Morality (or at least modern Western morality) did not really come from religion. It came from the Enlightenment. There’s also something called deontological ethics. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a high being, not hating God. You don’t really hate something that you don’t even believe exists. When it comes to object morality, it’s still opinion, just God’s opinion. Abstract videos:
Atheism and Libertarianism 8: The Argument from Morality (10:24)
Atheism and Libertarianism 9: "But...SOMALIA!!!" (12:28)
Libertarianism and Property Rights from First Principles (16:01)
Less recommended:
Richard Dawkins destroys absolute morality from God (2:28)
Morality Can't Be Objective, Even If God Exists (Morality p.1) (21:58)
Response videos: The narrative that morality comes from religion & that the West needs a Christian revival in response to degeneracy & the rise of Islamic terrorism;
Atheism isn't Edgy or Amazing- It's Dying Out Worldwide
I’ll mostly be addressing Traditional Conservatives (TradCons) & NeoConservatives (NeoCons), & the typical Breitbart reader & FOX News’ comments section. I write much of this based on experiences I had with Conservatives online, mainly boomers, though much of what I’ll say here would still apply to a number of younger ones as well.
These issues will be spoken about from roughly the least to most important (in my personal opinion). If you have a limited amount of time &/or energy, skip down to the last 6 points.
If you have a disagreement with anything that I said, address it & take it apart. It’s not so important to address the longer videos, as that I know that a lot of us don’t have time for that.
But please don’t be a case of disagreeing with nothing.
If this is too long for you, you can read it in parts here;
Disclaimer: the people who I link to may or may not agree with the views espoused here, so please do not harass them.
————————————————————————————————————————
14. It is not solidly proven that sexual openness & positivity will destroy society. It’s just about obvious that sexual repression in places such as Afghanistan leads to a dysfunctional society. Can we at least agree that situation is overly sexually repressive?
I can understand prohibiting genuine child, animal, & rape pornography (the root word here is GENUINE, because a living individual is being harmed).
Starting on teen birth rates, look at the 2 graphs below.
When it comes to pornography, it really isn’t that bad for society. Believe it or not, since pornography has became easier to access, sexual violence has, if anything, decreased.
Banning pornography - where the Religious Left and Religious Right meet
Will Pr0n Destroy Society?
"Porn Makes You Dumb And Violent"
Murray Rothbard - Pornography
Even IF pornography really is that bad for society, legal pornography involving consenting adults & fake pornography involving fictional drawn or computer generated characters is a lesser evil to illegal real rape, torture, animal & child pornography that exists on the dark web, the black market, & otherwise existing underground.
When it comes to prostitution, if it was legal & out in the open, people involved would not be afraid to seek legal help or medical attention if something does happen, thus, we’d see a decrease in human trafficking & the spreading the sexually transmitted diseases.
And believe it or not, the Catholic Church used to support tolerating prostitution, seeing it as a lesser evil to even masturbation. Real movements against masturbatiion came from the Progressive era, not Christianity.
Prostitution legalization and the Left Wing
I also oppose impregnation out of wedlock, & I oppose knowingly infecting people with STD’s (especially for permanent STD’s).
But, I’ve yet to see solid, evidence that being sex positive (not hypersexual, which is different), is a cause of the destruction of a society.
As for homosexuality, it’s not going to destroy society. Get over it.
Homosexuality Is Not Moral And Here's Why
The claim that homosexuality has anything to do with pedophilia is literally communist propaganda;
The Left's long history of homophobia
Believe or not, homosexuals are even in your favorite branch of service:
I do personally disagree with transgenderism (not people with actual gender dysphoria, which is rare) & I oppose mandating separate bathrooms for trans people.
————————————————————————————————————————
13. Running schools like prisons & Pledge of Alligence.
This doesn’t apply to all conservatives, though the Pledge of Alligence section does apply to the vast majority of conservatives.
Running on a philosophy of educational authoritarianism is not conducive to a free society that values individual responsibility.
I’ll acknowledge, however, that conservatives are more likely to support school choice & liberty in education, making them better than typical leftists.
Conservatives (& libertarians) talk all the time about government overreach & lack of respect for the constitution. It seems that many do not realize that kids going to school is not just reading them to go to work, but rather, conditioning them for life. So few conservatives talk about how prison-like school is & many do not speak out against arbitrary rules & punishments. With such an authoritarian institution like school (especially with strict rules of many schools in Texas), what do they expect?
And in actuality, schooling has helped ruin entrepreneurial spirit & create generation snowflake, people who are scared of the real world. Essentially, students get validation through virtue, which is shown through obedience, which fosters intellectual & emotional dependency. Hence, why we have virtue signalling, with people seeking external validation instead of self-actualizing, leading to collectivism, the group mentality, & virtue signalling.
For example, when someone talks about a low-brow, safe topic such as how much they hate racism, that comes from them seeking external validation, to be socially accepted.
This is all talked about in the video below from 50:51 to 1:02:48.
How do you preach “small government” when you putting little children into what is essentially a prison & then making them act out some Socialist-authoritarian ritual? Is it any wonder why we have people voting to make the government even bigger & more powerful than it already is?
————————————————————————————————————————
12. The war on Drugs.
The War on Drugs makes law enforcement pull resources for more serious crimes (such as murder) to combat victimless crimes (such as someone smoking a blunt of marijuana).
Top Conservatives Call for Pot Legalization
Conservative Case for Drug Legalization
GOP MOM: Republican Conservatives Should PUSH for Marijuana Legalization Fox News
Law enforcement Officers who oppose the War on Drugs (the first two videos show Dominick Izzo, who I wish was better known & listened to, & 5th video shows a drug investigator):
John Stossel on the War on Drugs:
6 part video:
Clips:
It also uses your tax dollars to put people in prison for committing victimless crimes, & puts drug addicts, people who are in need of help, in prisons with real criminals, which costs you more money, & encourages violent & negative behavior, creating more crime.
It’s better to legalize drugs like how we legalized alcohol, taking out the black market.
If you still want recreational drugs to be illegal, can we at least have Law Enforcement prioritize real, serious criminals first?
When it specifically comes to marijuana alone, since it was legalized in Colorado, crime did not increase. If anything, it decreased. Even the conservative The Daily Caller & the Federal Government funded Voice of America admits to this.
I’m sorry that this part was done rather bit lazily, but I can’t believe that I need to go over this (aside from the CIA connection), in the sense of how much more harmful the war on drugs is than drug use itself. Perhaps this part is due for a future edit.
————————————————————————————————————————
11. Obama is not a secret Muslim. Even if he was, it would be a non-issue.
Obama actually both expanded the wars started under the Bush administration AND even started some more, such as Libya & Syria to name a couple.
Obama is not anti Israel. If he was, then why did he not mention the billions of dollars of aid & loans given to the country’s government each year, or weapons sales to their government each year? I’ll explain the rift between him & Netanyahu later. Hint: it matters as much as wrestlers saying things about each other.
He actually increased sanctions on Iran before he let the Iran deal through. The only reason for him letting the Iran deal through was so he could come to some deal with Russia over Ukraine, which will be explained in point 4.
Obama’s policies are actually similar to the other candidates on real important issues, such as foreign policy, corporatism, the Federal Reserve, domestic civil liberties, etc.
Also, President Trump just recently banned bump stocks. This is what you get for not putting in someone with real values & principals (Trump is more of a populist than a constitutionalist or principled liberty supporter).
And remember that the 1986 machine gun ban & 1989 semi-auto import bans were passed under Republican administrations.
————————————————————————————————————————
10. The problems with Western Civilization are not caused by the decline of Christianity.
Western Civilization’s problems are not caused by the decline of Christianity.
