no such force, would not they be content to be in Israel?
     
     He pointed out that Jews are present in every nation on Earth, so I asked whether it simply made sense to repatriate all Jews worldwide to Israel, ending the diaspora and the Jewish Question at the same time.
     
     He allowed that this might be a solution, but that the demonic nature of Jews meant that they would inevitably meddle. I mentioned tikkun olam here, and opined that it was no different than any other form of human neurosis, bored people looking for meaning.
     
     At that point, his friends arrived, so the conversation ended. I opted for a Karbach Hoppadillo at this point. These beers are less sweet, but have more bite, and I felt like biting something.
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:39:16 JST ≠

     in reply to
     On my way home after the bar, which is a lonely walk, I spoke with one of my long-time friends from the black metal genre. Black metal, for those who do not know, is so "social Darwinist" that Nazis are considered moderates; it is uncontroversial among the smarter kids of my generation that 90% or more of humanity must die, and the genre we produced has a similar view: kill off everyone but the highly functional, burn the churches, and restore natural selection everywhere.
     
     For example, one of my friends from this genre has been of the opinion that we need to breed wolves and let them loose in the suburbs, towns, and cities. The point would be that anyone who could not have the wit to defend themselves or run away successfully was genetically unfit and needed to die, especially the obese, retarded, insane, homeless, Christian, and stupid.
     
     The mythos of the "unpunished herd" and "Christian Holocaust" is strong with this group, which in a Nietzschean take sees Christianity as the root of weakness in the West. Certainly Christianity, Judaism, liberalism, Islam, and Mongolian-style philosophies share a view where the individual is so important that means-over-ends conformity must be enforced on the group in order to avoid interrupting the individualism of single citizens. However, in my take, this view shows up in every social group, because they are united by the lowest common denominator which is a paranoid fear of life preying on them or obstructing their desires, judgments, feelings, and emotions.
     
     His take on "the JQ" was very black metal: Jews only exist because Christians exist, since Christianity is the non-ethnic variety of Judaism that incorporated Greek, Babylonian, Egyptian, Zoroastrian, Hindu, and Nordic pagan thought only because it wanted to be a summary of all religions so that it could out-compete all of those religions. I thought his assessment of Christianity was probably correct, since dualism -- the idea of a perfect Heaven-order and an imperfect natural order as its opposite -- resembled the scapegoating that people do when their lives do not work out as they had hoped more than a specific culture or tradition, although this mentality is most common in the third world where people are not only biologically/genetically lower IQ but, owing to zero functional social institutions, tend to be disappointed.
     
     "Jews are just like the Saami or gypsies," he said. They are in the West because their homelands got torn up. Now that they are here, they want to assert themselves so they can feel good about being different. He thought the Nazis were wasting their time using Jews as labor, which he and I both agree is what the Holocaust actually was, a moronic slave labor program where 270k Jews died, in addition to the aforementioned barn-burnings and partisan executions. I still hold the Nazis responsible because their rhetoric made it clear that those who killed Jews would not be punished, enabling old resentments to rise, especially after Kristallnacht, which in my view was a (mostly successful) attempt to drive Jews out of Germany.
     
     "Backfired," he said, explaining that this sent wealthy Jews on to the US and UK instead of Israel, and in those nations, they had more influence. He also opined that Jews made their own bed, since when 40% of the NKVD is Jewish, Lenin and Trotsky are Jewish, and so on, it was inevitable that Europeans were going to see Jews as Communist junk-sellers and gas them. I brought up the counterpoint of Ayn Rand (Alyssa Rosenbaum) who witnessed liberal Jews and gentile socialists taking over in Russia and dispossessing her family of all that it had produced, because in my experience the quarter or so of Jews who are not Democrats tend to be radical social Darwinists who defend the West because it has sheltered them, despite having dual loyalties as any non-WASP does in America.
     
     My friend is only half-WASP, so he partially accepts my take. Like most black metallers, he recognizes that mono-ethnicism is a prerequisite for a non-failing nation, but this leaves him at risk of repatriation to Ireland, where he would also be an outsider. Like I have said, race- and ethnic-mixing is a cruel thing. In his view, the focus on Jews was a mistake because it was obsessive and Christian, built from a view of the world as good/evil, where really the human mind shuttles between order/disorder (Jung) and as a result, human societies struggle to impose realism upon an individualistic herd that engages in flocking and self-promotional behaviors unless disciplined.
     
     We talked about Satan after that. Satan, in my view, is the container into which Abrahamism shuffled all the ancient gods, since in a monotheistic order it becomes increasingly difficult to have multiple gods, although apparently early Christian and Jewish sects did exactly that. Satan represents natural selection, the rising of the strong above the weak (Christianity does the opposite: like the Mongols, it tries to teach the weak to behave as if they were strong, simply because that unity is necessary to subsidize the individualism of members of the Crowd), and the pagan morality of "good to the good, bad to the bad" instead of the third world mentality of "good to my friends only" and the Christian or peer pressure morality of "good to the good, good to the bad."
     
     How funny it is, he observed, that conservatives believe in literal evil/satan and Leftists believe in secular evil/inequality. As if they were two wings of the same bird. I asked if Islam, Christianity, and Judaism were "three weeds from the same root," and he suggests that this was true in varying degrees. Islam was a very stupid religion, he opined, for inbred mixed-race people from the third world, and Judaism was a step up. "Much more consistent," he said.
     
     Christianity was probably a stoned hippie trying to make Judaism gentler, he said, and I did not disagree. It was well-intentioned. Then again, as I mentioned in passing, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions" (old Anglo proverb). He made a final point that sticks with me, which is that all three religions are raging because they are being replaced with a secular religion of science, wealth, and rules that allows for New Age beliefs to be personal hobbies, therefore is lower-cost than any religion, and will take over as these religions age into obsolescence.
     
     At that point, police cars showed up at the gas station that was across from where I was walking at that moment, and we had to detach the call so I could flee what looked like an arrest at gunpoint. It is never good to be around when the bullets start flying, and my fear is that this is what happened to the Jews in the decline of the West.
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     N e w m a n (newman@noauthority.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:44:33 JST N e w m a n

     in reply to

     @amerika 90% of people in the black metal, deserve to die

   • Embed this notice
     ≠ (amerika@annihilation.social)'s status on Tuesday, 15-Apr-2025 01:44:33 JST ≠

     in reply to

     • N e w m a n
     @newman
     
     Nowadays black metal? Sure, they're all millennial Redditors. Gas! Ovens!
     Forest of Enchantment likes this.