Why are the Jews such an easy target for the far/alt-right? -

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
Religious Jews believe some bad stuff I despise (hateful attitude towards other religions), but they don't even evangelize (much less use violence), so they're easy to live besides. It's specifically the Leftist, atheist/Reform/Reconstructionist Ashkenazi diaspora that pushes Far Left ideology. And that ties back in to my idea on why they developed that way. Urban life is already known to correlate with progressive values. So is higher education. Who has a history, since Medieval times, of living in cities, doing tertiary sector work, with all of their men being taught at least basic literacy?
I think the Ben Shapiros of the world with their neo-conservative positions (those on the right who are in favour of a lot of foreign wars, particularly in israel's favor) are no less a problem than then far left, whether supported by jews or gentiles... but neoconservatism just like far leftism is a jewish movement originally.

Certainly I think the type of work is part of it. It only takes us 10 generations to turn foxes or other animals into being mostly domesticated and respond positively to humans. It only took a couple of generations for Niger to suddenly throw off lactose intolerance and for the majority of the people being able to digest tard cum effectively:

(lactose intolerance world map)
Global-Lactose-Intolerance.png


-----

Though that prelediction only gives reason for jewish disproportionate success in the modern world (and even the IQ difference doesn't fully explain the large overrepresentation at higher education); it only addresses one of the many criticisms that there are.

It does not really examine for example the ethnic aggression from modern jews, broadly speaking.
 
Last edited:

Duke Nukem

Dimensional Merge Welcoming Party #1218C197
kiwifarms.net
Jews are an easy target because they cook so well, just ask a certain mustachioed fellow about it.
 

Medicated

Not the fun kind
kiwifarms.net
I think I can provide some perspective on this. When I was a wee lad back in high school I got into reading The Right Stuff, way back before the term "Alt-Right" was even coined. So, I've been familiar with those circles for a very long time.

Jewish folks have a very disproportionate role in Leftist movements and perceived immoral businesses. If you get to looking up prominent Leftists, especially anti-White and Communist Leftists, you'll find that a very large number of them are Jews.
Yeah if you look further back in history, various rulers have used the Jews a convenient scapegoat for whatever they were up to. Not only were the Jews the "out group" of any country they occupied, they also had wealth and would lend money to the rulers, which made people view them with suspicion and distrust, and when it was time to place blame on the Jews and drive them out, all their loans were cleared by force, how convenient for them.

If all the Jews were killed, then the financial and banking power vacuum would have to be taken up by a new party, who would eventually through typical networking and family favoritism would end up being viewed in the same way as the Jews decades and centuries later.

When people say there is a disproportionate representation of Jews in certain fields, it's simply the result of self selection over generations. Most banking and merchant families were Jewish, people in their network would be Jewish and get a leg up. Those people became financiers themselves, of other projects, and eventually become a pioneer in their own field. And you always need money in order to finance businesses. You need money to make money. Now remember, money is power, and power corrupts. So the stereotype of the rich, corrupt, immoral Jew, is just the result of this self selection process over time.

Of course there are plenty of people that are Jewish that are in the low to middle class, but most people ignore that, because they guys at the top are doing so well and have so much power.

Now I'm not saying that the Jews are a super persecuted "i dindunuddin" group, but neither are they the reptilian vampires others speak of, as usual the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
 
Last edited:

The Last Stand

All I got was a rock.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Something I want to know, where did the (((Jew Name))) meme come from? What do the three parentheses represent?
 

Sprig of Parsley

Damnation dignified
kiwifarms.net
Something I want to know, where did the (((Jew Name))) meme come from? What do the three parentheses represent?
Story I heard was that some brilliant person somewhere made a comment about how the names of the Holocaust victims would echo throughout time. People in places picked that up and ran with it. To make it even funnier some people against those people started using the echoes to show solidarity or to thumb their noses at evil bigots or something.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: The Last Stand

eternal dog mongler

kiwifarms.net
Incel basement dwellers hate the Jews because what the hell else is there to hate? Black people? No, they look down on black people so obviously it's not black people preventing them from getting laid and sticking them in retail jobs with no hope of advancement. And if you call a random black man walking down the street a nigger then good fucking luck.