Morality (or at least modern Western morality) did not really come from religion. It came from the Enlightenment. There’s also something called deontological ethics.
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a high being, not hating God. You don’t really hate something that you don’t even believe exists.
When it comes to object morality, it’s still opinion, just God’s opinion.
Abstract videos:
Atheism and Libertarianism 8: The Argument from Morality (10:24)
Atheism and Libertarianism 9: "But...SOMALIA!!!" (12:28)
Libertarianism and Property Rights from First Principles (16:01)
Less recommended:
Richard Dawkins destroys absolute morality from God (2:28)
Morality Can't Be Objective, Even If God Exists (Morality p.1) (21:58)
Response videos:
The narrative that morality comes from religion & that the West needs a Christian revival in response to degeneracy & the rise of Islamic terrorism;
Atheism isn't Edgy or Amazing- It's Dying Out Worldwide
For now, I’ll mostly stick to the religious source material, since getting deep into the problems in religious cultures would simply be too long & I’d have to deal with “no true Scotsman” arguments.
I don’t think that I need to tell you how bad the Koran is, as that many of you already know.
But let’s get into the Bible.
The Bible allows cutting open pregnant women's stomachs plus bashing babies on rocks (Isaiah 13:15-18 I believe), allows slavery (Leviticus 25:44), killing kids for cursing at their parents (Leviticus 20:9), & doesn't let women to teach or have authority over a man (2:12) just to get started. Also, if you really follow the Bible, you better forget about wearing mixed fabrics (Leviticus 19:19), getting tattoos (Leviticus 19:28), eating pork (Leviticus 19:27), eating shellfish (Leviticus 11:10-12), trimming hair on temples or beards (Leviticus 19:27), or having fortune tellers, fortune cookies or horoscopes (Leviticus 19:31).
Besides, books such as the Bible is ultra hard to understand, & I guarantee you that god would've made the Bible a lot easier to understand if he really wrote it.
How about Judaism, particularly with the Talmund? It’s not clean either, to say the least.
The following is an excerpt from A Crash Course on the True Causes of “Anti-Semitism”, which I recommend reading directly for more details (& no, it does not promote Antisemitism. Quite the opposite, actually);
"Next, here are key statements from the beginning of this lecture posted along their time-stamp so you can check for their authenticity:
09:20 The Torah teaches that the life of a Jew is more precious than the life of a non-Jew.
10:00 God (HaShem) prefers Jews to non-Jews and gives them a special status.
11:00 The notion that Jews and non-Jews are equally precious to God contradicts the spirit of the Torah from beginning to end.
16:40 According to Shimon bar Yochia (aka Rashbi) “the best of non-Jews should be killed in warfare” because just as Jews cannot know if a snake approaching you is venomous or not, Jews cannot know which non-Jew is a danger to then.
25:16 Jews must assume that it is likely that any non-Jew they meet does not live by the Noahide Laws.
Here an explanation is needed about the so-called “Noahide Laws”. According to Wikipedia (as use it as the hyper-politically-correct source) the Noahide Laws are a “are a set of imperatives which, according to the Talmud, were given by God as a binding set of laws for the “children of Noah” – that is, all of humanity”. Here are these laws as listed by Maimonides himself:
Prohibition of Idolatry
Prohibition of Blasphemy
Prohibition of Homicide
Prohibition of Sexual Immorality
Prohibition of Theft
Prohibition of Limb of a Living Creature
Imperative of Legal System
Sounds “kinda not modern”, but hey, that is no “worse” than the 10 Commandants, right? Wrong! Wrong for two crucial reasons. First, the penalty for breaking any one of these laws, at least according to Rabbi David Bar-Hayim, is death (listen to the lecture for yourself!). Second, this list uses a euphemism when is speaks of “idolatry”. What is mean here is not some pagan blood ceremony to sacrifice babies to some god of thunder, but “Avodah Zarah”. How do I know that? Listen to the lecture again, the Rabbi is very clear about it. And what exactly is “Avodah Zarah”? It is “foreign worship” or, to put it simply, the religions of the aliens, the others, the nations, the goyim. This exactly the accusation made by Pharisaic Judaics against Christianity: making “That Man” (the typical Talmudic reference to Christ) into an idol. True, during the Middle-Ages overt references to Christianity were obfuscated and even today to the question whether Avodah Zarah is applicable to Christianity the official answer is wonderfully hypoctitical: Christianity is a “special type of avodah zarah is forbidden to Jews but permissible to gentiles, so that a non-Jew who engages in Christian worship commits no sin”. First, this is an explicit modern Jewish admission that those Jews who convert to Christianity are committing a crime deserving the death penalty. But, more importantly, this is clearly a cop-out as this “special type of avodah zarah” has no basis in traditional Pharisaic Talmudic teachings. So this might come as a shock to many, but according to Pharisaic Talmudists, all Christians deserve to be killed for the sin of idolatry. Feel the love…
Now here is the sad part, in the US these rabidly anti-Christians laws have been proclaimed as the “bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization” by both President Reagan and Congress. And to think that these guys fancy themselves as “Christians”…
I am sure that there are those who are absolutely convinced that was I wrote above is a gross misrepresentation of fact, that there is no way “Judaism” would really teach any such horrors. Think again, and listen to the Rabbi himself:
25:33 Those who do not keep the Seven Noahide Laws are all therefore guilty of a capital offense
25:49 “Avoda Zara”, i.e. idolary meaning Christianity was the most common offense.
Of course, for those who know anything about Pharisaic Talmudism none of the above will come as any surprise. After all, did the Rabbi not also clearly state that:
16:40 According to Shimon bar Yochia (aka Rashbi) “the best of non-Jews should be killed in warfare” because just as Jews cannot know if a snake approaching you is venomous or not, Jews cannot know which non-Jew is a danger to then.
Non-Jews are explicitly compared to snakes! He also says something similar later in the lecture:
26:15 since you cannot bring a perishing non-Jew to court to establish his guilt, you take a neutral position by neither helping him nor killing him.
You got that? Since, like with snakes, it is impossible to tell a dangerous non-Jews apart from a safe one, you cannot just kill him. For that you need a ruling by a rabbinical court. But saving him is no option either, because he most likely deserves the death penalty (say, for being a Christian). So you do nothing when you see a non-Jew in danger or even perishing. Interestingly enough, the Rabbi is also asked if that kind of non-assistance to a person in danger could not negatively impact the reputation of Jews and he immediately replies:
1:22:00 if not saving a non-Jew makes Jews look bad, then the Jew ought to lie about his motives
So it is okay to let a non-Jew die and, if challenged, just lie about it!
The key concept here is simple: Jews are more important to God and, therefore, to themselves than non-Jews. This is why
1:00:30 there is no requirement to return a lost object to a non-Jew
1:17:40 Jews can brake the sabbath to save a Jew but not a non-Jew because Jews do not consider all lives to be equal
I will stop the examples here. The Rabbi clearly says that the humanistic notion that all humans are equal is contrary to the entire spirit of the Torah. If after that you don’t get it….
What about the so-called Golden Rule about “do unto others”?
What about these:
You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:18 )
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn. (Shabbath folio:31a, Babylonian Talmud)
Did you notice the key caveats “your kindsfolk” and “your fellow”. Pharisaic Talmudism interprets these passages are referring only to fellow Jews and not to the semi-bestial goyim! It is laughable to a Rabbi when he hears a non-Jew saying that all humans were created in the image and likeness of God. Pharisaic Talmudism explicitly contradicts that (and the Kabbalah even more so!). Still don’t agree? Which part of “ the humanistic notion that all humans are equal is contrary to the entire spirit of the Torah” don’t you get?!
The simple truth is that Pharisaic Talmudism (aka modern “Judaism”) is the only religion which teaches a God-revealed racism.
This is hardly a new discovery of mine. Just read Michael Hoffman’s superb magnum opus Judaism Discovered (available on Amazon and on his on his website). In fact, there have been thousands of books already written on this topic, and many are available online for download in various file formats. What makes the video by Rabbi David Bar-Hayim so interesting is that it is 1) official 2) recent 3) that he really confirms it all. But for those who, like myself and, I am sure, many readers here, have known about it for decades, this was absolutely nothing new.
A couple of crucial caveats here: there are many Jews out there (most, I would say) who are totally unaware of all this. Even “Conservative” and “Reform” synagogues don’t preach that too overtly (though sometimes even they do). This kind of religious racism is mostly taught in Orthodox Yeshivas and, of course, in various Haredi institutions in Israel. For these ignorant Jews any such explanations of the causes of antisemitism in world history are not only offensive (blaming the victim) but also completely unfair (“my family never said any such things!”). Second, while this kind of, frankly, demonic teachings have only been taught in religious circles, they nevertheless also have had a deep impact upon the outlook of many (but not all!) secular Jews many of whom might never have been told that all Christians deserve to be executed, but who still will have a profound and almost knee-jerk repulsion towards Christianity. The distance between Rabbi David Bar-Hayim and Sarah Silverman and her famous quote “I hope that Jews did kill Christ, I’d do it again in a second” is very, very short.”"
Admit that you can’t practice your religion in while without being arrested or even killed.
Yeah, so much for “Judeo-Christian” values.
————————————————————————————————————————
8. Islam is not going to take over the West, let alone the World.
I say this as someone who HATES Islam.
Islam is a dying religion. While it will have its 15 minutes under the son, I see no need to fearmonger about it, with worldwide religiosity going down.
While I see it as a related issue to what’s going on with immigration into Europe, I do NOT see it as the same issue. Beyond controlling the borders, enforcing immigration laws & stopping giving free welfare to immigrants (most of you which are already for), the problem can be further reduced by stopping wars started by Western Governments & predatory IMF loans. While it won’t make the 2nd & 3rd worlds automatically as good as the 1st world, it will be a step in the right direction.
I’ll talk more about the issue of Muslims in today’s world in point #3.
In one of Tom Woods’ talks on economics for capitalism (which I believe that he did by himself), he argued against a progressive/Keynesian/Marxist who said that the government should provide alternate jobs for people who don’t want a job in the private sector (such as growing gardens, panting murals or whatnot). Likewise, with conscription, the government is taking people away who could work for the private market (if someone can find that episode & what at what specific point he made the statement I’m describing, please let me know).
Tom Woods has talked about how giving resources to war industries takes other resources that could be spent on society.
Military personnel are basically government property. It’s enough that the government gets to take part of our labor through taxes & regulate our lives with the law. Why does the government need more control over our lives?
“Mandatory Service” is just a polite term for “slavery”.
I’ve read people state that one should be legally obligated to serve the country that birthed, raised & sustained them.
That eerily sounds like the rhetoric of some other country…
A North Korean labor camp boss for a North Korean labor camp in Russia was asked about people who flee North Korea. He stated, "That would be a betrayal. A person was born, grew up, was given an education, and fed by the country. And what kind of a man he grew up to be? A traitor. Goes off and runs away."
I recommend taking a break from here onto the last six. When reading through, please read all the way through. Again, the videos are here to simply provide substance.
————————————————————————————————————————
6. China, Russia, & Iran aren’t going to take over the world.
(I am simply linking to an answer. The creator of the answer does not endorse my answer or views unless they state otherwise.)
Long explanation why:
If they tried to, they wouldn’t last very long. Their military forces may be great at defense, but not so good at actually projecting power.
The country with the best Navy & Air Force out of the three is China, & they still are not as good as the United States Navy or Air Force, or even the Navies of the United Kingdom & France. Iran’s Navy is a joke, unable to do serious offensive operations outside of the Persian Gulf. Their Air Force’s combat aircraft aircraft are all old, many literally from the last century, & the very best of which (just over a couple dozen of F-14A/AM Tomcats) are mediocre by modern standards.
China is having problems with their aircraft carriers. Russia’s only aircraft carrier from the Cold War is in terrible shape. Both of them are conventionally powered, & because they’re STOBAR (they lack an aircraft catapult), the aircraft they carry may not even carry the full potential fuel & weapons that they could if takeoff wasn’t so short. And the closest thing that Iran can operate to an aircraft carrier is maybe a converted container ship to carry helicopters, though it would be extremely vulnerable & arguably even useless considering Iran’s aforementioned joke of a Navy.
If they did try to take over the world, they wouldn’t last for very long because the money supply will run out. Russia’s economy is already questionable to say the least. Iran doesn’t fair a whole lot better. China’s economy is still developing, & is extremely dependent on exports.
While some Russian companies do make military equipment that is among the best in the world, most of what the Russian government currency possess is from the Soviet era. A good portion of China’s military equipment is low-end junk (though I’ll admit that this doesn’t apply so much to their newer destroyers & missile systems). And Iran is technologically stunted, dependent on the outside world for much of its technology.
The YouTuber Binkov’s Battlegrounds has talked about many hypothetical war scenarios. China would have hard time just taking islands from Japan.
And in history, we see that even when China has every single advantage over Vietnam besides geography, it still fails to truly beat, let alone take over, Vietnam.
Do you honestly think that China can take over America, let alone the World?
They would have to be really stupid to use nuclear weapons, because that is a guaranteed way to have themselves destroyed by other nuclear powers (U.S.A., U.K., France, & perhaps India).
Speaking of which, if you advocate for preemptive nuclear attacks on other countries at little to no provocation, then you’re just like Hillary Rodham Clinton, or as Styxhexenhammer666/Tarl Warwick nicknames her, “Hydrogen Hillary”.
This goes out to Fox News’ comments section. Go to their YouTube channel, & look into videos that involve Iran, or Palestinians or Muslims or whatever, & you’ll know what I’m talking about.
————————————————————————————————————————
5. Do they really hate us for our freedom? And are anti-war people weak?
As for why the United States of America, & to a degree, the United Kingdom, France, etc, here’s an excerpt from the video called Chat With Ryan Dawson (starting at 1:00:20 in the original, but the video embedded in this answer is cropped) (this is from a live stream, so his wording isn’t refined but you’ll get the idea);
“I mean, you can say lunatic, or whatever, but he (Hitler) was not an idiot. We understand a lot more now about PTSD, & I think a lot of people from World War 1… Hitler was blinded… imagine people living in trenches for years like, years, dude, that’s your life… that had to have a huge psychological impact on everyone on both sides.” “Even if I can talk about ISIS, I mean I’m not pro ISIS. All my work is against these Wahabi fanatics & stuff. But I will put myself in the other person’s shoes”.
“Imagine you an an Iraqi kid, & someone comes up & like beats up your dad in front of you, which is so humiliating & emasculating &, you know, the rape, just the torture, Abu Ghrahib scene, you know, your soldiers, your men, stripped naked, humiliated, beaten.” “Fallujah, firebombs, all these civilians that are murdered, your leader killed, all that, & then sanctions, where you watched 800,00 children starve to death all throughout the 90’s. So you’re seeing kids with their ribs poking out. You’re seeing people die of starvation, & then they (the U.S. & NATO) come back, based completely on lies, & blow up your cities & put you back in the stone age, all of the things we did to Iraq, & you, say, are 11 years old, you grow up, & by the time you’re 18, how do you feel? Especially if you’re uneducated, on top of that. Are you going to be attracted to an Islamic militant group? You bet your ass.”
“The shit we do has predictable consequences. Of course there’s an ISIS. Why wouldn’t there be? Look at what you did. You beat, you murdered, you firebombed, hit ’em with chemical weapons. What the fuck you think they’re gonna do, shake your hand? And I can see, you know, stealing land from Germany after World War 1 with the Treaty of Versailles & how punishing it was, why you end up with Nazis.
That doesn’t justify Nazis, or ISIS or anything else, but for fuck’s sake, you have to look at it & see like ‘hey, were they just brainwashed & hate people for nothing, out of the blue?’, or did something happen first? And you just can’t say that, can you?”
“If you hadn’t have Gulf War 1, & you hadn’t had all the sanctions, & you hadn’t covertly supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria all through Assad’s father’s age,” “then we wouldn’t be where we are. If you didn’t kill Qaddafi & hand the country over to Al-Qaeda, there wouldn’t be all these African refugees in Europe. Like, they don’t understand cause & effect, because it’s this exceptionalism.”
“To hell with check your privilege, check your exceptionalism. American & European exceptionalism, they’re the ultimate dindu, ‘Oh, we didn’t do nothing wrong’, well like, yeah, you did, & now, Jonnys come home. The boomerang is on its way back, & this is what happens when you bomb & destabilize areas, like, you know, this is your own Frankenstein. You did this to yourself. This isn’t cultural genocide, this is cultural suicide, because your governments created this mess & your governments sustained this mess. That’s a nuanced view, & that does not at all promote any of these terrorist groups, migrants & thee raping & anything like that, it’s all terrible. It’s also predictable.” “We have to change our behavior & policies if we don’t want the backlash. I mean, that’s like simple stuff a three-year old understands. ‘ He hit me’. ‘Did you hit him first?’ ‘Yeah.’ ‘Well, maybe you shouldn’t have done that’. Simple.”
Ryan again makes virtually the same point in his video “911 and Iraq research and researchers” from 1:17:30 to 1:22:43.
As TheYankeeMarshal said in his video “My Thoughts on the Baltimore Riots”, “You treat someone like an animal long enough, & they’re gonna act like an animal”.
You can either read the following, which comes from Ron Paul’s speech “Imagine”, or listen to the video “Armed Chinese Troops in Texas!” & skip reading the speech;
“Imagine for a moment that somewhere in the middle of Texas there was a large foreign military base, say Chinese or Russian. Imagine that thousands of armed foreign troops were constantly patrolling American streets in military vehicles. Imagine they were here under the auspices of "keeping us safe" or "promoting democracy" or "protecting their strategic interests."
Imagine that they operated outside of US law, and that the Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine that they set up checkpoints on our soil and routinely searched and ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were fearful of these foreign troops, and overwhelmingly thought America would be better off without their presence.
Imagine if some Americans were so angry about them being in Texas that they actually joined together to fight them off, in defense of our soil and sovereignty, because leadership in government refused or were unable to do so. Imagine that those Americans were labeled terrorists or insurgents for their defensive actions, and routinely killed, or captured and tortured by the foreign troops on our land. Imagine that the occupiers' attitude was that if they just killed enough Americans, the resistance would stop, but instead, for every American killed, ten more would take up arms against them, resulting in perpetual bloodshed. Imagine if most of the citizens of the foreign land also wanted these troops to return home. Imagine if they elected a leader who promised to bring them home and put an end to this horror.
Imagine if that leader changed his mind once he took office.
The reality is that our military presence on foreign soil is as offensive to the people that live there as armed Chinese troops would be if they were stationed in Texas. We would not stand for it here, but we have had a globe-straddling empire and a very intrusive foreign policy for decades that incites a lot of hatred and resentment towards us.
According to our own CIA, our meddling in the Middle East was the prime motivation for the horrific attacks on 9/11. But instead of re-evaluating our foreign policy, we have simply escalated it. We had a right to go after those responsible for 9/11, to be sure, but why do so many Americans feel as if we have a right to a military presence in some 160 countries when we wouldn't stand for even one foreign base on our soil, for any reason? These are not embassies, mind you, these are military installations. The new administration is not materially changing anything about this. Shuffling troops around and playing with semantics does not accomplish the goals of the American people, who simply want our men and women to come home. 50,000 troops left behind in Iraq is not conducive to peace any more than 50,000 Russian soldiers would be in the United States.
Shutting down military bases and ceasing to deal with other nations with threats and violence is not isolationism. It is the opposite. Opening ourselves up to friendship, honest trade and diplomacy is the foreign policy of peace and prosperity. It is the only foreign policy that will not bankrupt us in short order, as our current actions most definitely will. I share the disappointment of the American people in the foreign policy rhetoric coming from the administration. The sad thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome's did, when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted. ”
I’ll explain in another point how foreign interventionism causes a lot of problems down the line.
I’ve also seen the assertion that anti-war people as being weak, which explains their anti-war views.
Quickie: “Cowardly Lions”.
Listen to the video “Are We a Nation of Wimps?”.
Ron Paul has also said something that maybe the toughest guys are the ones who act with the most self-restraint. And remember that Ron Paul did serve in the military (in a war he did not even agree with), while the strong majority of you did not serve period.
I have three words for individuals who never served in the military but support conscription/the draft;
He also got much of his 2012 campaign contributions from members of the United States Military;
As much as I have slammed the left for their weakness, meekness & other negative qualities, two of the biggest problems I have with the right is how macho they try to be, & even more so, lack of humility, along with unwillingness to swallow their pride, rather it be tribal or national.
Having an aggressive foreign policy does not even make us safer. The video “Foreign Policy Arrogance Undermines Our National Security” explains this:
This should’ve been point #4 in terms of importance, but it is important in understanding my next point.
————————————————————————————————————————
4. The issue of Iran & the Iran nuclear deal.
These two videos (the first 12 minutes long, the second 46 minutes long) summarizes the issue of the Iran nuclear deal;
As much as I hate Iran’s fundamentalist establishment, there is no proof that they want to build a nuclear bomb since 2003.
“Theatrical props and dramatic rhetoric aside, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent presentation on the “Iranian nuclear deal” in fact contained no new information.
That Iran had explored a nuclear weapons program prior to 2003 has been known and admitted for years. That they have an archive of this information is not a violation of the Iranian nuclear deal completed in 2015. In fact, if anything, Netanyahu’s presentation actually proved the exact opposite of what was intended: Namely, that Iran is abiding by the terms of that treaty and is not covertly pursuing any nuclear weapons activity. That’s why they had to go back to 15-year-old information and present it as if it was something new and revelatory.”
“Hand-wringing over Iran’s nuclear program is nothing new. It became a mainstay of Western political discourse after an Iranian dissident revealed the Iranian government’s plans for a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in August 2002. But the surprising fact for Americans and others around the world who get their information from the corporate mainstream media, is that Iran’s pre-2003 nuclear weapons program has long been known and admitted. Since 2003, when the program was scrapped, not a single piece of evidence has been presented (not even by Netanyahu or the Israeli government) that the Iranian government ever pursued anything other than what it said it was pursuing: a nuclear energy program.
Not that that fact has ever stopped Netanyahu from using any opportunity to use cartoon-level propaganda tactics to convince the world otherwise”.
“Of course, Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons, and Netanyahu’s Wile E. Coyote bomb and red-line warnings bore no greater semblance to reality than the cartoon propaganda surrounding Saddam’s “weapons of mass destruction.” Not only did the IAEA repeatedly confirm that Iran never diverted any nuclear material into any military program, but even the US intelligence community itself conceded that Iran was not trying to build a nuclear bomb. Most remarkable of all was Mossad’s own assessment that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
As I detailed earlier this year in “We Need to Talk About the Iran Protests,” fearmongering over Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program was the basis for an extraordinary series of measures against the country in recent decades. These measures include “NITRO ZEUS,” a full-scale military cyberattack against Iran, the best-known element of which was Stuxnet, the military-grade cyberweapon co-developed by the United States and Israel that specifically targeted Iran’s nuclear enrichment facility at Natanz.
Iran’s non-existent nuclear program also provided the pretext for sanctions aimed at crippling the country’s economy, including the de-listing of Iranian banks from the Swift Network connecting the world’s financial institutions.
“But perhaps the greatest irony of all is that it is Iran who has been arguing for decades that the Middle East should be a nuclear-free zone. The idea was first floated by the Shah in 1969 and was first formally proposed by Iran in a joint UN General Assembly resolution, but the idea failed to garner any support. The idea was again raised by then-Iranian President Ahmedinejad in 2006 and yet again by then-Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki in 2008, but these calls to banish nuclear weapons from the Middle East have not even been acknowledged by the West, let alone seriously considered.”
Some 36 American Star Officers (Generals & Admirals), including General Mattis, agree that Iran is not trying to build a nuke.
IDF Generals, Israeli Scientists, Israeli Spies, & Israel’s own Nuclear Panel say it (I don’t think that it’s a coiencidence that they’re also not superpartistans for the Likud party):
Ali Khamenei has issued a Fatwa (a legal opinion or ruling issued by an Islamic scholar) against nuclear weapons, & Muslims are serious about Fatwas.
Also, the type of centrifuges that Iran has & is using enriches uranium too slowly to viably produce serious nuclear weapons.
Serious weapons-grade uranium must be enriched to 90%. Iran has only successfully enriched their uranium to about 20% (for medical radio isotopes), & the more uranium is enriched, the harder it gets to be enriched further.
Ending the Iran Deal actually hurts America’s power, as that we are unable to trade with them.
And no, we weren’t sending American taxpayer’s money to Iran (that I would oppose if it were the case). What happened was that Iranian assets in the U.S. that were frozen were unfrozen.
I’m not going to comment on rather or not the shoot-down was justified, or rather or not Captain William C. Rogers is competent or rather or not he is “cold-blooded” sort-to-speak about the shootdown. I will just state the matter of fact that it happened, & the United States Federal Government has not apologized for the incident.
Also, General Wesley Clark has talked about a classified a memo that lays out the plans to take out 7 countries, one of them being Iran.
Is it any wonder that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (the IRGC can be described as a heavily armed religious militia) sends speed boats & missile boats out whenever NATO’s Naval vessels go through the Strait of Hormuz?
Want war with Iran? I hope you enjoy paying higher gas prices, & are willing to sacrifice both Christians & Jews living there.
So don’t incinerate both fellow Christians, &, gasp, God’s Chosen People to make yourself feel like some tough guy.
None of this is to say that Iran is even a remotely free country. A prison that allows for a little bit of religious freedom is still a prison. I’m sure that you’re already well aware of the human rights abuses going on. I even think it’s appropriate to call Iran a shithole thanks to its government & the power of its religious institutions & how people accept having their lives ruled by , though I prefer to describe it more as a hellhole to emphasize how bad its human rights & liberty situation is rather than how bad its environment &/or standard of living is.
“The Iranian revolution was not good. They went out of the kettle and into the fire. They left a foreign corporatocracy only to fall into the arms of a theocratic nightmare. They traded exploitive foreigners for local despots.” - Ryan Dawson’s response to a comment on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/posts/putting-america-18713842).
When it comes to most of the terrorism in the world today, the video ‘Modern terrorism how the CIA NATO use rent-a-terrorist’ explains most of this issue;
Before foreign governments meddled in the middle east, the middle east was doing fine and didn't have war and religious fanatics quite like what they do now. In fact, at least some places were more secular pre-Cold War than now.
For a small example, as shown at 7:29 of the video “Alex Jones back to the Woodshed”, there were women in the middle east who dress up in ways that religious fanatics wouldn't allow.
Furthermore, when it comes to the specific issue of Muslims talked about in “Alex Jones back to the Woodshed”, skip around 7:28, 10:23, 15:42, 19:42, 26:19, 31:14, 36:35, 46:11, 1:15:15, 1:27:02, & do so whenever the clips of Alex Jones talking starts.
People can turn to religion for a number of reasons. Commonly, they're uneducated, so they're more likely to be superstitious, they're grown up seeing violence around them, so they're desensitized to violence & feel that it's more acceptable, or, from time-to-time, don't see much of a point in life outside of religion.
Hence, how we see religious fanatics thrive outside of the developed world more often.
On certain sites, especially BareNakedIslam or Walid Shoebat's sites, a lot of the information posted there are actually proven to be part-truths at best, & often outright lies. Many of them try to make it seem like Muslims are attacking Christians & Jews & promote tribalism not unlike Neo-Nazi sites such as the DailyStormer (which I'd like to see a comparison between it & BareNakendIslam).
A friend of mine, Allyson (formerly Allyson Abu-Hajar) created a Pinterest board dedicated to debunking lies spread by these sites; https://www.pinterest.com/bookde... .
This is an excerpt from the PrisonPlanet article "Muslims Are Good Folks" (though I have no intention of protecting ideology: only stopping hate from turning violent);
"[Sunni] Islam is not a religion with a hierarchy such as the Roman Catholic Church. In that respect, Muslims are much like Southern Baptists, only more so. Any group of Muslims can build a mosque and hire themselves an imam, or teacher. They are independent. There is no Muslim pope or College of Cardinals. There are no bishops. When an imam somewhere issues a fatwa, which is a sort of formal opinion on a subject, it is not binding. Like Protestant Christians, Muslims interpret their holy writings themselves and consider themselves answerable directly to God – or, to use the Arabic word, Allah.
Most of the disputes in the Middle East are secular and political. Hamas’ quarrel with Israelis is not about the fact that they are Jews but about the fact that they occupy Palestine. The objections some Muslims have to Western culture are the same as those some Christians have. They don’t like the violence, the immorality, the pornography and the greed. The conflict one sees between the religious and the secular in some Muslim countries is similar to the conflict in this country between religious and secular folks.
There are 6 million or 7 million American citizens who are Muslims. Muslims have been in this country since the late 19th century. If you don’t already, you should make an effort to get to know Muslims. You’ll find that they don’t fit the stereotypes created by mean-spirited propaganda or superficial news coverage."
Not only did Muslims, Jews, & Christians live in the middle east lived in relative peace thousands of years before the Cold War (the situation isn't as good as, say, in the U.S.A., but better than now), but also, even today, there are a number of Muslims who are sensible enough to coexist, & sometimes, even unite with their Christian neighbors.
I admit that I am biased in this, considering how almost all of them are atheists & I myself am an atheist. Though another reason for me recommending them is that they don’t seem like that they have much of an ax to grind & aren’t politically hyper-polarized & hyper-partisan.
————————————————————————————————————————
2. Foreign policy, Imperialism, & being the “Policeman of the world”?
Our foreign policy, after the War of 1812, was based on lies, & was not meant to protect & defend America, but rather, to benefit big-banks, the military-industrial complex, & Israel & Saudi Arabia.
As for Afghanistan, it’s mainly for control over an oil pipeline & to control opium trade, the latter of which the Central Intelligence Agency needs to get extra money from to fund Black Operations without needing to ask congress;
Do you realize how much governments lie to us to go to war. James Corbett of Corbettreport (& Ryan Dawson of Anti-NeoCon Report) has done awesome videos on this issue.
As for Saddam Hussein, he was actually our ally before the end of the 1980’s or beginning of the 1990’s against Iran. We supplied him with weapons, even chemical weapons for a war against Iran that he started.
As for World War II, we could have avoided the rise of the Nazi Germany if the allies did not punish Germany so harshly. If it wasn’t for the Treaty of Versailles, with the strict military limitations, & even more so, the war reparations (taking money from Germany) & the occupation & taking of German territory, people would not have became so bitter, resentful, & angry to the point where they’ll do almost anything to feel strong again, playing right into the hand of extreme ideologies such as Fascism & National Socialism.
That is conveniently glossed over or even completely left out of the narrative on how the Nazis rose to power.
World War Two was not a “good” war. It was a war between power hungry governments (I am NOT, in any way, shape, or form, attempting to justify, excuse &/or downplay human rights violations by the Axis powers).
“The US did not enter WWII to save the Jews. They didn’t care about any particular ethnic minorities. They had their own economic interest. They had their own post war propaganda too. Yes even America lies. The death toll done by the Axis has been played up and the death toll by the allies has been played down. There is no way in a city of 380k that Hiroshima’s instantaneous bombing killed only 100k people. The post war starvation in all the losing countries is also glossed over. The only thing separating Allied crimes from Axis crimes is the Holocaust. Otherwise its just like WWI a pointless war of imperialist fighting each other by sacrificing their poor. Both my grandparents were in that war one killing Nazis one killing Japanese. The one sent to Germany was also in the Korea War. His father was in WWI and his grand father was in the Civil War. He helped invent the submarine. And his ancestors were in the Revolutionary War. Betty Washington married into our family. A Dawson was chancellor of W&M when Thomas Jefferson went to school there. My mother’s dide was opposite all American Indians and a few pirates. I remember asking my surviving grandfather about WWII and Korea. I thought he was a hero. He said, “no, Ry by the time I was in Germany they were just starving. They used to send little girls to the kitchen begging for food, after the war.” Did you give them any?” No,” he hung his head. How about Korea? Weren’t use in a tank? Yes we had three tanks, but listen to me and don’t forget this. “There was no point or purpose of that war.” That’s all he would say about it. And later I found out he had pulled dead North Koreans out from where they had shelled them and looking at them and how young they were he just cursed the whole situation. My Native grandfather I never met but he was island hopping and burned Japanese to death with a flame thrower. He was shot through the leg but lived. Ironically I married a Japanese woman and had a child. I feel like I gave one life back.
Please don’t confuse Eric Hunt with Kyle Hunt. Kyle Hunt is racist white nationalist trash. Eric is a school teacher and historical revisionist. Yes he gets trashed on the internet again so what everyone does who talks about politics. He doesn’t deny the Holocaust. He just doesn’t think it was six million. No one studying it actually does. That ought to be good news. I am happy believe less people died and many of them made it out. Raul Hilberg placed the number at 5.5m people and that’s the highest it ever was. I had a different revisionist on right after, Dave Stein, saying Majdanek probably did have gas chambers and that though the gas disguised as showers was a war time myth that’s not a reason to dismiss gas chambers and that that spot had previously had them but they were destroyed. We have witnesses and confessions from these other camps. No one sane would deny it. We also had false claims about the western camps like Dachau which did not have gassing saying they did then later admitting they did not. It did have thousands of people worked to death and shot. They were also marched to the Tegernsee camp and killed over there. It’s important to point these things out and explain them because naysayers will point to evidence of labor camps which did exist and then say ah ha they were all like that. They were not. I’m the guy actually engaging these people instead of screaming racist and dropping the mic and walking away. That simply doesn’t work. I got Eric to admit on record millions were killed. I met Marc Gould who befriended Nazis and turned on them and put them in jail. He spoke at the Knesset and has one of the only two 100% voted they ever made which was to convict SS Lieutenant Colonel Bernhard who Marc had befriend. The press completely turned on him and attacked him because he released info about the Holocaust that Frank had records of showing names of people who had died with kill orders and stamps. It wasn’t the number they wanted and so he has been attacked. Now I know this guy. He’s Jewish and very proud of it, he has three daughters. I’ve met them. He doesn’t have a ill bone in his body. but google his name and look at what has been said about him. No one will defend these people, because it is easier to throw them under the bus and not get associated with it. I interviewed David Cole too who had the shit beat out of him by the JDL on Thanksgiving when he was walking home form the grocery store. He’s also Jewish. I have been to his home and seen his dying mother who was about 90lbs sleeping in the kitchen. He takes care of her. He and Hunt do not get along but both at some point in their life have reduced the numbers killed in the Holocaust and for that lost everything. It isn’t right. Even if both were wrong it’s not right.
I have a great number of videos defending Jewish people on my channels from the insane collectivism they must put up with. I have to make these from time to time because if you defend Palestine it must be because you hate jews.”
Look into the works of the author & historian Tom Goodrich, who has written about the human rights atrocities committed by the allies during World War II (trust me, it is far worse than you think. As for why he doesn’t write about Axis human rights abuses, they’re already well-known & talked about to the point where it would be redundant for him to talk about).
Here’s a couple of talks between Goodrich & Dawson:
Why Postwar Germany and Japan Don't Prove It's Easy to Spread Democracy;
Non-interventionism is NOT the same as Isolationism. Non-interventionism means that we do not get involved in the affairs of foreign countries (especially if they don’t effect us), which is different from Isolationism, which is abstaining from having relationships with foreign countries.
As for “humanitarian interventionism”, there is no real incentive for a government to seriously care about people living in foreign countries. Let alone rather or not if it can actually fix the problems of foreign countries.
People living under terrible governments today must find freedom on their own (we can’t make a people free if they aren’t ready for it). That's how many places in Latin America have gotten away from being dictatorships.
Also, trading with countries, improving their (& our) living standards can also prevent wars. Lookup “capitalist peace”.
I myself am a Junior Reserve Officer’s training Corps Cadet (something I shouldn’t even be mentioning out of professionalism). I know a lot of people from the unit that I’m in who are joining the United States Military. I don’t want them to need to go to an unnecessary war, worrying rather or not they’ll come back alive, worrying about if they come back alive if they’ll get any permanent injuries, worrying about if they’ll come back with a mental disorder (ie PTSD) they they may have to live with for the rest of their lives for some war that they don’t even understand becuase the government that hired them doesn’t have the curtousy to be honest about what they’re doing & why they are doing what they are doing.
I recommend watching the documentary The Empire Unmasked (which costs $20, I believe). It is the ultimate documentary to watch to understand post-WW2 American foreign policy.
And my ultimate policy beef with western conservatives.
————————————————————————————————————————
1. Israel, Zionism, Judaism & the Jewish people.
Where do I even start!?
I’ll break this up into 5 parts, with the 4th one talking about solutions, & the 5th one talking about the left’s prejudice towards Jews.
When reading, just change the word “Jew”/”Jewish” to “Muslim”, “Judaism” to “Islam”, “Talmud” to “Hadith”, “Gentile” to “Infidel”, “Israel” to “Saudi Arabia” or “Iran” & so on & so forth. Re-read what I have written. Play some devil’s advocate. You’ll understand what I mean.
If you want the other side of the discussion, look elsewhere. I’m here to present my side of the case, specifically.
And if you don’t agree with or believe be, can you not take several minutes to look at the source provided before coming to your conclusion?
If Karl Marx said that the sky is blue, it does not mean that the sky is yellow. I say that to mean that just because you disagree with a source, even if it really had bad ideas, doesn’t mean that it is wrong.
Part 1: Israel.
These videos summ up the issue (if you’re not in a mood to watch them, scroll down & I’ll articulate in text);
Since it seems like that many conservatives want to brush away talks about the past & can care less when Muslims are harmed (some actively hate Muslims), I’ll dilute the start of this down to what Israel has done to Christians & Westerners (especially Americans), & try using Israeli & Christian media sources when possible.
They have killed Americans. USS Liberty, Lavon Affair, just to name a couple of things. Both of which were intentional. And the actors for both of the incidents have been honored in recent times;
As Ron Paul once said, “the quest for empire destroys all great nations”. Maybe those who oppose Israeli imperialism but want to save the country should adopt that.
In late July of 2018, a bunch of White Helmets (who are just a supporting faction for the Syrian rebels) got up to Israel’s border. Instead of shooting or even blocking them at the border, what did Israel’s Government do? They let them in, not even arresting/detaining the rebels.
White helmets rescue or cover for Al Qaeda leadership retreat to Israel
And more recently, Israel has fired missiles into Syria at an 40+ year old Iranian Air Force cargo plane… that is carrying troops & items back from Syria to Iran as part of the agreement that included Iran leaving Syria. Why did they do that? How are the Iranian troops you want out of Syria supposed to get out without their ride?
The IDF didn’t even try to firing missiles at the Syrian rebels.
Al Qaeda Surrenders after US withdrawal from Syria.
GCL bombs Syria on Christmas.
So there goes the “Israel is fighting terrorism” narrative.
If you’re wondering why Israel is doing what it is doing in Syria, watch the documentary “Syria: Israel’s Covert War on the Levant”;
Continued, here’s some more (this is only a fraction of what is going on):
One notable example of Zionist terrorism is the S.S. Patria bombing, were Haganah blew up a ship full of Jewish refugees, who made up most of the victims, with the bombing leaving at least 260 people dead.
And there were actually anti-peace protests in Israel.
Do they rightfully represent all Jews?
Of course not!
If not, then why does a single Islamist represent all or a strong majority of Muslims?
The video How Calling People Islamophobic Actually Enables Bigotry explains what I’m going to talk about. Just change the word “Muslim” for ”Jew”, “Islamic” for “Jewish/Judaic”, “Islamophobe/Islamophobic” for “Antisemite/Antisemitc”, “Maajid Nawaz” for “Gilad Atzmon”, & so on & so forth.
Lots of you like to say “tragedy is not a contest”, “oppression is not a contest”, & so on & so forth. But why is it that Ben Shapiro (who identifies as being Orthodox Jewish) & Milo Yiannopoulos (who is part Jewish but makes a big deal out of it), who criticizes identity politics for everyone else practice Jewish-Zionist identity politics? Zionism is identity politics for Jews like feminism is identity politics for Women, the Black Power movement for Black people, etc.
(Though ironically some Zionists actually didn’t care so much for Jews:
Shapiro & Yiannopoulos, if you’re reading this, just so you know, some people actually see right through this. They see your practicing of identity politics, which discredits your anti-identity politics message, & sometimes even push them into their own identity politics (ie White Nationalism).
A case study for this is ramzpaul, though at least he is articulate in his criticisms in his video.
Ditto for Squatting Slav TV, who wasn’t worth getting into for being even less articulate than ramzpaul.
You’re really doing the anti-identity politics crowd a disservice when you oppose identity politics for everyone except for your own (perceived) in-group.
I myself am 1/8 Chinese. Does that mean that I should support China over India? No (I support India over China because they’re friendlier to the outside world, especially the West, & basic human rights is at least a concept, in contrast with China).
Do I support China harassing & bullying other Southeast Asian countries becuase I'm part Chinese? No.
Do I like big Chinese businesses buying up businesses in the outside world, simply because I’m part Chinese? No.
Am I at all happy about the Communist Chinese persecuting Muslims & Christians, considering how I have more in common with the typical non-religious Han Chinese person than a Uighur Muslim? No. And that is considering how I, an atheist, would’ve been persecuted by Christians throughout history (&, to this day, in parts of Africa), & many Muslims would also persecute me.
I have more Vietnamese (3/8) than Chinese (1/8) heritage in me. Do I hate or hold some grudge against Chinese people for what they historically did & are trying to do to Vietnam? No.
Continued, there are other oppressed ethnic & religious groups in the world, & they don’t get their own countries.
I think that identity politics & victim hood are equally wrong & stupid, regardless of who practices it.
Also, just because one hates an ideology does not mean that they hate a person. Most of us agree that smoking, an action, is stupid. That does not mean that we think that smokers, who are people, are stupid.
People who criticize Israeli policies are not hating on Jewish people. Even when that’s the case, the hatred comes from what hated group DOES, not what they are. I am concerned that what the Israeli government is doing & the constant conflation with the State of Israel with the Jewish people will create backlash against the latter, & the overuse of “Jew hater” accusations by partisan Israel supporters will not help this, & is crying wolf.
Jews & Israelis shouldn’t shun criticism of their religion, culture, &/or actions any more than anyone else. How would any group or individual improve themselves if they do not listen to criticism?
Similarly, if a business does not listen to the criticism of its customers, it won’t change its goods &/or services, & will be less successful.
I see a parallel between (usually Zionist) Jews & Israelis attacking non-Zionist Jews such as Gilad Atzmon, Jeff Blankfort, Norman Finkelstein & many others while doing little to nothing to address their arguments & how proponents of Black victimhood attack Black American Conservatives & libertarians like Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elder, Taleeb Starkes, & Candace Owens, calling them names like “Coon”, “Uncle Tom”, “Sellout”, “Race Traitor”, & so on & so forth for challenging the Black victimhood narrative.
Why does the “you’re only criticizing x because I’m Jewish” hold any more social weight than “”you’re only criticizing X because I’m black”? Are we not allowed to entertain the thought that a “Jew card” may exist like a “Black Card” does?
I can’t be the only person in the world to see this parallel.
I do see a kind of racism/faithism from Evangelical Christian Neoconservatives towards Jews, but unlike the left’s paternalistic racism towards Blacks & other minorities, type of attitude I see from typical Evangelical Neoconservatives toward Jews is favoritism, superiority &, especially, exceptionalism. Spend some time looking around conservative leaning sites & social media profiles, using the search terms “God’s Chosen People” & you should see what I mean (if not, ask me & I’ll show you some examples).
A case study for how different standards are held differently by right when it comes to Muslims & Jews is Howard Stern, as talked about in the video ‘Howard Stern to the Woodshed’.
“I want you to imagine what would happen if somebody said on the air, on a major syndicated radio show, if they said on the air, the following; "Kill the Jews! Kill them! Drop a nuclear bomb on them! Give them nuclear warfare! It's the only thing they understand like the bastards that they are! Drop a bomb on their schools! Five-year olds! Kill them all!"
What really happened was that the crowd was bribed with a cake & candy to look like they were celebrating. The crowd was tiny. The entire street wasn't shown. And the footage was only 20 seconds long.
Talk about something that was "out of context".
See the double standards?
How would Howard Stern probably feel if someone went around, collect racist things said by Jewish individuals, & uphold what they say to represent all Jews? I am aware of the fact that he himself is Jewish (not Evangelical Christian).
If you want to stop anti-Jewish hatred, one way to do it is to stop overusing the “antisemite” & “Jew hater” slurs to try & shut down any discussion that does not go your way. That does nothing to change anyone’s mind, & wears out the stigma.
You do not want to give merit to the saying “"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize”.
Instead of saying “Author of video x is wrong & thus an anti-Semite”, make your own response to that video, pulling it apart & showing why it is wrong.
An article explaining my reasons why Jews should NOT be hated as a collective (which is also a punch at the Alt-right & related circles) will be linked later in this article.
Instead of screaming “ANTISEMITE!” & dropping the mike, respond to the content of the people that you disagree with (I will post links to sources that you can do this with at the end), & hold debates.
Dialogue good:
Ryan Dawson debating an American Christian soldier who has visited Israel;
If you can’t get someone to debate, then why not at least create articles, audio &/or videos that actually debunk that your opponents say, such as what Ryan Dawson did with Alex Jones?
Part 3: Miscellaneous.
Ironically, IRAN, itself a hyper-authoritarian hellhole, does a better job at protecting Christians in the middle east through supporting Hezbollah & the secular Syrian government than Israel, not that it’s something to brag about (Iran is doing what it’s doing out of self-interest, not out of the good of its heart, of course).
If you’re an (Evangelical Christian Conservative) Israel supporter who seriously cares about human rights & doesn’t follow John Wick morality (at least John Wick doesn’t harm innocent people), if this doesn’t make you reconsider your beliefs, I do not know what will.
And almost no one other than Evangelical Christian Holy Rollers & the like really care about Biblical prophecies.
Seriously, lay off John Hagee & Pat Robertson. The End Times Predictions are just delusional.
You really cannot complain about Muslims using their religion to justify what they’re doing if you use your religion to justify what you’re doing. No one else wants to be involved in your “Holier than thou” p*****g match with Islamists & religious groups that are not your own.
I can go on, & on, & on for hours on end about what Israel’s government & its partners have done. But, instead of listing their wrongs here, I’ll link to sources to listen to. I’ll lead a horse to water.
I can care less what religion you practice. But please, follow a political philosophy that excludes religion.
Identity politics is wrong & stupid, Jew or Gentile.
I’d still definitely prefer a Jewish libertarian over an atheist Authoritarian (& I say this as an atheist) or Muslim Authoritarian etc, any time.
Oh, & remember the rift between Obama & Netanyahu that I mentioned? Netanyahu hated Obama because he’s actually a racist (according to Ryan Dawson, that is), which is plausible;
This is because, under a one state solution, Palestinians would be offered to emigrate (leave), become a permanent resident or full citizen, & at the same time Israelis can go into the West Bank & even Gaza without fighting with the Palestinians so much, making the issue of settlements a moot point, & there are less divisions in society.
What I have just said was inspired by something Ryan Dawson said in one of his late 2018 podcasts (forgot which one exactly. If any one of you know what I’m talking about, please let me know in the comments).
I do not want a situation like former Rhodesia, now Zimbawe, or South Africa today where people are having private property taken from them, with terrible economic & other consequences. Not to mention how unethical it would be to force people who have already been living in some place for a long time out of said place.
If you’re not going to go ahead & implement a One-state solution, remove the settlements from the West Bank, allow the West Bank to trade with the outside world more, & do the same by ending the blockade of Gaza.
Stop shooting people simply for being close to the border without actually crossing (at least). Stop harassing & persecuting people in Israel proper.
Put the IDF & Border Police on the border where they should be. As mentioned before, even some philosophical Zionists support this.
Part 5. Is the left antisemitic?
I challenge you to share this article with progressives & ask then “do you think this article is antisemitic?”
Many on the left do see Jews as white , & Israelis as white people of the middle east. But criticizing Jewish culture &/or Judaism is off-limits, or they at least shut up when someone screams “antisemite!” at them.
I’m guessing that they actually can’t really make up their minds on the issue.
————————————————————————————————————————
Rules when responding to this answer:
Do not bother calling me or anyone else an “anti-Semite” or otherwise try to derail, sidetrack, or divert the discussion. If you need to say that to me, do it here (my comments sections are always open. I even allow spam comments);
I have never advocated anti-Jewish hatred or blamed all or even a simple majority or Jews for any problem. I am mainly talking about a minority within a minority. I’m done explaining that I do not hate Jews as a collective, & why.
My thoughts & opinions on Jews not what the answer is really about. Israel & powerful & influential Zionists is more what this answer is about.
If you wish to discuss rather or not nepotism explains Jewish over-representation in media, business & government, comment on
If you wish to discuss issues within Judaism & Jewish culture, comment on this article. I do this because there is a lack of discussion, let alone anything well-informed or even truly nuanced on the topic (I don’t want literal Neo-Nazis to dominate the discussion).
I do believe in the saying that “sunlight is the best disinfectant”.
I recommend using the comments section of the linked articles to talk, because, 1, we can be honest with our thoughts & feelings & not worry about Quora moderation getting us, 2, people without a social media account can comment, 3, it’s easier to use archiving to hold everyone accountable. & 4, we stay on-topic.
Also, if you libel anyone’s character or link to defamatory content in the comments section of this answer, I will give you a warning. Doing it again can get your comment deleted.
For example, do not cite this guy when criticizing Ryan Dawson;
You can avoid that by simply directly listening or reading to whoever you have a disagreement with, ie actually taking what your opponent has said & directly respond to what they have said.
You can thank other Israel supporters I’ve dealt with for making these commenting policies, considering how much they use character assassinations (which is pointed out in the two documentaries about the Israeli lobby). I am done with that. I will not allow this comments section to become a character assassination range.
————————————————————————————————————————
The sole reason for me pinning this answer to the top of my profile is the issue of foreign policy & Israel. I would far rather have my “What don't most liberals realize?” pinned to the top of my profile, but ending unnecessary wars & virtually unconditional support for Israel/Zionism has priority over destroying ultra-partisan leftist stupidity.
Ben Shapiro & Milo Yiannopoulos look like they are geniuses because they debate with teenage Social Justice Warriors. Just because you can debate SJW’s does not make you a genius. This is called “low hanging fruit”.
I’ll elaborate as we move into foreign policy.
War supporting Zionists use anti-SJW theme for self promotion
As much as I despise people like Ilhan Omar & Rashida Tlaib for their identity politics, Ben Shapiro & other Zionists are hypocrites as that they oppose identity politics for every group except for their own in-group. Not that I’d blame B.S. or other Zionists for Omar’s & Tlaib’s identity politics, as that identity politics has existed as long as mankind did, & Omar & Tlaib both come from cultures where civic nationalism isn’t really a thing.
And if you are still unconvinced after reading this answer, I have a nice little video for you to wrap this up. Let’s see if you can get through 10 minutes of one of Ry’s rants.
“We need more stuff like this, this "right-wing = liberty" really grinds my gears, as if we can forget everything horrible that was created or supported by right-wing ideologies for thousands of years such as slavery, monarchy, conquest, honor killings, serfdom, suppression of science, persecution of homosexuals just because socialism happened.” -Jack Mcslay.
“I think it was Harry Browne who said that, "Republicans campaign like libertarians, but rule like Democrats." - Golden Retreiver.
Going off-topic, I’m sure that you’ve heard that Sargon of Akkad got kicked from Patreon. Ryan Dawson does have a temporary solution to this, as described in his video “Sargon Kicked, I have a Solution to all this mess”, which involves using payment processors in Asia. His permanent solution is creating his own platform, one of which involves upgrading the servers of his own site, Anti-NeoCon Report, & hosting content there.
.svg){kind=link}
_-_NH_42989_-_cropped.jpg){kind=link}