This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Sure, the Jews thought it would also be in their overall interests of the time (not only as Jews, but also as Americans and pacifists like Einstein) to create the atom bomb.
But I still think it was a big deal to entrust such a destructive weapon to people who were not so ethnically or culturally dissimilar from the Nazis.
And, perhaps most relevantly for White identitarians, by creating such a destructive weapon, they perhaps created the conditions to never have another massively destructive war among White people. ("Brother wars" being one of our chief and regular mistakes for so many centuries.)
It may have even been unintentional, but how many White Goy lives have been saved by the fear of nuclear war? (Quite a lot of human progress has come from unintended discoveries and indirect effects... sort of an anti-fragile effect, I think, the natural tendency of humans to try to turn everything into a positive.)
I personally value the cultural contributions of Jews the least of their contributions. Very little of their culture is the culture I like most. (I hate Seinfeld, I hate Mindgeek, I hate Tinder, I hate...)
But almost zero White people (including White identitarians) don't have some favorite movies or music or other culture which had major Jewish contributions.
One of the culturally "Whitest" and most wholesome movies of all time, imo, "It's A Wonderful Life", was made by a Jew, for example.
Hollywood may have been largely run by (often nepotistic) Jews for over a century (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-dec-19-oe-stein19-story.html), and yet those Jews turned a profit from White audiences. If Jews did a better job of giving White audiences culture they were willing to pay for, than we ourselves were able to do, whose fault is that? Nepotism can only explain so much...
This had already happened, and was going to keep happening, even if no Jews had ever been let in the country.
The Hart-Cellar Act of 1965 passed overwhelmingly, Jews were not necessary for it.
"voted 320 to 70 in favor of the act, while the United States Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18.[28] In the Senate, 52 Democrats voted yes, 14 no, and 1 abstained. Among Senate Republicans, 24 voted yes, 3 voted no, and 1 abstained.[29] In the House, 202 Democrats voted yes, 60 voted no, and 12 abstained, 118 Republicans voted yes, 10 voted no, and 11 abstained.[30] In total, 74% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans voted for passage of this bill"
And Reagan naturalized huge numbers of illegal aliens.
I think America and other countries have done a terrible job with how they have managed immigration, but us White people should take responsibility for our part in them. (And if we were partly persuaded by Jews into these mistakes, we should take responsibility for that, too. We have to be smart enough to not push the blade into our own heart, no matter how persuasive some messages might be.)
No doubt commercial and pro-immigration Jews helped accelerate this, but probably much of this would have happened anyway, due to capitalist and migratory pressures. We need to take responsibility for our choices, along with acknowledging the environment we were operating in. Once we created so many nice countries, and being so capitalist, mass immigration was almost inevitable.
"Jewish nationalism" and "Jewish identitarianism" are great phrases. Instead of saying "Zionist" (which most people don't understand), just always refer to it as "Jewish nationalism/identitarianism", so people understand that White nationalism and Jewish nationalism are the same thing.
I think that several groups of people are VERY BAD at bragging about how much they have helped the rest of the planet.
These groups include (but are not limited to):
.men of all races
.White Goys
.Jews
.nerds in general
Anyway, Jews need to do a better job of bragging about every great contribution they have made, just like White Goys need to brag more, and men need to brag more, and so on.
It's possible that one single Jew- Fritz Haber- saved more lives with one single invention, than the sum of all lives lost to every single "bad Jew" on the planet.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=EvknN89JoWo&ab_channel=Veritasium
(One thing I love about the Fritz Haber example is that he also helped to kill a lot of people, so it shows the dichotomy of Jews, which is similar to the dichotomy of White Goys & the dichotomy of men & of technology in general- sometimes they do bad things, and sometimes they do good things. But the Good usually heavily outweighs the Bad.)
White people had the least need for help, but I bet the White population could expand by over 100 million extra people due to that one Jew.
Every other invention and scientific discovery is basically gravy on top, for its benefits for White people. And Jews are massive contributors in these areas.
A meaningful portion of White wealth is directly and indirectly based on Jewish ingenuity & investment. (Just like most Jewish wealth is built on top of White foundations.)
And in a civilizational conflict with, say, China, Jews would be crucial allies. Just like their help in ending the war with Japan.
