Creepy
Tons of links can be found here.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2016/06/02/the_jewish_cowbell_the_meaning_of_those_double_parentheses_beloved_by_trump.html
Quote(((The Jewish Cowbell))): Unpacking a Gross New Meme from the Alt-Right
By Katy Waldman
From every Internet niche comes a native shorthand, so we should not be surprised that includes putrescent swampy niches from the putrescent swamps of Twitter. New York Times reporter Jonathan Weisman shared his war story in the paper:
The first tweet arrived as cryptic code, a signal to the army of the "alt-right" that I barely knew existed: "Hello ((Weisman))." @CyberTrump was responding to my recent tweet of an essay by Robert Kagan on the emergence of fascism in the United States.
"Care to explain?" I answered, intuiting that my last name in brackets denoted my Jewish faith.
"What, ho, the vaunted Ashkenazi intelligence, hahaha!" CyberTrump came back. "It's a dog whistle, fool. Belling the cat for my fellow goyim."
Truly though ((those brackets)) are not ultrasonically subtle enough to qualify as a dog whistle and not heroic enough to conjure Aesop's image of belling the cat. Let's call the construction the Jewish cowbell. The cowbell is a series of parentheses, anywhere from one to three, around the name of a Jewish person, to signal Jewishness. It proliferates in the dank margins of online conservative discourse, where anti-Semitism glows like a weird mold; tweets exhort Jews to follow trails of dollar bills into ovens and warn readers, via photographs of goose-stepping Nazis, not to "piss off the white boys."
TWEETS
That critiques, or even mentions, of Trump can incite brain-atomizing gusts of anti-Semitism from certain corners of the Web is, sadly, not news. Just ask writer Julia Ioffe, who weathered Holocaust-themed abuse after she profiled Melania Trump for GQ, or journalist Bethany Mandel, who felt so intimidated by the violent threats of the #MAGA, or Make America Great Again, crowd (she was called a "slimy Jewess" and told she "deserved the oven") that she went out and purchased a gun. But such vituperation often begins with this curious Jewish cowbell, a typographical indicator of ethnicity that hearkens back to the starred armbands Jews were forced to wear in Nazi Germany. Looking at these parentheses is a surreal experience: Not only do they mark out Jews, but they visually contain them, sequestered as if in a camp or prison.
According to historian Sarah Werner, there are few precedents for using typography to signify particular forms of identity. In 17th century multilingual dictionaries, various typefaces could connote various tongues: blackletter for Flemish and English; roman for Italian, Latin, and German; and italic for French and Spanish. Though most English texts switched from blackletter to roman in the mid-1500s, works that strongly evoked a shared English culture continued to be printed in blackletter, including the great national bibles, such as 1611's King James Version.
Leaving aside clandestine methods for designating the race of potential jurors, the closest many texts come to telegraphing ethnic or regional background is dialect. Mark Twain shaped the language of black characters to mirror "Negro speech" (or his perception of it) in Huckleberry Finn; so too William Faulkner in his fiction and George Gershwin in Porgy and Bess; novels by Paul Laurence Dunbar and Zora Neale Hurston allowed men and women to voice the vernacular music of their communities.
Mic has a good exposé on the origins of the cowbell: Known to alt-right activists as an "echo," the symbol sprang from a hardcore conservative podcast named the Daily Shoah. The Shoah "featured a segment called 'Merchant Minute' that gave Jewish names a cartoonish 'echo' sound effect when uttered," Cooper Fleishman and Anthony Smith explain. When they reached out to the podcast editors for more information, they were told that the meme also functioned as a critique of "Jewish power":
Quote"The inner parenthesis represent the Jews' subversion of the home [and] destruction of the family through mass-media degeneracy. The next [parenthesis] represents the destruction of the nation through mass immigration, and the outer [parenthesis] represents international Jewry and world Zionism."
After just a few hours of research for this post, I cannot begin to describe the vile Freudian effluvium that pours out of Trump-adjacent spigots of the Internet. Think cartoons of purple-lipped black guys spilling McDonald's drinks across the desks of white employers (to support Trump's scorn for affirmative action) and Jews vacuuming up money through their fantastical schnozes. Men who criticize Trump can expect to find themselves starring in rococo gay sex scenarios: id-soaked fantasias of BBCs (big black cocks), cucks (cuckolds), "receptive homosexuals," and "romping groups" of "alpha males" mingling with "subversive degenerates." Women face gross comments on their bodies, accusations of mental instability, solicitude about their "meds," and social Darwinist speculation on their corrupted "bloodlines." The craziness highlights posters' fluency in Internet porn even as it foregrounds intense erotic and racial anxiety. And all this is preceded, often, by a ((symbol)) whose clarion call-to-viciousness evokes the clang at the start of a boxing match.
"Hey, look at this fetid thing!" journalism has its limits, but its value is unmistakable in the Age of Trump, and this particular fetid thing should make us step back and reflect. The Republican nominee for president is riding a wave of support that looks for all the world like Hitler nostalgia. As a casually Jewish woman without the financial means to get my horns removed or my cloven hooves separated into toes, I am dismayed. Cowbell bigots may represent a tiny fraction of Trump followers, but they're too toxic to be written off as a mere parenthetical.
Weird, I thought Republicans loved Israel.
They can't catch a break.
Quote from: sbr on June 03, 2016, 12:25:24 AM
Weird, I thought Republicans loved Israel.
The Alt-right aren't republicans, with a big r or a small one. They're an eclectic mix of monarchist, fascists and authoritarians.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 03, 2016, 12:35:34 AM
Quote from: sbr on June 03, 2016, 12:25:24 AM
Weird, I thought Republicans loved Israel.
The Alt-right aren't republicans, with a big r or a small one. They're an eclectic mix of monarchist, fascists and authoritarians.
:yes: No true Republican...
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 03, 2016, 12:35:34 AM
Quote from: sbr on June 03, 2016, 12:25:24 AM
Weird, I thought Republicans loved Israel.
The Alt-right aren't republicans, with a big r or a small one. They're an eclectic mix of monarchist, fascists and authoritarians.
Seems like they favor the Republican candidate for President.
I bet alt right trolls love it when morons overanalyse their antics.
Next: Polandball and the rise of authoritarianism in Eastern Europe.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 03, 2016, 01:05:29 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 03, 2016, 12:35:34 AM
Quote from: sbr on June 03, 2016, 12:25:24 AM
Weird, I thought Republicans loved Israel.
The Alt-right aren't republicans, with a big r or a small one. They're an eclectic mix of monarchist, fascists and authoritarians.
Seems like they favor the Republican candidate for President.
The candidate isn't a republican either.
The No True Republican fallacy. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 02:11:09 AM
The No True Republican fallacy. :lol:
I don't think it's a contraversial statement to make that Trump engineered a hostile takeover of the better and doesn't actually believe in its ideals. He's been rather up front about the matter.