Must be the (((Jews))) because the alt-right has mainlined cowardice and tilting at windmills. Gotta blame everything else for your own damned failure to launch.
 
They pretty much bred favoring intelligence, but they got some strange mental patterns because of that.
So you have your higher average IQ and tons of unique diseases and neurosis.

Nobody would really care about them if they weren't messing around too much.
They just enjoy 1) making everything about them 2) push destructive shit 3) get collectively defensive over anything.

They should chill more.
Ancient wisdom held that everything is best in moderation. I believe the same is true of intelligence, too. Being a little bit above average seems to be the ideal amount to make people successful in life. People who are actual geniuses tend to be crazy, and often wind up being useless. For whatever reason, intelligence seems to correlate with craziness.

Nobody has ever accused Blacks of being the smartest people around, yet they're the happiest ethnic group in America despite also having a really shitty situation. Likewise, has anybody ever seen an unhappy exceptional individual?

I think the Ben Shapiros of the world with their neo-conservative positions (those on the right who are in favour of a lot of foreign wars, particularly in israel's favor) are no less a problem than then far left, whether supported by jews or gentiles... but neoconservatism just like far leftism is a jewish movement originally.

Though that prelediction only gives reason for jewish disproportionate success in the modern world (and even the IQ difference doesn't fully explain the large overrepresentation at higher education); it only addresses one of the many criticisms that there are.
I despise Israel and Right-wing neocon types too, I just respect them on some level. They cause problems, but the problems they cause are not as severe. They also tend to have better character, excepting their deceptive nature.

Take Israelis for example. I feel like creating Israel was wrong: they confiscated the land from the people already living there and moved in a bunch of outsiders of another culture. It's a colony. The Palestinians have every right to be upset. But, the Palestinians are still savages, while the Israelis treat them rather well (for hostile natives) and have made the place more livable than the locals would have. The Israelis also have a fine, masculine/militant culture instead of being degenerate parasites. But they are still backstabbing leeches, and I wish we had a President who would just tell them to fuck off. Ultimately, I would like for Iran to be the top dogs in the area (I think Persians are the best people around there), but I can't abide that for as long as Iran is going to antagonize the US.

Neocons are mostly bad in that they're rats who pretend to be conservative so they can move the Overton Window. I'm not all that opposed to the Middle Eastern wars and still have a soft spot for Bush, even though I know I shouldn't. Hussein had to be cut down to size, as did Al-Qaeda.

Yeah if you look further back in history, various rulers have used the Jews a convenient scapegoat for whatever they were up to. Not only were the Jews the "out group" of any country they occupied, they also had wealth and would lend money to the rulers, which made people view them with suspicion and distrust, and when it was time to place blame on the Jews and drive them out, all their loans were cleared by force, how convenient for them.

If all the Jews were killed, then the financial and banking power vacuum would have to be taken up by a new party, who would eventually through typical networking and family favoritism would end up being viewed in the same way as the Jews decades and centuries later.

When people say there is a disproportionate representation of Jews in certain fields, it's simply the result of self selection over generations. Most banking and merchant families were Jewish, people in their network would be Jewish and get a leg up. Those people became financiers themselves, of other projects, and eventually become a pioneer in their own field. And you always need money in order to finance businesses. You need money to make money. Now remember, money is power, and power corrupts. So the stereotype of the rich, corrupt, immoral Jew, is just the result of this self selection process over time.

Of course there are plenty of people that are Jewish that are in the low to middle class, but most people ignore that, because they guys at the top are doing so well and have so much power.