It seems particularly insane to me in the present moment for any White identitarians to dare to make themselves seem like a threat to Jews, when so many Jews are playing crucial roles in AI development. There are an almost infinite number of ways in which unnecessary enmity could turn out horribly for White anti-Semites during this phase of history!
(And likewise, there are so many White Goys playing crucial roles in AI development, and Chinese people, and Indians, and so on, that the risk of Jews or anyone else being negatively racist towards any of these other groups seems off-the-charts insane.)
I bet some Jews have the exact same rationalization for why it's ok to screw over lots of White societies. "Sure, most White people are nice, but some of them did MASSIVE damage to us...", and use that to justify their selfishness and racism against all of us.
And BTW, I never doubted that some Jews have had a truly horrible (and often misinformed) attitude towards us. I am just exploring how the dynamic could eventually become lastingly better.
Ending the negative cycle is the key thing. Or at least reducing it. Both sides need better communication/persuasion, and more creative pragmatism.
This and the rest of your comment did a good job of exploring reasons to A) fear the power of Jews (in other words, try to convert them to friends and allies, by whatever creative and reasonable means we can do so), and B) "if you can't beat them, join them".
Ah yes but somebody would've figured out synthesizing nitrogen eventually. If it wasn't Haber, it would've been the next-best, next-luckiest chemist. As guano prices rise, more money and brainpower is brought to bear on the problem. Someone was always going to figure out quantum mechanics, eventually. In a world without Jews, people might've figured out nuclear weapons somewhat slower but it would still have been achieved. Likewise with polio vaccines.
Politics and culture is vastly more important than science since culture and politics are one-shot things. If you lock in feminism to the Japanese constitution and the birthrate plummets, never to recover, then that's brainpower that is forever lost, it cannot be rediscovered. If you (Trotsky, Zinoviev and the rest of the gang) impose a horrendously bad form of government on a huge swathe of Eurasia (then get overthrown by Stalin and Beria who do their best to match and exceed in terms of brutality and waste), then that can never be undone. Let's not forget galaxy-brain Von Neumann's plea to immediately wage nuclear war against the Soviet Union and kill tens of millions more. If he'd been listened to, if people had trusted his game theory over their own common sense... Well someone else can invent computer architecture - nobody can bring the dead back to life.
Over the last few years, how many people weren't born because of Ehrlich and co's overpopulation meme? How much wealth has been squandered? Nobody can be sure but the amount of brainpower we lost to communism and bad politics (which is admittedly multi-causal but heavily influenced by ideas promulgated by Jews) is immense. My bet is that it outweighs Jewish contributions to science by far.
Good point. But the key thing hinges upon the necessity of the enmity. If you have a neutral, then you should not offend them unless necessary, especially if they're powerful. But if there's an enemy on the verge of attaining total power over the world? If protesting at the sinister entrenchment of political bias in GPT, for example, is making a threat, so be it. It's rather similar to the adage 'When You’re Accustomed to Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression'.
Likewise, brainpower is needed in a conflict with China. But there are other options - we could abandon our crusade to impose LGBT rights and liberal democracy upon Beijing. Acknowledging China as a legitimate non-democracy would have soothed much of the problems. Or we could've been more disciplined earlier on! Goldman Sachs and co could have not blindly sought profits from the Chinese market... A less Open Society would not have brought in Chinese students and trained them in advanced technology, so they could then leak IP back to China. A West that had a genuinely nationalist policy would not have let its industrial base be carved out and send to Shanghai.
There's a combination of high intelligence and insufficiently high wisdom that is very dangerous. It can make money and innovation - but also bad money and bad innovations like coin-clipping or communism, Middle East regime change, pre-emptive nuclear war, pumping sterilization drugs into the water supply as Ehrlich proposed. Better to match moderate wisdom and intelligence, advance swiftly but not recklessly embrace radical ideas.
Even so, I respect the novelty and refreshing point of view of your argument. But don't you think that it's a very unlikely ideology to work? I've spent a lot of time reading and never come across anything like what you say. People more naturally think in terms of 'threat -> enemy -> weaken/destroy' than 'threat -> cooperate -> ally'. Why else are there wars in the world?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link