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 01:34:23 AM
I bet alt right trolls love it when morons overanalyse their antics.
Next: Polandball and the rise of authoritarianism in Eastern Europe.
Pole considers antisemitism playful antics. How new and refreshing.
Gosh golly gee. Trolls? On my internet?
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 07:35:38 AM
Gosh golly gee. Trolls? On my internet?
Gosh golly gee. Ridiculous articles? On Tim's Slate?
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 07:35:38 AM
Gosh golly gee. Trolls? On my internet?
Yet you seem delighted to see it extended off the internet as much as possible. This statement seems a bit dishonest considering where you stand that the LOLZ should be all that life is about.
Well yes, watching these dumb Slate lolcows get milked by /pol/ edgelords is funny.
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Oh, you'd say that wouldn't you, (((Minsky Moment))).
Seriously though, I don't see why we should just laugh this bullshit off either. That Dylann Roof kid was like this, and he assassinated a politician and killed eight other people.
Seems to me these guys are old fashioned KKK types, just emboldened and made shameless by the anonymity provided by the internet.
Yep - I find the entire "Haha, they sure trolled you LOL" response only slightly less odious than the hatespeak to begin with...
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 10:04:08 AM
Seems to me these guys are old fashioned KKK types, just emboldened and made shameless by the anonymity provided by the internet.
Yes and let me tell you it is only going to get worse, because they are now realising that rallying together behind a common cause (Trump in thi case) countr-wide gives them critical mass necessary to actually influence stuff.
Happened slowly but steadily to Hungarian far-right scum over the years from the late 90s, as from their pariah status some public figures started to talk to their liking, and their style, and their "values" became sociall accepted talking points again.
I agree with ||Berkut||
[{|( jimmy olsen )|}] :rolleyes:
$P|( tag :P
online, probably 10%~ of people who make anti-semitic remarks are actually anti-semites. people do it for laughs or to get a reaction from people--a culture of this has developed that's more similar to ginger jokes than actual racism. here, it's probably a joke/whatever because it contains the standard, "yes, yes, good goy." the actual anti-semites don't seem to really play along--their discussions tend to be more serious and filled with actual hate. contrast this with gamersgate/anti-SJW types (another subculture in the same community), who tend to be more serious in their rants against feminists, etc. there are few actual rants against jews.
I haven't seen much of this kind of stuff but I do follow a bunch of econ blogs and I have noticed a recent rise in the comments sections of references to the Bell Curve (Charles Murray) as if it were some kind of irrefutable social scientific dogma and not one of the most notorious junk statistics studies in recent history. For the most part I don't read comments sections anymore because of the idiots/trolls.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Is it acceptable and would I put up with someone I knew who was behaving in such a fashion? No, of course not. But this is the internet and people do despicable things on it all the time. What was noted in that excerpt in OP doesn't seem to rise to the occasion of needed to take action.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
In fact the troll point supports spreading of racism in this case (or homophobia or any other kind of bigotry). If you can't say it seriously, but can pass it off as "a joke" that's what you do... and you continue doing so until people have heard those jokes enough that you can start saying it seriously and not get a reaction.
Pre-emptive overreaction is the key to winning, then.
Quote from: derspiess on June 03, 2016, 10:56:28 AM
Pre-emptive overreaction is the key to winning, then.
I was just chatting with someone who had their name bracketed like that on twitter - by people unrelated to the conversation - for something relatively , unleashing a barrage of channer like spam, hatemail, cries of "kind and sensitive person" and "beta", and gore to their account.
I don't think reacting to this in the online space is an overreaction, nor pre-emptive even if you personally don't care.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 03, 2016, 01:05:29 AM
Seems like they favor the Republican candidate for President.
Our system only gives them two real choices. If we had a true multi-party system, they would have their own loony like the Euro countries do.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Of course we don't understand it. We're all normie scum to be triggered for lulz. Anon chan culture + 17 year old lettowites = /pol/.
Even if some of these memes are actually inspired by hate (as opposed to just a desire to rile people), is this really a pressing issue we should be caring about? All kinds of nasty right wing white supremacists, antisemites etc. are the margin of the margin in the US right now - they are completely irrelevant. They are not the ones burning down police cars or causing people to lose their jobs because of a not-well-thought-out tweets.
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 12:45:57 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Of course we don't understand it. We're all normie scum to be triggered for lulz. Anon chan culture + 17 year old lettowites = /pol/.
I don't think Minsky was saying he doesn't understand the trolls. He was saying he doesn't understand that the argument they're trolls somehow mitigates their actions.
Well yes, again, trolls live on the internet. Grow a thicker skin? Journalists complaining about mean tweets is just pathetic.
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 12:57:37 PM
Even if some of these memes are actually inspired by hate (as opposed to just a desire to rile people), is this really a pressing issue we should be caring about? All kinds of nasty right wing white supremacists, antisemites etc. are the margin of the margin in the US right now - they are completely irrelevant. They are not the ones burning down police cars or causing people to lose their jobs because of a not-well-thought-out tweets.
<boggle>
I know Marty's embrace of ultra-right bigotry should not really be a surprise anymore, but somehow it still is...I guess that says more about me than it does about him.
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 12:57:37 PM
Even if some of these memes are actually inspired by hate (as opposed to just a desire to rile people), is this really a pressing issue we should be caring about? All kinds of nasty right wing white supremacists, antisemites etc. are the margin of the margin in the US right now - they are completely irrelevant. They are not the ones burning down police cars or causing people to lose their jobs because of a not-well-thought-out tweets.
:lol:
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 01:17:04 PM
Well yes, again, trolls live on the internet. Grow a thicker skin? Journalists complaining about mean tweets is just pathetic.
Many people live on the internet, not just journalists and trolls. You may chose not to care about what happens online - or to enjoy it for the lulz - but that doesn't mean the rest of the world should ignore it.
Agree to disagree.
while places like /pol/ of course encourage bigotry, and the attitudes there probably have/do convert people, the same can be said of LGBT and other progressive movements. the internet and its anonymity has done a lot of good and bad, and I agree with the point that I think marti's trying to make: the vast majority of kids who come from chans and other off-color internet communities aren't a threat. they're too few and unpopular; these are the social outcasts.
I think for most teenagers, you should assume it's trolling. Even a sincerely held belief when 16 is just a passing (usually)mistake. Most kids say incredibly dumb stuff and then they grow out of it. Sad for these that their bad ideas are on record for internet eternity.