Now I'm not saying that the Jews are a super persecuted "i dindunuddin" group, but neither are they the reptilian vampires others speak of, as usual the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
Have you read "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" by Thomas Sowell? It has a chapter on "middleman minorities," which describes how in every region of the world, there is some minority group which fulfills the same social role of Jews in terms of both the work they do and the position of being scapegoats. In Southeast Asia, it's Chinese diaspora. In Africa, it's traditionally been the Lebanese or Asian Indians. In the American Frontier, it was White traders.

The Jews as a whole trend very Far Left (when not Libertarian; in generally, they tend to be highly modernist, but never reactionary), but as you said, they aren't all the same. It's the small Jews I worry for since they're the ones most likely to suffer when the public gets tired of the rich Jews' shit. The Soroses of the world will fuck off to another country, while the average people (like the ones I know) will get left behind.

I think (unlike much of the Alt-Right) that the modernist Jew problem didn't really emerge until the late Enlightenment. Even back before Marx, most socialists were gentiles. Somebody, I think Solzhenitsyn, noted that it was reactionary Jews living on shtetls who were the most content, while the "emancipated" ones who were partially integrated into society were the most aggressive.
 

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
The Israelis also have a fine, masculine/militant culture instead of being degenerate parasites. But they are still backstabbing leeches,
What do you mean when you say they're not degenerate parasites, but they are backstabbing leeches? Because I'm not really sure where the line between a parasite and leech lays in your perception. Elucidate it for me, if you like.
 
What do you mean when you say they're not degenerate parasites, but they are backstabbing leeches? Because I'm not really sure where the line between a parasite and leech lays in your perception. Elucidate it for me, if you like.
They leech off of the US for free support. Lot of dumbass Evangelical money, Congress money, US army protection, benefits like that. They keep the US strung along, and it's all an act. One of the chief rabbis of Israel, a guy who's like their equivalent of Billy Graham or the Pope, once bragged about gentiles being cattle put on the Earth to serve them. He's supported by most of the Israeli public. Israelis like Netanyahu pretend to like America, but they really just see us as idiots to do their bidding.

But, the Israelis are also people who work their factories, work their farms, and patrol their borders. Unlike the Diaspora, who tend to be consumed with faggotry and work in occupations like media, law, and the like, Israelis get their hands dirty. They also rediscovered their ancient Hebrew culture (I hear a lot more Hebrew names among Israelis than I do Diasporas, even though both are mostly Ashkenazim), and promote good values among their own people. Neither have I ever heard of the Israelis running campaigns to promote degeneracy.

So Israel are backstabbing bastards (will sell your tech to China, will bomb your ships and pretend it was an accident, will send special forces into other countries to murder people), but they're real men, unlike their fucked up cousins in Brooklyn.
 
@Ughubughughughughughghlug in this thread:
"Nazis are evil, despicable people and the Holocaust shouldn't have happened! Now, let me tell you about how the Jews are evil parasites, dictatorship is great, and my political enemies should be killed or expelled from the country."
That whole second part of the quote is basically the operating procedures for pretty much every society from ancient times on up to the French Revolution, but I think it's obvious to everybody you're not arguing in good faith anyways.

If you want an example of an authoritarian society I like, look at Singapore. Rich, capitalist country, mostly socially open but they keep the worst troublemakers down. No secret police patrolling the streets or gulags. They arrest the worst of the worst (I know it may sound shocking, but you can run a dictatorship without going Full Stalin), but have a mostly free media. High happiness/life satisfaction among the people, and high immigration. It's also a one-party state.

How has Singapore managed it? Because they don't let lunatics run wild. They have reasonable people in power and those people bash the skulls of those who threaten their society.

Democracy has some advantages; it tends to give back more competent government officials, lower corruption, and it acts a pressure release for political tensions. But it also has an unfortunate openness to bad actors, which ends up destroying it and creating the conditions for far worse forms of tyranny. But the average democrat doesn't really care about that. Democrats are like a more general form of centrists: they're cowards who want to preen about their "morality," so that they don't have to do the hard work of keeping civilization civilized. They're unconfrontational pussies. The betas of the political world.
 

Sprig of Parsley

Damnation dignified
kiwifarms.net
Ancient wisdom held that everything is best in moderation. I believe the same is true of intelligence, too. Being a little bit above average seems to be the ideal amount to make people successful in life. People who are actual geniuses tend to be crazy, and often wind up being useless. For whatever reason, intelligence seems to correlate with craziness.
If we assume that intelligence is distributed on a curve while mental illness is more or less distributed equally across the whole range, it follows that as you approach either extreme of that curve you find an inordinate concentration of mental issues for that extreme IQ bracket. That being said...

Being intelligent drives you insane. Not so much the intelligence itself, but the cloying grasp of the education system which is equipped to handle average students far better than students at one end or the other and at times actively discourages higher end students from seeking out challenges more suited to them. Then in the rest of the world, people at the extremes find very few people they can relate to in the sense of having someone else who understands what it feels like to know you can run rings around standard curricula, what it feels like to constantly be looking for things that genuinely stimulate and nurture one's intellect and what it feels like to, at times, be singled out as troublesome for not fitting cleanly into a system designed not just for people closer to the mean but also to enforce the mean as more desirable than encouraging personal excellence. You are different, and not even a BAD kind of different, and you're still being treated as a problem. It wears on people.

Having extraordinary IQ is like having a pristine block of the most beautiful, high-quality marble imaginable and public education is like being handed terrible, cheap sculpting tools which which to shape it.
 

Lemmingwise

Blamer
kiwifarms.net
How has Singapore managed it? Because they don't let lunatics run wild. They have reasonable people in power and those people bash the skulls of those who threaten their society.
Í have a liking for Singapore, but if I'm not mistaken, government critical bloggers disappear there, just like in China.
 
If we assume that intelligence is distributed on a curve while mental illness is more or less distributed equally across the whole range, it follows that as you approach either extreme of that curve you find an inordinate concentration of mental issues for that extreme IQ bracket. That being said...

Being intelligent drives you insane. Not so much the intelligence itself, but the cloying grasp of the education system which is equipped to handle average students far better than students at one end or the other and at times actively discourages higher end students from seeking out challenges more suited to them. Then in the rest of the world, people at the extremes find very few people they can relate to in the sense of having someone else who understands what it feels like to know you can run rings around standard curricula, what it feels like to constantly be looking for things that genuinely stimulate and nurture one's intellect and what it feels like to, at times, be singled out as troublesome for not fitting cleanly into a system designed not just for people closer to the mean but also to enforce the mean as more desirable than encouraging personal excellence. You are different, and not even a BAD kind of different, and you're still being treated as a problem. It wears on people.

Having extraordinary IQ is like having a pristine block of the most beautiful, high-quality marble imaginable and public education is like being handed terrible, cheap sculpting tools which which to shape it.
Are you familiar with unschooling? It's only really appropriate for motivated, gifted children, but that's where you just let your kids study what they want or their own (as long as it isn't vidya). Unschooled children tend to be a lot happier than other children and have better/no worse outcomes on average.

I personally felt like I didn't get any value out of elementary school. Already knew pretty much all of it, was taught how to read by my parents before I started Kindergarten. High school was more useful. University I like; it's still all stuff (in my majors) that I could study on my own, but having professors provides some important structure and perspective that you don't get from reading on your own. I still wish I was unschooled. Most of the great intellects (not necessarily scientists/engineers, but at least thinkers) were also self-educated, for the most part.

Í have a liking for Singapore, but if I'm not mistaken, government critical bloggers disappear there, just like in China.
I understated the extent of repression there. They do "disappear" critics. It's still not to the extent of Nazi Germany or any Communist country, though. Singapore also tolerates making changes. Lee Kuan Yew once said that if they made a mistake, they would try something different. This is a very different attitude than most dictatorships have, where you just continue the same path.

In general, Rightist dictatorships seem* to only go after political enemies, whereas Leftist dictatorships go after entire classes of people. In a Rightist dictatorship, you can usually keep your head down and be fine. Don't concern yourself with matters of state. Leftist dictatorships are more the type to go apeshit over nothing. The Nazis are a strange case because they're arguably the most murderous regime in history, despite having been Right-wing. This mostly comes down to the Nazis having decided to just straight-up murder entire populations.

*This is contestable; I may well be wrong on this.

I'm mostly familiar with a handful of dictators who experimented with neoliberalism. Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore) seemed to do the best job. Augusto Pinochet seems to have done okay, although I understand there to be quite a bit of disagreement over his economic effects. Adolf Hitler was fucking awful, even from an economics point of view (his economy was basically a Potemkin village running off Jew gold). Francisco Franco (who I'm doing university research on right now) was awful but ended up getting good later in life.
 
Last edited:

Senior Lexmechanic

Shitposting displeases the Omnissiah
kiwifarms.net
That whole second part of the quote is basically the operating procedures for pretty much every society from ancient times on up to the French Revolution, but I think it's obvious to everybody you're not arguing in good faith anyways.

If you want an example of an authoritarian society I like, look at Singapore. Rich, capitalist country, mostly socially open but they keep the worst troublemakers down. No secret police patrolling the streets or gulags. They arrest the worst of the worst (I know it may sound shocking, but you can run a dictatorship without going Full Stalin), but have a mostly free media. High happiness/life satisfaction among the people, and high immigration. It's also a one-party state.

How has Singapore managed it? Because they don't let lunatics run wild. They have reasonable people in power and those people bash the skulls of those who threaten their society.

Democracy has some advantages; it tends to give back more competent government officials, lower corruption, and it acts a pressure release for political tensions. But it also has an unfortunate openness to bad actors, which ends up destroying it and creating the conditions for far worse forms of tyranny. But the average democrat doesn't really care about that. Democrats are like a more general form of centrists: they're cowards who want to preen about their "morality," so that they don't have to do the hard work of keeping civilization civilized. They're unconfrontational pussies. The betas of the political world.
1. Incorrect. Scandinavian societies governed themselves by devolved councils of senior tribesmen. Rome was an oligarchical republic for the first half of its existence. Most Medieval societies were functional oligarchies, not autocracies. Tribal societies are run by elder councils for the most part. Man gravitates towards oligarchy, not autocracy. In addition, just because something was always done one way doesn't mean it was right. We used to bleed anemics and try to exorcise epileptics.
2. Odd that the most notable cases of democratic societies made of unconfrontational pussies meeting the alpha autocrats on the field of battle resulted in the alpha autocrats eating shit.
 

Sprig of Parsley

Damnation dignified
kiwifarms.net
Are you familiar with unschooling? It's only really appropriate for motivated, gifted children, but that's where you just let your kids study what they want or their own (as long as it isn't vidya). Unschooled children tend to be a lot happier than other children and have better/no worse outcomes on average.

I personally felt like I didn't get any value out of elementary school. Already knew pretty much all of it, was taught how to read by my parents before I started Kindergarten. High school was more useful. University I like; it's still all stuff (in my majors) that I could study on my own, but having professors provides some important structure and perspective that you don't get from reading on your own. I still wish I was unschooled. Most of the great intellects (not necessarily scientists/engineers, but at least thinkers) were also self-educated, for the most part.
I took matters into my own hands and sought out extracurricular stuff when I wasn't in school. Public school yielded some degree of value in that I learned some basics of socialization, was able to get a good idea of what I wanted to pursue further outside of the classroom and it provided some degree of structure and later a sort of reprieve from other things (though that didn't last long). At one point my elementary school shifted me into a GATE program, and I quickly discovered that it basically served as a "smart kids" counterpart to special ed - some place to stow the troublesome ones, put some books and board games in front of them, that kind of thing.

High school was concentrated misery for me for a number of reasons and I have no fond memories of it whatsoever. College/university was initially pleasant but quickly soured.

In any event, this is a full-on derail. If I had to guess why Jewish people tend to exhibit higher levels of neuroses I would examine the genetic angle, which also likely explains why Tay-Sachs is practically a Jewish disease at this point.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Syaoran Li
1. Incorrect. Scandinavian societies governed themselves by devolved councils of senior tribesmen. Rome was an oligarchical republic for the first half of its existence. Most Medieval societies were functional oligarchies, not autocracies. Tribal societies are run by elder councils for the most part. Man gravitates towards oligarchy, not autocracy. In addition, just because something was always done one way doesn't mean it was right. We used to bleed anemics and try to exorcise epileptics.

2. Odd that the most notable cases of democratic societies made of unconfrontational pussies meeting the alpha autocrats on the field of battle resulted in the alpha autocrats eating shit.
Honest question: how do you fine dictatorship? I had this argument with somebody in real life, recently. To me, a dictatorship is mostly determined by its intolerance for freedom of political views and lack of popularly elected leadership, as opposed to necessarily having an all-powerful executive. But, my friend argued that a dictatorship has to have a single executive.

In my case, monarchies are essentially dictatorships, as are bureaucratic governments like the First French Republic, Soviet Union, and People's Republic of China, as well as any Latin American junta. Actual absolutist governments are extremely rare. You're right, though, that feudalism doesn't really fit the description I gave. You can view it a number of ways: an entirely different sort of society, a privatized society taken to the extreme, a bureaucracy governed by tradition with hereditary posts. It still has the trait, though, of unelected leadership and I believe (could be wrong here), usually, intolerance of competing political ideologies.

In the case of the second bit, you have a point. My point about democrats being cowardly is more in reference to individuals within democracies, not the spirit of the society as a whole. It's also arguable that this is skewed a bit by more advanced civilizations having been the ones that developed democracies, so their successes are possibly attributable to their other advancements, rather than to their democratic structure itself. There's a few examples that suggest the latter may have been a hindrance, like:
- The Romans using their "dictators" to govern instead of the Senate during crises.
- The United States electing the same guy four times in a row during the Depression/WW2, and basically just flat-out destroying hostile political parties unconstitutionally.
- The War of 1812, when democratically-elected officers in military units got their asses handed to them by professional, autocratically-structured British military units.

I took matters into my own hands and sought out extracurricular stuff when I wasn't in school. Public school yielded some degree of value in that I learned some basics of socialization, was able to get a good idea of what I wanted to pursue further outside of the classroom and it provided some degree of structure and later a sort of reprieve from other things (though that didn't last long). At one point my elementary school shifted me into a GATE program, and I quickly discovered that it basically served as a "smart kids" counterpart to special ed - some place to stow the troublesome ones, put some books and board games in front of them, that kind of thing.

High school was concentrated misery for me for a number of reasons and I have no fond memories of it whatsoever. College/university was initially pleasant but quickly soured.

In any event, this is a full-on derail. If I had to guess why Jewish people tend to exhibit higher levels of neuroses I would examine the genetic angle, which also likely explains why Tay-Sachs is practically a Jewish disease at this point.
I guess we can take it to a private conversation or a different thread, if you want. Your description of the gifted program sounds a lot like what they did in my county. We didn't really learn anything; it was just games and stuff. Activities meant to make you more creative, or something gay like that. But still more useful than regular class. For whatever reason, I never got bullied in school, and mostly liked high school, though I hated junior high. Too asocial to make any friends, though. Didn't do that until university.


Sorry to everybody else for taking this so off-topic; I'm real bad for that. Jew bad
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino