OY VEY!!! Antisemitism!

[soft kitty]

No. Jews in America and Britain have an overall IQ mean somewhere between a half and a full standard deviation above the mean. A single standard deviation does not result in the amounts of over-representation we see. It's nepotism and cronyism.


White liberals want to do that because that's what they were taught was the right thing, by jews in academia and hollywood.

That's fair but a standard deviation can be quite a lot. Look how well whites do compared to blacks.

 

[Forgetful Gynn]

That's fair but a standard deviation can be quite a lot. Look how well whites do compared to blacks.

That's more than just IQ, blacks did not evolve in an environment that gave them the traits needed to properly live in civilizations. But even considering IQ, blacks are anywhere from 1-3 standard deviations from the mean depending on where they're from and what their admixture is. Just one isn't too terribly bad and they can still function somewhat, but less than that and you get a clear picture of why africa has never had a civilization worthy of note.

 

[Distant Stare]

They were literally prohibited from every other profession.

Then the same kind of fucking idiots who created that situation got mad they turned out really good at it.

"We were prohibited from doing all work except the work that gave us the most power"

I have heard Jews make this claim before. It really boggles my mind that someone can claim to be oppressed by performing a job that requires zero labor and yields enormous wealth and power.

Christians did not condone lending money on interest, and any Christian who did so was punished or shamed. It was considered dishonest because you were not using your mind or your labor. You were just making money off of having money. Jews ignored this taboo and used it to their advantage. It is not proof of their oppression.

Jews purposely distanced themselves from their hosts for thousands of years. They purposely chose to maintain their own religion and ethnic bias. That comes at the cost of not being well liked by the ethnic majority And then they act like it was a shock that no one wanted that tumor in their country. They act like it came out of nowhere.

If I were to move to Nigeria, break Nigerian taboos, refuse to adopt Nigerian culture, and only cooperate with other whites, it would be no wonder why the Nigerians would want me gone. But god forbid someone holds a Jew to the same universal standard.

 

[Devyn]

- Which key institutions are you calling Jew controlled? Which specific Jews hold the structural/institutional power you're talking about? Keep in mind that Jew-friendly and Zionist are not synonyms for Jewish.
- Have you considered that there's a bunch of gentiles who think making the Jews sad will piss off their Christian god?
- Israel is also getting shipments of third worlders. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-54501546
-Shapeshifting is something everyone multiracial does. In a woke environment, you'll see every minority who formerly claimed a White identity shout "I'M NOT WHITE!" for their own safety. That doesn't mean they're to blame for the creation of that environment.

 

[Crystal Golem]

The missing piece to this discussion all too often seems to be the conflict between the different schools of zionism and the fallout that has come from out of that. It offers both a more realistic and yet confusing answer to this question.

I became aware of this first when doing research for the bernie sanders thread. I came across an unending number of socialist jews who were deeply anti-israel but also ardent jewish nationalists. This made no sense to me when I first came across it. I would see some socialistia dyke with triple parentheses around her name absolutely duking it out with some yenta with a bari weiss quote in her profile. I would see these people each calling each other hitler and bad jews for their choice in democrat candidate. Seeing two jews call each other hitler because one wants to vote michael bloomberg and the the other wants to vote bernie sanders was one of the strangest(and funniest) things I've ever witnessed so I had to look into this mess.

The most important part was that they both seemed to think they were the better jew. The basis of this seems to lie in the split between the so-called movements of 'political zionism', 'cultural zionism' and 'labor zionism' or 'socialist zionism'. These are all groups of jewish nationalists but they do hate each other.

After the Basel Zionist Congress of 1897 many Zionists became disillusioned with the route zionism was going and believed that a re-invigorated and more faithful/traditional jewish people was preferable to an actual physical jewish state or at least they thought israel would not survive without a return to tradition. This can be clearly seen in the actions and beliefs of Achad Ha'am further spelled out in his written work 'Lo Zu Haderekh' (This is not the way). In his words Achad says:

we should have made strenuous endeavors to train up Jews who would work for their people. We should have striven gradually to extend the empire of our ideal in Jewry, till at last it could find genuine, whole-hearted devotees, with all the qualities needed to enable them to work for its practical realization.

A jewish state is still the end goal but without an "empire of our ideal in jewry" this state is not practical in his mind. This is the ultimate in elitism Ha'am and other jewish thinkers like him did not care about the palestinians or the effects on the surrounding arab world of a massive influx of jewish settlers he merely wanted those settlers to be good jews in his ideal before aliyah. Moreover he had little care for jews whose ties to judaism end at ethnicity.

In aid of this goal many jewish publications were started and attempts were made to kick start a artistic jewish renaissance. Some of the "Oy Veyying " we know so well today started around this period not to be used against non-jews but against secularised, assimilated diaspora populations particularly in the west.

Looking at it through this lense what can appear to be a monolithic conspiracy is actually many groups of jews with opposing ideas on how best to "save" the jewish people. It is important to note that even though socialist zionists put a great deal of emphasis on racial/ethnic persecution they only do this as a proxy to accomplish their own goals as they are extreme racists and elitists from the very core of their belief system. A common tenant amongst them is to discourage diaspora populations from assimilating or engaging with non-jewish populations. Indeed one of the reasons they didn't see the settlement of israel as practical is because they didn't see themselves ever working with the native arab populations and held a deep disdain for them.

All of these movements seem to have an outsized influence on world events since their inception but their goals are not exactly the same and I do believe some bad shit has come out of their respective scheming. However I can't really do this subject justice because I am just learning about it myself .

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

View attachment 1668024
View attachment 1668025
View attachment 1668027
View attachment 1668029

- The media isn't owned only by Jews. Most of it seems to be run by Whites and White Jews collaborating together.
- Jews are over represented in influential positions, but they don't run the show alone. Complaining about over-representation also seems like a slippery slope that might lead to encouraging policies like diversity hiring. I mean, is it really fair to ask for every office to be comprised of a perfectly even mix of every race?
- Everyone has laws to stop people from hating them. Even Blacks who have harmed Whites have occasionally been charged with hate crimes.

I think your problem is with leftism/globalism and not necessarily Jews as a whole.

That's how it needs to be framed for it to be palatable to normal people, I think. Anyways, it's more accurate.

The missing piece to this discussion all too often seems to be the conflict between the different schools of zionism and the fallout that has come from out of that. It offers both a more realistic and yet confusing answer to this question.

I became aware of this first when doing research for the bernie sanders thread. I came across an unending number of socialist jews who were deeply anti-israel but also ardent jewish nationalists. This made no sense to me when I first came across it. I would see some socialistia dyke with triple parentheses around her name absolutely duking it out with some yenta with a bari weiss quote in her profile. I would see these people each calling each other hitler and bad jews for their choice in democrat candidate. Seeing two jews call each other hitler because one wants to vote michael bloomberg and the the other wants to vote bernie sanders was one of the strangest(and funniest) things I've ever witnessed so I had to look into this mess.

The most important part was that they both seemed to think they were the better jew. The basis of this seems to lie in the split between the so-called movements of 'political zionism', 'cultural zionism' and 'labor zionism' or 'socialist zionism'. These are all groups of jewish nationalists but they do hate each other.

After the Basel Zionist Congress of 1897 many Zionists became disillusioned with the route zionism was going and believed that a re-invigorated and more faithful/traditional jewish people was preferable to an actual physical jewish state or at least they thought israel would not survive without a return to tradition. This can be clearly seen in the actions and beliefs of Achad Ha'am further spelled out in his written work 'Lo Zu Haderekh' (This is not the way). In his words Achad says:

A jewish state is still the end goal but without an "empire of our ideal in jewry" this state is not practical in his mind. This is the ultimate in elitism Ha'am and other jewish thinkers like him did not care about the palestinians or the effects on the surrounding arab world of a massive influx of jewish settlers he merely wanted those settlers to be good jews in his ideal before aliyah. Moreover he had little care for jews whose ties to judaism end at ethnicity.

In aid of this goal many jewish publications were started and attempts were made to kick start a artistic jewish renaissance. Some of the "Oy Veyying " we know so well today started around this period not to be used against non-jews but against secularised, assimilated diaspora populations particularly in the west.

Looking at it through this lense what can appear to be a monolithic conspiracy is actually many groups of jews with opposing ideas on how best to "save" the jewish people. It is important to note that even though socialist zionists put a great deal of emphasis on racial/ethnic persecution they only do this as a proxy to accomplish their own goals as they are extreme racists and elitists from the very core of their belief system. A common tenant amongst them is to discourage diaspora populations from assimilating or engaging with non-jewish populations. Indeed one of the reasons they didn't see the settlement of israel as practical is because they didn't see themselves ever working with the native arab populations and held a deep disdain for them.

All of these movements seem to have an outsized influence on world events since their inception but their goals are not exactly the same and I do believe some bad shit has come out of their respective scheming. However I can't really do this subject justice because I am just learning about it myself .

That was super informative. Please post any new info you find or interesting musings you come up with if you keep researching this topic.

 

[Forgetful Gynn]

Christians did not condone lending money on interest, and any Christian who did so was punished or shamed. It was considered dishonest because you were not using your mind or your labor. You were just making money off of having money. Jews ignored this taboo and used it to their advantage.

Also because it's stealing from the poor.

The media isn't owned only by Jews.

It doesn't have to be run by only jews it just has to be run by enough jews for them to have the power to shape the content, which they most certainly do.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

@Hellbound Hellhound here's a good rundown of what anti-racist means nowadays, since you seemed to be unfamiliar with the way the progressives have warped things:



Basically: "anti-racism" is turboracist and even non-whites should be worried about it.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

I just started reading "the international Jew: the World's Foremost Problem" by Henry Ford and I must say, I am shocked. This guy was admired by the Nazis so I was expecting something unhinged but he sounds reasonable.

He rants exclusively at the class of Jew that wields world ruling power, acknowledges that Jews are not a monolith and admits that many Jews suffer from the actions of the Jewish ruling class.

The Jews of the
United States can best serve themselves and their fellow-Jews all over
the world by letting drop their far too ready cry of "anti-Semitism," by
adopting a franker tone than that which befits a helpless victim, and by
seeing what the Jewish Question is and how it behooves every Jew who
loves his people to help solve it.

There has been used in this series the term "International Jew." It is
susceptible of two interpretations: one, the Jew wherever he may be; the
other, the Jew who exercises international control. The real contention
of the world is with the latter and his satellites, whether Jew or
Gentile.

Now, this international type of Jew, this grasper after world-control,
this actual possessor and wielder of world-control is a very unfortunate
connection for his race to have. The most unfortunate thing about the
international Jew, from the standpoint of the ordinary Jew, is that the
international type is also a Jew.

He wasn't antisemitic, even though news outlets have been calling him that for almost a century now.

Anyone who essays to discuss the Jewish Question in the United States or
anywhere else must be fully prepared to be regarded as an Anti-Semite,
in high-brow language, or in low-brow language, a Jew-baiter. Nor need
encouragement be looked for from people or from press. The people who
are awake to the subject at all prefer to wait and see how it all turns
out; while there is probably not a newspaper in America, and certainly
none of the advertising mediums which are called magazines, which would
have the temerity even to breathe seriously the fact that such a
Question exists. The press in general is open at this time to fulsome
editorials in favor of everything Jewish (specimens of the same being
obtainable almost anywhere), while the Jewish press, which is fairly
numerous in the United States, takes care of the vituperative end.

Of course, the only acceptable explanation of any public discussion at
present of the Jewish Question is that some one--writer, or publisher,
or a related interest--is a Jew-hater. That idea seems to be fixed; it
is fixed in the Jew by inheritance; it is sought to be fixed in the
Gentile by propaganda, that any writing which does not simply cloy and
drip in syrupy sweetness toward things Jewish is born of prejudice and
hatred. It is, therefore, full of lies, insult, insinuation, and
constitutes an instigation to massacre. These terms are culled at random
from Jewish editorial utterances at hand.

It would seem to be necessary for our Jewish citizens to enlarge their
classification of Gentiles to include the class which recognizes the
existence of a Jewish Question and still is not anti-Semitic.

I just started so I don't know if he goes off the rails later or if his information is accurate but at any rate, it's an interesting peek into the cultural climate of the 1920's.

Edit: he starts making a lot of unsubstantiated claims and talking about the Protocol of the Elders of Zion which was later proven to be a forgery. Pretty gay.

 

[Koby_Fish]

Man I've seen some shit. I saw a thing where someone tried to argue where der juden were "kicked out of every country" and used the first example as EGYPT. MOTHERFUCKING EGYPT. Um excuse me, but I'm pretty sure Pharaoh was doing his damnedest to KEEP THE ISRAELITE SLAVES IN EGYPT. Dude used some bullshit etymology to equate "Hebrew" to "habiru" where "habiru" meant "bandit" and therefore the Israelite Hebrews were allegedly bandits attacking Egyptians or some shit and somehow "betrayed" Egypt to let the Hyksos in. That's 40 different flavors of wrong. Another example used was the Babylonian Captivity (which was all on Babylon because they took the Israelites THERE) where allegedly some Jews supposedly let the Persians in through a gate (BULLSHIT, but even if true, completely justified) and so Babylon fell to conquerors. This fucker went full blood libel too, though at least he didn't make the irrational and illogical claim that blood goes into matzos (blood being forbidden for consumption; plus it would NOTICEABLY darken any food it was put into, including WHITE MATZO CRACKERS) - but still, the idea that anyone whose very religion forbids drinking blood, actually drinks blood, is fucking stupid. And of course the dude's solution to the "problem" was huwhite spremacism. *facepalm*

 

[Willie Thrills]

but still, the idea that anyone whose very religion forbids drinking blood, actually drinks blood, is fucking stupid. And of course the dude's solution to the "problem" was huwhite spremacism. *facepalm*

Mate, you know full-well that cultish sects interpret Scapegoat as the ritual sacrifice of a gentile child. Is this all Jews? Probably not. Is this some Jews? Absolutely, 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt, interpretting the scapegoat ritual as the sacrifice of a gentile child. These Jewish sects were present in northern Italy, Eastern England, several parts of the Holy Roman Empire, Poland, Russia and France.

They did this numerous times throughout European history, across several different countries, those countries themselves sometimes thousands of miles apart. This was common from the 1000s to the 1400s especially, wherein we have an absurd amount of evidence backing up this claim.

The arguments come when it is said that this ritual, Blood Libel, extends either significantly before the Middle Ages or significantly after.

We know this much - it is 100% true by any competent historical standard. We know these events happened, especially the thoroughly documented Trent and Lincoln incidents (Italy and England) who specifically documented these instances right down to the dates of birth of the victim, date of arrival of the perpetrators, a thorough account of events from multiple witnesses - the full biography of the fucking witnesses - I can't believe you'd lie so openly and disgustingly, we have more first-hand evidence of this than we have of Spanish crimes against indigenous Americans, for fuck's sake.

We know that, for a fact, Middle Ages-era European Jews ritually sacrificed and consumed the blood of gentile children as a development of the far older scapegoat tradition - casting the sins to the child and then killing the child, thereby cleansing the Jewish community of whatever sins they had. Drinking the blood of the child is how it is cleansed from the individual and means that all people involved are spiritually cleansed.


Edit: wow, even more widespread - extending to the 20th century in the Middle East, with over 150 documented Jewish communities and 150 dead gentile children. Given the intensely secretive nature of these events, it is guaranteed to be an undercount. Iran having it's last major development in 1910, and Syria in the 1840s.

Of course, there are intensive speculations that people like Epstein engage in these practices.

 

[Lemmingwise]

"We were prohibited from doing all work except the work that gave us the most power"

I have heard Jews make this claim before.

I'm sure that guilds were used as a kind of control of the market, but it was also a way to ensure actual quality was made, and it doesn't help to allow people in who are experts at filing down coins, finding new, cheaper and crappier ways of making the same thing.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

This fucker went full blood libel too, though at least he didn't make the irrational and illogical claim that blood goes into matzos (blood being forbidden for consumption; plus it would NOTICEABLY darken any food it was put into, including WHITE MATZO CRACKERS) - but still, the idea that anyone whose very religion forbids drinking blood, actually drinks blood, is fucking stupid. And of course the dude's solution to the "problem" was huwhite spremacism. *facepalm*

The blood in modern matzos claim is obviously bullshit, but there's evidence that blood was actually used in Jewish rituals at some point. Here's a book by a Jew that other Jews tried to censor:

Passovers of Blood - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I haven't read it and I don't know if the information contained within is any good, but I see nothing controversial about the claim. Wacky religious rites were practiced all over the world at one time or another. For instance, we know that Aztects mixed the blood their of human sacrifices with flour and ate the resulting cakes. It's not just a Jew thing.

Mate, you know full-well that cultish sects interpret Scapegoat as the ritual sacrifice of a gentile child. Is this all Jews? Probably not. Is this some Jews? Absolutely, 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt, interpretting the scapegoat ritual as the sacrifice of a gentile child. These Jewish sects were present in northern Italy, Eastern England, several parts of the Holy Roman Empire, Poland, Russia and France.

They did this numerous times throughout European history, across several different countries, those countries themselves sometimes thousands of miles apart. This was common from the 1000s to the 1400s especially, wherein we have an absurd amount of evidence backing up this claim.

The arguments come when it is said that this ritual, Blood Libel, extends either significantly before the Middle Ages or significantly after.

We know this much - it is 100% true by any competent historical standard. We know these events happened, especially the thoroughly documented Trent and Lincoln incidents (Italy and England) who specifically documented these instances right down to the dates of birth of the victim, date of arrival of the perpetrators, a thorough account of events from multiple witnesses - the full biography of the fucking witnesses - I can't believe you'd lie so openly and disgustingly, we have more first-hand evidence of this than we have of Spanish crimes against indigenous Americans, for fuck's sake.

We know that, for a fact, Middle Ages-era European Jews ritually sacrificed and consumed the blood of gentile children as a development of the far older scapegoat tradition - casting the sins to the child and then killing the child, thereby cleansing the Jewish community of whatever sins they had. Drinking the blood of the child is how it is cleansed from the individual and means that all people involved are spiritually cleansed.


Edit: wow, even more widespread - extending to the 20th century in the Middle East, with over 150 documented Jewish communities and 150 dead gentile children. Given the intensely secretive nature of these events, it is guaranteed to be an undercount. Iran having it's last major development in 1910, and Syria in the 1840s.

Of course, there are intensive speculations that people like Epstein engage in these practices.

You're probably right, but what are your sources for these claims? There's so much censorship around this topic that it's hard to find unbiased information.

 

[(((Obar Lazcano Kamz)))]

Jews do not exist, they are not real.

 

[Koby_Fish]

Mate, you know full-well that cultish sects interpret Scapegoat as the ritual sacrifice of a gentile child. Is this all Jews? Probably not. Is this some Jews? Absolutely, 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt, interpretting the scapegoat ritual as the sacrifice of a gentile child. These Jewish sects were present in northern Italy, Eastern England, several parts of the Holy Roman Empire, Poland, Russia and France.

They did this numerous times throughout European history, across several different countries, those countries themselves sometimes thousands of miles apart. This was common from the 1000s to the 1400s especially, wherein we have an absurd amount of evidence backing up this claim.

The arguments come when it is said that this ritual, Blood Libel, extends either significantly before the Middle Ages or significantly after.

We know this much - it is 100% true by any competent historical standard. We know these events happened, especially the thoroughly documented Trent and Lincoln incidents (Italy and England) who specifically documented these instances right down to the dates of birth of the victim, date of arrival of the perpetrators, a thorough account of events from multiple witnesses - the full biography of the fucking witnesses - I can't believe you'd lie so openly and disgustingly, we have more first-hand evidence of this than we have of Spanish crimes against indigenous Americans, for fuck's sake.

We know that, for a fact, Middle Ages-era European Jews ritually sacrificed and consumed the blood of gentile children as a development of the far older scapegoat tradition - casting the sins to the child and then killing the child, thereby cleansing the Jewish community of whatever sins they had. Drinking the blood of the child is how it is cleansed from the individual and means that all people involved are spiritually cleansed.


Edit: wow, even more widespread - extending to the 20th century in the Middle East, with over 150 documented Jewish communities and 150 dead gentile children. Given the intensely secretive nature of these events, it is guaranteed to be an undercount. Iran having it's last major development in 1910, and Syria in the 1840s.

Of course, there are intensive speculations that people like Epstein engage in these practices.

It's really weird that there would be an evolution to the scapegoat ritual where the "scapegoat" (be it beast or human) is killed. In the original scapegoat ritual, the "scapegoat" was released into the wilderness, while the other goat got killed and sacrificed. I guess shit happens and people twist things years on out.

The fact that dude said so many things wrong, makes everything he said suspect, so yeah, maybe there's a kernel of truth to some of the things, but it's entirely negated by the majority of wrongness.

 

[Willie Thrills]

The blood in modern matzos claim is obviously bullshit, but there's evidence that blood was actually used in Jewish rituals at some point. Here's a book by a Jew that other Jews tried to censor:

Passovers of Blood - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I haven't read it and I don't know if the information contained within is any good, but I see nothing controversial about the claim. Wacky religious rites were practiced all over the world at one time or another. For instance, we know that Aztects mixed the blood their of human sacrifices with flour and ate the resulting cakes.


You're probably right, but what are your sources for these claims? There's so much censorship around this topic that it's hard to find unbiased information.

Just check the wiki for Blood Libel and use your head for most of it.

The most interesting is Trent, since the Italians wrote so much down that it's more well-documented than many modern court cases. They had fully interviewed the witnesses to such an extent that we know the name and national origins of practically everyone involved, to the extent that, if I am remembering correctly, a "foreign" (not-involved) Jew was named and credited with helping authorities, having told them what happened to the child, then going on about his experience with the local Jews.

 

[RichardMongler]

I find the few posts in this thread to be absolutely jarring. In the great before time, the vast majority of Kiwis were thoroughly philosemitic. Oh, how THAT greatly changed in the subsequent years.

 

[The Great Chandler]

I find the few posts in this thread to be absolutely jarring. In the great before time, the vast majority of Kiwis were thoroughly philosemitic. Oh, how THAT greatly changed in the subsequent years.

I just noticed that too!

Not stopping everyone from sharing their thoughts, as much as I'd like to wholeheartedly disagree with their assessments. It's just a weird line of development just because it so happens that a lot of the big cats are of Jewish descent, but I don't blame the culture nor the ethnic background of someone on the account of their rotten behavior. It's no different to me

 

[RichardMongler]

I just noticed that too!

Not stopping everyone from sharing their thoughts, as much as I'd like to wholeheartedly disagree with their assessments. It's just a weird line of development just because it so happens that a lot of the big cats are of Jewish descent, but I don't blame the culture nor the ethnic background of someone on the account of their rotten behavior. It's no different to me

I attribute this change to the migration of /cow/boys from 8ch after the site became gradually less usable and the community more unhinged. The massbanning of the alt-right and internet racists from mainstream platforms similarly contributed to this shift in opinion.

 

[The Great Chandler]

I attribute this change to the migration of /cow/boys from 8ch after the site became gradually less usable and the community more unhinged. The massbanning of the alt-right and internet racists from mainstream platforms similarly contributed to this shift in opinion.

I appreciate the fact that Farms is open to any opinion and all. Plus I'm sure most of the posters in the Farms
are really in it for the memes, less so actually believing them. That said, you definitely have a fair share of kooky ones.