I'm not a fan of the "young and stupid" line of thinking. "Young and stupid" people do bad things because they (the people) are bad, not because they are young. Lots of people don't act like assholes when they're young.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 03, 2016, 02:51:17 PM
I think for most teenagers, you should assume it's trolling. Even a sincerely held belief when 16 is just a passing (usually)mistake. Most kids say incredibly dumb stuff and then they grow out of it. Sad for these that their bad ideas are on record for internet eternity.
One can imagine a female typist like in the OP writing clickbait for bored office drones on KAPLand, getting tag-teamed by a young Fireblade and Jaron and then writing a similar virtue-signalling screed about the horrible, terrible misogyny on anon message boards. Fetch the smelling salts! ^_^
Quote from: The Brain on June 03, 2016, 02:55:43 PM
I'm not a fan of the "young and stupid" line of thinking. "Young and stupid" people do bad things because they (the people) are bad, not because they are young. Lots of people don't act like assholes when they're young.
very few young people do bad things because they're actually Bad People. most young people who do bad things do so because they're highly susceptible to external influence: some of these internet communities. then, once they mature and enter the real world, many drop those attitudes.
Quote from: LaCroix on June 03, 2016, 03:04:00 PM
very few young people do bad things because they're actually Bad People. most young people who do bad things do so because they're highly susceptible to external influence: some of these internet communities. then, once they mature and enter the real world, many drop those attitudes.
I'm reminded of a certain discussion about root causes of Islamic terrorism. :hmm:
Quote from: LaCroix on June 03, 2016, 03:04:00 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 03, 2016, 02:55:43 PM
I'm not a fan of the "young and stupid" line of thinking. "Young and stupid" people do bad things because they (the people) are bad, not because they are young. Lots of people don't act like assholes when they're young.
very few young people do bad things because they're actually Bad People. most young people who do bad things do so because they're highly susceptible to external influence: some of these internet communities. then, once they mature and enter the real world, many drop those attitudes.
I have been young myself. You are not some puppet without a will just because you are young.
I'm reminded of the "12-year-olds don't know that you don't shoot people" discussion from a while back.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 03, 2016, 02:20:07 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 02:11:09 AM
The No True Republican fallacy. :lol:
I don't think it's a contraversial statement to make that Trump engineered a hostile takeover of the better and doesn't actually believe in its ideals. He's been rather up front about the matter.
A takeover's a takeover. He's the Republican candidate for President and has been endorsed by, from what I can see, everyone but Romney. Sorry but he's the face of Republicanism in 2016.
QuoteEven if some of these memes are actually inspired by hate (as opposed to just a desire to rile people), is this really a pressing issue we should be caring about? All kinds of nasty right wing white supremacists, antisemites etc. are the margin of the margin in the US right now - they are completely irrelevant. They are not the ones burning down police cars or causing people to lose their jobs because of a not-well-thought-out tweets.
Less of an issue if Trump hadn't made a habit of retweeting white supremacists and anti-semites. For what it's worth I have the exact same issue with the anti-semitism that I think's been unleashed or unmuzzled on the British left since Corbyn won.
There are plenty of people other than Romney who haven't endorsed him.
Really? I thought Ryan was everyone's last hope of a prominent Republican just not lining up.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 03:04:55 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on June 03, 2016, 03:04:00 PM
very few young people do bad things because they're actually Bad People. most young people who do bad things do so because they're highly susceptible to external influence: some of these internet communities. then, once they mature and enter the real world, many drop those attitudes.
I'm reminded of a certain discussion about root causes of Islamic terrorism. :hmm:
I don't think these trolls are Muslim. :huh:
Quote from: The Brain on June 03, 2016, 03:09:14 PMI have been young myself. You are not some puppet without a will just because you are young.
I'm reminded of the "12-year-olds don't know that you don't shoot people" discussion from a while back.
world politics is more nuanced than murder
Quote from: The Brain on June 03, 2016, 03:09:14 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on June 03, 2016, 03:04:00 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 03, 2016, 02:55:43 PM
I'm not a fan of the "young and stupid" line of thinking. "Young and stupid" people do bad things because they (the people) are bad, not because they are young. Lots of people don't act like assholes when they're young.
very few young people do bad things because they're actually Bad People. most young people who do bad things do so because they're highly susceptible to external influence: some of these internet communities. then, once they mature and enter the real world, many drop those attitudes.
I have been young myself. You are not some puppet without a will just because you are young.
I'm reminded of the "12-year-olds don't know that you don't shoot people" discussion from a while back.
Free speech is murder!!!11
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 03:37:50 PM
Really? I thought Ryan was everyone's last hope of a prominent Republican just not lining up.
Unless I missed something, Wubya and Herbert Walker have not. Pretty sure the New Mexico gobernador has not. Rand Paul said he signed a pledge to support the eventual nominee, so he will support. I think there are a great number of pro forma endorsements of this non-ringing kind out there.
Or to put it another way, how many prominent Republicans have been showing up at his campaign events?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 03:46:19 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 03:37:50 PM
Really? I thought Ryan was everyone's last hope of a prominent Republican just not lining up.
Unless I missed something, Wubya and Herbert Walker have not. Pretty sure the New Mexico gobernador has not. Rand Paul said he signed a pledge to support the eventual nominee, so he will support. I think there are a great number of pro forma endorsements of this non-ringing kind out there.
Or to put it another way, how many prominent Republicans have been showing up at his campaign events?
I would think that a term "prominent Republican" means someone who is active in politics. Dubya is retired.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 03:46:19 PM
Unless I missed something, Wubya and Herbert Walker have not. Pretty sure the New Mexico gobernador has not. Rand Paul said he signed a pledge to support the eventual nominee, so he will support. I think there are a great number of pro forma endorsements of this non-ringing kind out there.
Or to put it another way, how many prominent Republicans have been showing up at his campaign events?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.nj.com%2Fpolitics_impact%2Fphoto%2Fdonald-trump-chris-christie-c0ec6ced2a50d9c5.jpg&hash=92baafa954799e2f230324124ca8ffe80a3630d0)
Okay, prominent Republicans who aren't blood relatives of a man bullied by Trump across God knows how many debates and I wasn't limiting this to ringing endorsements and campaigning either.
Personally I think with something like Trump any sort of endorsement's a disgrace. As with Corbyn I even sort of feel that silence is tacitly allowing the takeover.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/where-republicans-stand-on-donald-trump-a-cheat-sheet/481449/
Quote from: garbon on June 03, 2016, 03:52:21 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/where-republicans-stand-on-donald-trump-a-cheat-sheet/481449/
One Senator (+Cruz), one Rep, the Bushes (+Rove), Romney and Delay? :(
Edit: Dole and McCain disappoint me the most :(
Of course many of those yea are like McCain's I support the nominee of the party.
Quote from: garbon on June 03, 2016, 03:52:21 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/where-republicans-stand-on-donald-trump-a-cheat-sheet/481449/
So it's Cruz, the Bushes and a handful of people I haven't heard about, then do not support Trump. :P
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 03:51:08 PM
Personally I think with something like Trump any sort of endorsement's a disgrace. As with Corbyn I even sort of feel that silence is tacitly allowing the takeover.
I think Rand Paul's position, for example, is perfectly defensible.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 03:56:37 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 03:51:08 PM
Personally I think with something like Trump any sort of endorsement's a disgrace. As with Corbyn I even sort of feel that silence is tacitly allowing the takeover.
I think Rand Paul's position, for example, is perfectly defensible.
'A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president'. He's a 'delusional narcissist and an orange faced windbag'. 'Do we really want a commander in chief who is eager to use nuclear weapons?'
'I've always said I'll support whoever's nominee.'
That doesn't seem defensible to me.
Quote from: LaCroix on June 03, 2016, 02:20:37 PM
while places like /pol/ of course encourage bigotry, and the attitudes there probably have/do convert people, the same can be said of LGBT and other progressive movements. the internet and its anonymity has done a lot of good and bad, and I agree with the point that I think marti's trying to make: the vast majority of kids who come from chans and other off-color internet communities aren't a threat. they're too few and unpopular; these are the social outcasts.
Not just that but also the fact that there are hardly any reports of these people being violent - whereas, at least in the US, it's the left that has been committing a number of acts of violence over the last months.
Admittedly it's different in Europe - that's why, for example, Tamas is so misguided on this.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 04:02:57 PM
'A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president'. He's a 'delusional narcissist and an orange faced windbag'. 'Do we really want a commander in chief who is eager to use nuclear weapons?'
'I've always said I'll support whoever's nominee.'
That doesn't seem defensible to me.
It does to me. You make a pledge, you honor it, regardless of how distasteful it is.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 04:15:52 PM
It does to me. You make a pledge, you honor it, regardless of how distasteful it is.
Even if you've said and presumably think Trump's utterly unqualified to be President and eager to use nukes? If I thought that and actually had a position of influence there's not many promises I wouldn't break to try and stop them becoming President. My conscience would matter too much to me.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 04:15:52 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 04:02:57 PM
'A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president'. He's a 'delusional narcissist and an orange faced windbag'. 'Do we really want a commander in chief who is eager to use nuclear weapons?'
'I've always said I'll support whoever's nominee.'
That doesn't seem defensible to me.
It does to me. You make a pledge, you honor it, regardless of how distasteful it is.
:yes: It was morally unacceptable for German generals to turn against the Führer.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on June 03, 2016, 11:15:43 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 03, 2016, 01:05:29 AM
Seems like they favor the Republican candidate for President.
Our system only gives them two real choices. If we had a true multi-party system, they would have their own loony like the Euro countries do.
Yeah, here's the thing, these guys weren't coming out the woodwork over Bush or Romney. I think this constituency existed in the GOP for a long time, but the party was careful to not make overt overtures to them, relying on on dog whistles. They feel emboldened by Trump and making themselves known.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 03, 2016, 04:15:52 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 03, 2016, 04:02:57 PM
'A speck of dirt is way more qualified to be president'. He's a 'delusional narcissist and an orange faced windbag'. 'Do we really want a commander in chief who is eager to use nuclear weapons?'
'I've always said I'll support whoever's nominee.'
That doesn't seem defensible to me.
It does to me. You make a pledge, you honor it, regardless of how distasteful it is.
Only to a certain point. It wasn't a suicide pact, so I think "eager to use nukes", is where you break your word.
Quote from: Jacob on June 03, 2016, 01:03:39 PM
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 12:45:57 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Of course we don't understand it. We're all normie scum to be triggered for lulz. Anon chan culture + 17 year old lettowites = /pol/.
I don't think Minsky was saying he doesn't understand the trolls. He was saying he doesn't understand that the argument they're trolls somehow mitigates their actions.
I thought the point is that they aren't trolls, i.e. people who say things they don't genuinely believe just rile others up, but rather people with genuinely-held antisemitic beliefs; and that the fact that they're online doesn't change the basic "racists provoking people" dynamic.
Quote from: Berkut on June 03, 2016, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 12:57:37 PM
Even if some of these memes are actually inspired by hate (as opposed to just a desire to rile people), is this really a pressing issue we should be caring about? All kinds of nasty right wing white supremacists, antisemites etc. are the margin of the margin in the US right now - they are completely irrelevant. They are not the ones burning down police cars or causing people to lose their jobs because of a not-well-thought-out tweets.
<boggle>
I know Marty's embrace of ultra-right bigotry should not really be a surprise anymore, but somehow it still is...I guess that says more about me than it does about him.
Ooh! Ooh! Before I forget! :w00t:
Mart's favorite statue: Penis de Milo.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 03, 2016, 05:49:15 PM
I thought the point is that they aren't trolls, i.e. people who say things they don't genuinely believe just rile others up, but rather people with genuinely-held antisemitic beliefs; and that the fact that they're online doesn't change the basic "racists provoking people" dynamic.
Yeah for sure, it's just that some people think that if they say "it's just trolling" that means it shouldn't be taken seriously.
Yes, kind of the Web 2.0 version of the conversational "I was only joking..."
Quote from: Martinus on June 03, 2016, 04:04:55 PM
Not just that but also the fact that there are hardly any reports of these people being violent
Sure those guys in the Charleston church just tripped and accidently fell into bullets that were lying about.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 03, 2016, 05:49:15 PM
Quote from: Jacob on June 03, 2016, 01:03:39 PM
Quote from: Legbiter on June 03, 2016, 12:45:57 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 03, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I don't understand the "troll" point. Is there any reason to think these people don't believe what they say? Is there something about degenerate racists harassing people that somehow becomes cute or acceptable because it is done through an internet connection?
Of course we don't understand it. We're all normie scum to be triggered for lulz. Anon chan culture + 17 year old lettowites = /pol/.
I don't think Minsky was saying he doesn't understand the trolls. He was saying he doesn't understand that the argument they're trolls somehow mitigates their actions.
I thought the point is that they aren't trolls, i.e. people who say things they don't genuinely believe just rile others up, but rather people with genuinely-held antisemitic beliefs; and that the fact that they're online doesn't change the basic "racists provoking people" dynamic.
I would assume it's a mix. No way I can see how you'd figure if it's a 50/50 split, or more like 90/10, or whether a particular person is a genuine anti-Semite or just a troll. Not sure what difference it makes, anyway--it's distasteful trash one way or the other.
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/133825/white-supremacists-new-hero-red-angry-bird (https://newrepublic.com/minutes/133825/white-supremacists-new-hero-red-angry-bird)
:lol:
Quote from: citizen k on June 04, 2016, 02:37:34 AM
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/133825/white-supremacists-new-hero-red-angry-bird (https://newrepublic.com/minutes/133825/white-supremacists-new-hero-red-angry-bird)
:lol:
:lol:
Quote from: JacobYeah for sure, it's just that some people think that if they say "it's just trolling" that means it shouldn't be taken seriously.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 03, 2016, 10:40:36 PM
Yes, kind of the Web 2.0 version of the conversational "I was only joking..."
where does this mentality end? if peoples' jokes should be taken seriously and those people should be condemned, where do we stop?
Quote from: LaCroix on June 04, 2016, 03:05:58 PM
Quote from: JacobYeah for sure, it's just that some people think that if they say "it's just trolling" that means it shouldn't be taken seriously.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 03, 2016, 10:40:36 PM
Yes, kind of the Web 2.0 version of the conversational "I was only joking..."
where does this mentality end? if peoples' jokes should be taken seriously and those people should be condemned, where do we stop?
Maybe we stop making jokes like that?
Yeah, I don't think we are missing on too much if we ditch racist jokes, really.
No, freedom of speech should stop only short of direct incitement to violence - otherwise you will always find someone offended by something someone else says.
Quote from: Jacob on June 04, 2016, 04:07:30 PMMaybe we stop making jokes like that?
I think a lot of people would disagree that we should persecute those who make offensive jokes
Besides, the only criterion one should judge jokes against is whether they are funny. No topic should be off limits a priori.
Quote from: LaCroix on June 04, 2016, 04:14:50 PM
Quote from: Jacob on June 04, 2016, 04:07:30 PMMaybe we stop making jokes like that?
I think a lot of people would disagree that we should persecute those who make offensive jokes
Pretty much anyone who believes in the inherent worth of Western civilization. Cucks, on the other hand...
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 04:13:18 PM
No, freedom of speech should stop only short of direct incitement to violence - otherwise you will always find someone offended by something someone else says.
I'm not saying we should prosecute them, just disapprove of them. I know you're a lawyer, but not everything is addressed through the criminal code.
Freedom of speech works both ways, and it includes the people that feel offended by those jokes.
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 04:15:00 PM
Besides, the only criterion one should judge jokes against is whether they are funny. No topic should be off limits a priori.
You got on your high horse when I made jokes about Trump scum getting the shit kicked out of them.
Quote from: celedhring on June 04, 2016, 04:19:55 PMFreedom of speech works both ways, and it includes the people that feel offended by those jokes.
the original argument was that these offensive jokes should be considered (by everyone, I guess) as if they weren't jokes but serious statements. this essentially means the obliteration of offensive joke-making
so, I don't think it's limited to just those who are offended by offensive jokes. these people already exist: prudes.
I don't get the joke in pointing out that someone's Jewish :huh:
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 04, 2016, 04:49:44 PM
I don't get the joke in pointing out that someone's Jewish :huh:
Fair enough. It does not automatically mean the joke is a bad one. I bet there are jokes you find funny that other people do not get (or even find them offensive).
Sure but I can't even see the outline for a joke.
There's racist memes and stuff that I don't find funny and think offensive, but I can see how it's a joke. I literally have no idea how identifying someone as Jewish works on that level.
Quote from: celedhring on June 04, 2016, 04:19:55 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 04:13:18 PM
No, freedom of speech should stop only short of direct incitement to violence - otherwise you will always find someone offended by something someone else says.
I'm not saying we should prosecute them, just disapprove of them. I know you're a lawyer, but not everything is addressed through the criminal code.
Freedom of speech works both ways, and it includes the people that feel offended by those jokes.
Sure, the question is whether it is a productive use of your time to do so. But I guess I am willing to concede that whatever floats your boat it is highly subjective and I shouldn't waste my time criticising others for wasting theirs - some people find painting miniatures rewarding; for others, virtue signalling does the trick.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 04, 2016, 04:55:09 PM
Sure but I can't even see the outline for a joke.
There's racist memes and stuff that I don't find funny and think offensive, but I can see how it's a joke. I literally have no idea how identifying someone as Jewish works on that level.
I suspect it's absurdist. There is probably also an element of an in-joke there. Like, Languish's "Who the fuck are you?" which is probably deeply unfunny for anyone who is not "in".
Jokes are formulaic stories clearly labeled as jokes by the teller. "One-liners" etc are not funny and certainly not jokes.
So 1) antisemitism still exists, and 2) Europeans and racist Dumbfuckistanis are at best dismissive about it and at worse endorse it. Holy fucking shit.
I guess, on consideration, ultimately my objection to overreaction to unfunny or bad jokes is that I generally like comedy, and if bad jokes meet with too harsh of a reaction, this may have a chilling effect on edgy jokes that are actually funny - thus depriving me of my entertainment.
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:00:11 PM
I guess, on consideration, ultimately my objection to overreaction to unfunny or bad jokes is that I generally like comedy, and if bad jokes meet with too harsh of a reaction, this may have a chilling effect on edgy jokes that are actually funny - thus depriving me of my entertainment.
You also hate Jews.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 05:00:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:00:11 PM
I guess, on consideration, ultimately my objection to overreaction to unfunny or bad jokes is that I generally like comedy, and if bad jokes meet with too harsh of a reaction, this may have a chilling effect on edgy jokes that are actually funny - thus depriving me of my entertainment.
You also hate Jews.
My boyfriend is Jewish.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 05:00:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:00:11 PM
I guess, on consideration, ultimately my objection to overreaction to unfunny or bad jokes is that I generally like comedy, and if bad jokes meet with too harsh of a reaction, this may have a chilling effect on edgy jokes that are actually funny - thus depriving me of my entertainment.
You also hate Jews.
Aren't you forgetting something?
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:01:15 PM
My boyfriend is Jewish.
That's just you reinforcing your own self-loathing. As predictable as clear heels and a stripper pole.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 05:04:02 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:01:15 PM
My boyfriend is Jewish.
That's just you reinforcing your own self-loathing. As predictable as clear heels and a stripper pole.
Milo is Jewish too. :secret:
Face it, you're a Circle-K kind and sensitive person. Lulz, Circle-Kuck. I just made that one up.
Wassat?
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 04:56:42 PM
I suspect it's absurdist. There is probably also an element of an in-joke there. Like, Languish's "Who the fuck are you?" which is probably deeply unfunny for anyone who is not "in".
To be honest I think it's more plausible that it's just anti-semites than that it's an absurdist in-joke.
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 05:12:47 PM
Wassat?
Circle K is a kosher label on food products one would see in a grocery store.
Although I can appreciate you not knowing that, since there are so few Jews in Poland these days, due to their massive demographic changes years ago because of the high costs of the real estate market. [berkut]Jews want to live in Warsaw that's their problem[/berkut]
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 04, 2016, 04:55:09 PM
Sure but I can't even see the outline for a joke.
There's racist memes and stuff that I don't find funny and think offensive, but I can see how it's a joke. I literally have no idea how identifying someone as Jewish works on that level.
It's identifying Jews as warning to others, and for targeting later.
Quote from: Martinus on June 04, 2016, 04:56:42 PM
I suspect it's absurdist.
So are these guys clownish teenagers or are they sophisticated cultural critics with an exquisite taste an irony?
You almost had me willing to believe the first, but they only thing absurdist about calling a complete stranger a "slimy Jewess" who should "burn in the oven" is the person trying to defend it.
SIGH
The "joke" is that the person holds views associated with Jews (depending on your flavour of idiot, it is either liberalism, or just whatever the idiot disagrees with). So pointing out his/her Jewishness is in fact a snappy, witty revelation of the true motivation behind the points the person is making.
And as for the general topic, I don't think such antisemitic comments should be banned or sanctioned. They should be shunned and peer-pressured into silence, because that is how free speech is supposed to work: if everyone is voicing their opinions, the fringe should have trouble heard.
But that is not what happening. What is usually happening is that one colour of radical is yelling one flavour of idiocy (far-right scum), triggering a reaction from the SJW and assorted far-left mirror images on the other side, while the majority is silent.
Now, whether this is a problem in a general societal context is yet to see. We just can't possibly know because social media and the Internet are totally new phenomena and the effect of the radicals dominating discourse can have any effect from none to decisive and ruinous. Then again, trying to curtail them have possible outcomes on the exact unpredictable scale.
Of course it is hard to argue that on the political front, inaction by the moderates to defend their own moderation has caused horrible problems, from Orban's Hungary through the Le Pens and UKIPs of the world, to Future President Trump.
Quote from: Tamas on June 06, 2016, 10:07:10 AM
SIGH
The "joke" is that the person holds views associated with Jews (depending on your flavour of idiot, it is either liberalism, or just whatever the idiot disagrees with). So pointing out his/her Jewishness is in fact a snappy, witty revelation of the true motivation behind the points the person is making.
Yeah and that's anti-semitism, even if you say it's "a joke".
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 11:30:05 AM
Quote from: Tamas on June 06, 2016, 10:07:10 AM
SIGH
The "joke" is that the person holds views associated with Jews (depending on your flavour of idiot, it is either liberalism, or just whatever the idiot disagrees with). So pointing out his/her Jewishness is in fact a snappy, witty revelation of the true motivation behind the points the person is making.
Yeah and that's anti-semitism, even if you say it's "a joke".
that was exactly my point
Quote from: Tamas on June 06, 2016, 11:30:57 AM
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 11:30:05 AM
Quote from: Tamas on June 06, 2016, 10:07:10 AM
SIGH
The "joke" is that the person holds views associated with Jews (depending on your flavour of idiot, it is either liberalism, or just whatever the idiot disagrees with). So pointing out his/her Jewishness is in fact a snappy, witty revelation of the true motivation behind the points the person is making.
Yeah and that's anti-semitism, even if you say it's "a joke".
that was exactly my point
Well, it's a damn fine point :cheers:
Oh yeah this is serious. Very, very (((serious)))
Quote from: Legbiter on June 06, 2016, 02:48:46 PM
Oh yeah this is serious. Very, very (((serious)))
Are there a lot of Jewish people in Iceland?
Jews are leaving France in record numbers. Spoiler alert: Not because of (((mean tweets)))
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/22/middleeast/france-israel-jews-immigration/ (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/22/middleeast/france-israel-jews-immigration/)
Can't wait for the next moral panic of the day article from (((Tim))).
Why are they leaving France?
Quote from: The Brain on June 06, 2016, 03:26:37 PM
Why are they leaving France?
Why indeed.
Dunno, maybe, maybe the housing market is really tight?
Quote from: Legbiter on June 06, 2016, 03:28:36 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 06, 2016, 03:26:37 PM
Why are they leaving France?
Why indeed.
Dunno, maybe, maybe the housing market is really tight?
Goyification?
There's about 500K Jews in France. Most of them aren't going anywhere.
There was a time of course when things were different . . .
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 06, 2016, 04:00:55 PM
There's about 500K Jews in France. Most of them aren't going anywhere.
There was a time of course when things were different . . .
It's kind of weird watching the alt right using perceived anti-Semitism to support their own anti-Muslim bigotry while simultaneously dismissing criticism of or indulge in actual anti-Semitism.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 04:59:19 PM
So 1) antisemitism still exists, and 2) Europeans and racist Dumbfuckistanis are at best dismissive about it and at worse endorse it. Holy fucking shit.
What is your estimate, in %, of Americans that are anti-semitic?
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 04:40:45 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 06, 2016, 04:00:55 PM
There's about 500K Jews in France. Most of them aren't going anywhere.
There was a time of course when things were different . . .
It's kind of weird watching the alt right using perceived anti-Semitism to support their own anti-Muslim bigotry while simultaneously dismissing criticism of or indulge in actual anti-Semitism.
And no doubt using the sort of anti-Semitism we're seeing in Labour now as an attack on the 'regressive left' :lol:
Quote from: Zoupa on June 06, 2016, 05:45:18 PM
What is your estimate, in %, of Americans that are anti-semitic?
Depends if you mean hard core Aryan Nation type anti-semitism or softer "Jews are shitty tippers" type.
Quote from: Zoupa on June 06, 2016, 05:45:18 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 04:59:19 PM
So 1) antisemitism still exists, and 2) Europeans and racist Dumbfuckistanis are at best dismissive about it and at worse endorse it. Holy fucking shit.
What is your estimate, in %, of Americans that are anti-semitic?
8 percent.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 06, 2016, 05:55:19 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on June 06, 2016, 05:45:18 PM
What is your estimate, in %, of Americans that are anti-semitic?
Depends if you mean hard core Aryan Nation type anti-semitism or softer "Jews are shitty tippers" type.
Jews are shitty tippers included.
I used to think Americans were OK now I'm not sure. Suddenly the Walken joke about more cowbell looks very suspicious to me. And if SNL isn't proof against the anti-semites there is no safe place.
Quote from: Zoupa on June 06, 2016, 05:45:18 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 04, 2016, 04:59:19 PM
So 1) antisemitism still exists, and 2) Europeans and racist Dumbfuckistanis are at best dismissive about it and at worse endorse it. Holy fucking shit.
What is your estimate, in %, of Americans that are anti-semitic?
I am certain there is a substantial amount, but certainly less than the 100% of Europeans.
Then again, there are some parts of America where Jews are such an ingrained part of society they're not even noticed, and there are parts of America that have probably never seen a Jew.
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 04:40:45 PM
It's kind of weird watching the alt right using perceived anti-Semitism to support their own anti-Muslim bigotry while simultaneously dismissing criticism of or indulge in actual anti-Semitism.
Not really; it's just another defensive play on the whole "only racists talk about race" angle.
After all, when racists talk about the "inner city", or "states' rights", or "welfare", or "law and order", they're not saying "niggers" even though they're saying "niggers", and they will take umbrage when you call them on it.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 06, 2016, 07:04:08 PM
I am certain there is a substantial amount, but certainly less than the 100% of Europeans.
You are overstating your case here. At the very least, you should exclude European Jews from the list of anti-Semites.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 06, 2016, 07:09:33 PM
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 04:40:45 PM
It's kind of weird watching the alt right using perceived anti-Semitism to support their own anti-Muslim bigotry while simultaneously dismissing criticism of or indulge in actual anti-Semitism.
Not really; it's just another defensive play on the whole "only racists talk about race" angle.
After all, when racists talk about the "inner city", or "states' rights", or "welfare", or "law and order", they're not saying "niggers" even though they're saying "niggers", and they will take umbrage when you call them on it.
Yeah, I agree. Originally I thought "funny" instead of "weird", but it's not really funny.
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 07:09:55 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 06, 2016, 07:04:08 PM
I am certain there is a substantial amount, but certainly less than the 100% of Europeans.
You are overstating your case here. At the very least, you should exclude European Jews from the list of anti-Semites.
:lol: I dunno, man...Jews are loathed, but Jewish self-loathing is a close to an art as you get.
Quote from: Zoupa on June 06, 2016, 08:14:55 PM
What? :huh: Seriously?
Yeah. I think most people here hold at least one negative generalization about Jews. But then again they probably hold at least one negative generalization about almost any ethnic/religious/cultural group, and I think Jews would score better than most on the question "taking the good with the bad, is your view of [group X] overall positive or negative."
Maybe lower than 90, since as Seedy pointed out there are swathes of the country where people have never met a Jew and don't give them any thought.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 06, 2016, 04:00:55 PM
There's about 500K Jews in France. Most of them aren't going anywhere.
There was a time of course when things were different . . .
But what about their obvious inability to coexist with {{Ahmed}}?
Quote from: Jacob on June 06, 2016, 04:40:45 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 06, 2016, 04:00:55 PM
There's about 500K Jews in France. Most of them aren't going anywhere.
There was a time of course when things were different . . .
It's kind of weird watching the alt right using perceived anti-Semitism to support their own anti-Muslim bigotry while simultaneously dismissing criticism of or indulge in actual anti-Semitism.
Not as weird as watching leftists like Capetan Mihali spout anti-semitic stuff in defense of Palestinians.
I mean let's face it, everybody is antisemitic to a degree. But if I were Jewish, I'd rather side with antisemites who make jokes about Jews, than antisemites who support nations, cultures and religions that pose existential threat to Jews.
It's pretty much the same with being gay and picking which homophobes to side with.
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
I mean let's face it, everybody is antisemitic to a degree. But if I were Jewish, I'd rather side with antisemites who make jokes about Jews, than antisemites who support nations, cultures and religions that pose existential threat to Jews.
It's pretty much the same with being gay and picking which homophobes to side with.
Why pick?
And I don't think everyone is racist, homophobiic or anti-Semitic to some degree. Even if that's the case not everyone makes the choice to make jokes about Jews/gays. Pick the people who choose not to.
I find Woody Allen's neuroticism rather wearing but that is about it :huh:
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on June 07, 2016, 01:38:25 AM
I find Woody Allen's neuroticism rather wearing but that is about it :huh:
Yeah I genuinely can't think of any stereotypes I have or have held about Jews :mellow:
Its sad to see Martinus become an apologist for anti semitism. Maybe that staring into the abyss quote rings awful true.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 07, 2016, 01:45:52 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on June 07, 2016, 01:38:25 AM
I find Woody Allen's neuroticism rather wearing but that is about it :huh:
Yeah I genuinely can't think of any stereotypes I have or have held about Jews :mellow:
My main contact with Jews was at my old school in Brighton (Hove actually). They were all from ultra-liberal families and you more or less had to be told that they were Jewish. Instead of morning worship they went to a large room and played cards and whatnot; I joined them for a while as I prefer cards to singing hymns, but was spotted by my housemaster and had to rejoin the Christian faithful :P
Maybe I could have managed some anti-semitism if the contacts had been with the very orthodox? With the guys in Brighton it would be like hating oneself.
I grew up in the Highlands. Having stereotypes about Jews would be like having very strong opinions on the Bedouin.
I had a fair amount of stuff about Gaelic speakers though.
I think I met a single jew in all my life until I moved to NYC. And I was like 14 (he was a classmate in high school) and too preoccupied by puberty in order to develop prejudices. He told some great jokes, though, I guess that's a cliché too.
Not all cliches are bigotry.
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:30:51 AM
Not as weird as watching leftists like Capetan Mihali spout anti-semitic stuff in defense of Palestinians.
:lol: Sorry my cuckraking QQ on behalf of the Palestinians was too much for you -- a man with a deep personal connection to the Jewish people, being that one of your multiple boyfriends is 1/8th Jewish or something like that, right? -- to bear, but I regret to inform you that I'm very far from antisemitic in my opinions (except probably by ADL standards of course). More subtle thinkers than yourself, whether they agree or not, can distinguish criticism of Israel's policy and even criticism of Zionism from antisemitism.
But whatever suits your fancy. Feel free to keep latching onto me as your "prototypical kind and sensitive person" and "SJW," even though you don't have a clue about, or a legitimate interest in, my actual political beliefs. Hint: They're very far from the ethos of "identity politics."
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on June 07, 2016, 01:57:22 AM
Maybe I could have managed some anti-semitism if the contacts had been with the very orthodox?
I grew up with old relatives who were secular Jews living in Brooklyn, and they maintained a deep-seated resentment against the ultra-Orthodox (referred to as "Yiddles" or "Heebs") in their neighborhoods. My relatives would be chastised for doing shopping on a Saturday and such things, but I figure their antipathy had more significant roots than just that.
Quote from: Sheilbh on June 07, 2016, 01:45:52 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on June 07, 2016, 01:38:25 AM
I find Woody Allen's neuroticism rather wearing but that is about it :huh:
Yeah I genuinely can't think of any stereotypes I have or have held about Jews :mellow:
That's kind of surprising. No stereotypes of Jews being any combination of cheap, shrewd, unscrupulous, underhanded, argumentative, neurotic, or overly intellectual/analytical?
I heard a few people in the courthouse down in Charlotte sounding quite pleased when telling family members that they'd drawn a "Jew lawyer" (a colleague doing property felonies) as their public defender. :lol: Precisely because of some of those stereotypes, of course.
I got asked about my origins and the derivation of my last name a couple of times personally, in the South and in the North, with the client hoping I was, in fact, a possessor of "that vaunted Ashkenazi intelligence" from the original post, at least so far as the law went.
And yes, antisemitic feeling probably varies considerably across the country. The relationship between African-Americans and Jews has been particularly strained since the mid-60s, with some black activists making more pointed attacks against "Goldberg," the archetypal exploitative Jewish owner of black-patronized stores and black-occupied tenements. Jews meanwhile continued to participate in the general "white flight" to the suburbs during this period and saw blacks increasingly as a threat.
But I'm thinking specifically of the 1968 Ocean Hill-Brownsville teachers' strike (long story but the teachers were almost all Jewish, the students almost all black) as a discrete event from that era that strongly contributed to the breakdown of mutual friendliness, not to mention the ostensible solidarity between the two groups that existed during the mid-50s "respectable" civil rights heyday.
More recently, the 1992 Crown Heights riots in Brooklyn were a particularly violent flare-up of tensions between Orthodox Jews and the local West Indian community; again, it's a long story and while antisemitism did play into it, it was more complicated than just that.
The Jews I knew have been a mixed bag. Pretty much like everyone else.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 07, 2016, 03:44:37 AM
"that vaunted Ashkenazi intelligence"
So that's what's wrong with Siege.
Here's a leaflet on "Famous Jewish Sports Legends."
Quote from: Razgovory on June 07, 2016, 03:50:49 AM
The Jews I knew have been a mixed bag. Pretty much like everyone else.
That's been my experience as well. And, yes, there are Jews in southern West Virginia.
In my Appalachian hometown we had a small number of jews in the community, enough for a couple synagogues. Anti-semitism was practically non-existent.
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
I mean let's face it, everybody is antisemitic to a degree.
Yeah, I am just going to stop right there...
Quote from: Berkut on June 07, 2016, 08:08:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
I mean let's face it, everybody is antisemitic to a degree.
Yeah, I am just going to stop right there...
Yep, quite an odd one.
Quote from: Berkut on June 07, 2016, 08:08:00 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:44:15 AM
I mean let's face it, everybody is antisemitic to a degree.
Yeah, I am just going to stop right there...
Consider the cultural context.
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:30:51 AM
Not as weird as watching leftists like Capetan Mihali spout anti-semitic stuff in defense of Palestinians.
El Capetan said a lot of objectionable things about the I-P conflict but nothing anti-Semitic.
There was prolly some dog whistle stuff in there.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 07, 2016, 09:04:01 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 07, 2016, 12:30:51 AM
Not as weird as watching leftists like Capetan Mihali spout anti-semitic stuff in defense of Palestinians.
El Capetan said a lot of objectionable things about the I-P conflict but nothing anti-Semitic.
It's hard to imagine one taking such a dogmatic anti-Israeli position he did without some sort of irrational animus against Jews - that's the definition of antisemitism.
I think I'm pretty sensitive to dog whistles in that context. But hey maybe I'm confused. After all I think that when people send threatening messages to strangers about being slimy Jews and sticking them in ovens they are probably anti-Semitic, but am reliably informed that this is just innocent youthful hijinks.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 07, 2016, 09:20:23 AM
I think I'm pretty sensitive to dog whistles in that context. But hey maybe I'm confused. After all I think that when people send threatening messages to strangers about being slimy Jews and sticking them in ovens they are probably anti-Semitic, but am reliably informed that this is just innocent youthful hijinks.
Or, possibly, done ironically. ;)
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 07, 2016, 09:20:23 AM
I think I'm pretty sensitive to dog whistles in that context. But hey maybe I'm confused.
I was kidding. Seems like "dog whistle" accusations are the last resort when someone is trying to accuse someone of racism.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 07, 2016, 06:04:10 AM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 07, 2016, 03:44:37 AM
"that vaunted Ashkenazi intelligence"
So that's what's wrong with Siege.
Here's a leaflet on "Famous Jewish Sports Legends."
He's not Ashkenazi.
Quote from: derspiess on June 07, 2016, 01:25:37 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 07, 2016, 09:20:23 AM
I think I'm pretty sensitive to dog whistles in that context. But hey maybe I'm confused.
I was kidding. Seems like "dog whistle" accusations are the last resort when someone is trying to accuse someone of racism.
No, the last resort is saying that someone is trying reinstitute slavery through welfare.
Kthnx.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on June 07, 2016, 03:44:37 AM
That's kind of surprising. No stereotypes of Jews being any combination of cheap, shrewd, unscrupulous, underhanded, argumentative, neurotic, or overly intellectual/analytical?
Yeah I don't think so. I was thinking about this earlier and I never heard any comments about Jews growing up and don't think I consciously knew anyone who was Jewish. So because I didn't have any reference I think for a long time I actually thought a lot of what are Jewish stereotypes were just sort-of non-Southern American/New York things. Alternately if I did have stereotypes I may have had a sort-of internalised philo-Semitism as a kid who was different, was a bit precocious and not massively sporty. I'm not sure.
I remember being really surprised when I moved to England and was exposed to anti-Semitism for the first time, it was very striking.
I've never lived in an area with a big Jewish population, so I think the first Jewish people I really knew were mostly Israeli - dancers from a couple of theatre festivals, ex-IDF travelling around South America etc - who didn't match any of the common stereotypes.
I grew up around lots of Jews. I never really understood anti-semitism. They seem like perfectly normal people.
Jefferson City, has a small Jewish community (oldest synagogue West of the Mississippi!), and they seemed like normal people to me. Antisemitism seems so absurd to me, it verges on funny. Like the belief that the Bavarian Illuminati are out to get you. On several occasions I have claimed that Malthus and Minsky are part of the Elders of the Protocols of Zion. It was meant as joke and I believe it was always taken as a joke. Sadly there are hundreds of millions of people who take that kind of thing seriously, which kind of ruins the joke.
yeah. example, this image http://i.imgur.com/yuBPVaw.jpg that gets floated around every now and then
facially, it's a holocaust denial. in actuality, it's really more of a "joke" or, I guess more accurately, a non-serious picture meant to elicit some reaction. it's not serious, and it doesn't indicate a rise of anti-semitism/holocaust denial
Quote from: LaCroix on June 08, 2016, 11:58:03 AM
yeah. example, this image http://i.imgur.com/yuBPVaw.jpg that gets floated around every now and then
facially, it's a holocaust denial. in actuality, it's really more of a "joke" or, I guess more accurately, a non-serious picture meant to elicit some reaction. it's not serious, and it doesn't indicate a rise of anti-semitism/holocaust denial
A picture that denies the holocaust does not indicate holocaust denial? How do you figure?
EDIT: I see, the claims are so obviously overstated that it must me humour. Okay.
I did like the one that proved that Jews secretly run Israel :lol: