Aporia has another article out on the same theme, "Good trans, bad trans", about race faker Rachael Dolezal and the inconsistency of the left embracing trans ideology but not transracialism. It's a feature not a bug. Parading absurdities is a projection of power by the left. Next week good/bad could change places. At the heart of this synthetic reality is something more basic.
Many of the scenes of claimed atrocities by Israel are choreographed fakes. And the lefties, journalists, and Western news outlets who broadcast them know they are fake. It's so well know it's a genre, "Pailliwood", staged crisis scenes wildly popular in the Arab world. There are star actors, like social media influencer Saleh Aljafarawi, featured in a Tablet article.
He is " ... a victim of an Israeli air raid, writhing in pain in a Gaza hospital ... a day or two later: He’s a radiologist now, helping a blood-smeared patient into a small MRI machine. ... he has died on camera—not once but twice—and then, like Lazarus, come back to life. He sired a (fake, plastic) child, then lost it in a bombing; found work as a foreign correspondent; picked up a gun and joined the fighting; laughed joyfully when Jews were slaughtered; ... discovered his calling as a singer; led guided tours of his shelled-out hometown."
Here is the link to the article. In it are references to others. To see what this is all about just replace anti-Semitism with the victims of the left as a whole.
You have said many times though that cultures that are high in positive and negative ethnocentrism are the ones that prosper and succeed. You have also said many times that multiculturalism and therefore inevitably by extension multiracialism make societies low in trust. You recently made a video drawing attention to Nihal Arthanayake's comments and how the state of his mental health was predictable and inevitable.
I have good friends I met at University who were of different races, they no longer live in the UK, but I still stay in contact with them. Why is it unethical to say they shouldn't have the right to permanent residence in England when they already have residence in de facto ethno-states of their own?
I can see why you have no wish to live in an ethno state due to you having friends of different races but would you say that a racially diverse state is a strength or a weakness? And if it's a weakness, wouldn't you advocate for ethno states?
In my opinion it is sad that white nationalism/ethnonationalism is such a minority. But each to their own I guess, or not as some liberals would have it.
The most clear case that wealthy while liberals need a foil over racism was the 50 migrants sent to Martha's Vineyard then quickly escorted out. Houses there commonly have yard signs with multiple left wing slogans like Black Live Matter, We stand with out LGBTQ Community Members, We Stand With Immigrants, with Refugees ..., and so on. It's a little fraud the left plays.
They live there because it is mostly white except for the people who clean their houses and mow their lawns. All perfectly reasonable. No one wants to live around third world immigrants and refugees. But it can be costly to admit that. So they launder their "white nationalism" by accusing the right of racism and making a show of being advocates for the unfortunate.
There is a real fear of getting tagged as right wing and the damage that can do to careers and social standing. Those yard signs are totems to ward off bad spirits even though everyone knows it's fake.
It may be his way of pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. When someone says, "I’m not trying to suggest that white liberals are just repressing their latent white nationalism", that is exactly what they are suggesting.
He's a gifted intellectual but he's known on Twitter for milquetoast political takes that never quite hit the mark. He's like a parody of conservative in that regard or maybe even a distillation of the conservative. This case in particular, e.g., may contain kernels of truth but at the end of the day it doesn't amount to anything more than impotent conservative posturing: Does the ultimate message of it actually amount to him being morally superior to everyone else because conservatives aren't the real racists? (A: Yes.) No one cares. It's intellectual fart sniffing. A subjective "checkmate." It offers no real insight, nor does it solve any problems. Did he give himself a congratulatory handjob after writing it? We can't say for certain but it's hard to doubt.
Everyone knows that leftists are hypocrites, it's old news; but their rhetoric is objectively superior to this limpwristed conservative soyslop which is why they keep winning. -- And conservatives wonder why they can never conserve anything! The political position of the true loser. Yesteryear it was whining in a concerned way over immigration, tomorrow they'll be "conserving" transgender rights (just as long as they aren't offending pedophiles!!!). Their activities never amount to anything more than standing with their hands on their hips while wagging their fingers at their future conservation stack.
Well, reading it again it certainly isn't a policy paper. No serious person would entertain the idea of a white ethnostate inside the US. The article is a thought experiment, with several rhetorical gimmicks that betray what this guy Noah Carl is really up to.
He sets up his argument on the, I'm one of you trick: "So, yes, we should be far more concerned about [violent] white nationalism than about radical left-wing movements". Hey guys, I'm down with the cause, just tossing out an idea.
Just as you say, limpwristed soyslop: "(and in case there were any doubt, I’m not a white nationalist myself)". And he doesn't say it just once parenthetically, but 5 times by my count and a few more obliquely: "Again, I’m not saying I support it", "I know many non-white people and have no desire to be separate from them", "Now, there are objections one can make to secession in general", "doesn’t reflect my own view".
A white ethostate isn't a real thing, it's more akin to someone saying they want a Viking funeral at sea. It's a gross exaggeration of the musings of a few race kooks. The left needs their boogiemen. So it's not a serious piece, rather a guy trying to be clever and edgy on a taboo subject.
Particularly dishonest is putting out Orania, SA as an example. Those people have segregated themselves for outright survival.
Fair enough. I'm surprised you actually bothered reading it. Such nonsense should be contained at Tweet-length for the mental health of the readers. Almost makes one wonder if so called (liberal) conservatives are more aligned with the left than they are with the right (yes!).
And won't bother again. Two thirds of the article is hedging and pandering to the left. If it wasn't clear enough he refers to white mass shooters as terrorists, a lefty invention to smear whites as enemies of the state by association when it suits them.
N. Carl is a milquetoast version of former Slate columnist William Saletan, a shapeshifting wordsmith and child-eating Satan worshiper in print. Saletan is the Grandmaster of using slick word skills for evil. He was far too good at it.
--------------------------------
You summed up Carl pretty well. There's not much more to add on the subject. But thinking about William Saletan and seeing the same elements with Carl, this article is as good example as any for anyone interested in the dark art of writing. Here's just one example.
Carl does not say straight out that white mass murders are terrorists, he says, "there have been a number of deadly terrorist attacks by individuals who could reasonably be described as white nationalists", with "terrorist attacks" a hyperlink. Real people who are white (Carl sloppily conflates white nationalists with white supremacists throughout)
It's the first part of a both-sides argument. The other side is, "By the same token, there have been terrorist attacks by opponents of the Republican Party and by supporters of Black Lives Matter", again with "terrorist attacks" a hyperlink. No real people just "opponents" who are never defined, a false equivalency in favor of white people are bad.
Now to the links. The first is to an article titled, "Why white nationalist terrorism is a global threat". Real white people and they are a global threat, removing any doubt who he's talking about.
The second link, the one about opponents of the Republican Part and supporters of Black Lives Matter, is to one of Carl's own articles, "Mass murder and censorship", about the WHITE MASS SHOOTER who gunned down 10 blacks in Buffalo, New York!
Do you think that was a mistake? He just overlooked the fact? Maybe so, I don't think he's that clever, maybe it's just out of habit from years writing in a predominately liberal environment.
He offers a rebuttal in defense of --- the academic papers cited in the shooter's manifesto! This is the crap that passes for intellectual writing if you don't pay close attention. And most people don't. I'd bet not one in a thousand caught that. That is how they get away with it.
Wouldn't it be interesting to have journalists, after writing an online article about the speaker of the article's content, name the nearest intersection closest to the speaker's home address and then detail the demographics of that area? No house numbers or street names, but a close-by general area.
Like Gavin Newsome's general San Fran neighborhood, for instance? And offer Gavin's vague areas where he lived prior, such as in, Olympic Valley, CA 96146, and Fair Oaks, CA 95628 and in Greenbrae, CA 94904?
How much diversity in those neighborhoods -- across several categories -- would you assume to be the case?
Aporia has another article out on the same theme, "Good trans, bad trans", about race faker Rachael Dolezal and the inconsistency of the left embracing trans ideology but not transracialism. It's a feature not a bug. Parading absurdities is a projection of power by the left. Next week good/bad could change places. At the heart of this synthetic reality is something more basic.
Many of the scenes of claimed atrocities by Israel are choreographed fakes. And the lefties, journalists, and Western news outlets who broadcast them know they are fake. It's so well know it's a genre, "Pailliwood", staged crisis scenes wildly popular in the Arab world. There are star actors, like social media influencer Saleh Aljafarawi, featured in a Tablet article.
He is " ... a victim of an Israeli air raid, writhing in pain in a Gaza hospital ... a day or two later: He’s a radiologist now, helping a blood-smeared patient into a small MRI machine. ... he has died on camera—not once but twice—and then, like Lazarus, come back to life. He sired a (fake, plastic) child, then lost it in a bombing; found work as a foreign correspondent; picked up a gun and joined the fighting; laughed joyfully when Jews were slaughtered; ... discovered his calling as a singer; led guided tours of his shelled-out hometown."
Here is the link to the article. In it are references to others. To see what this is all about just replace anti-Semitism with the victims of the left as a whole.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/mr-fafo-real-liel-leibovitz
You have said many times though that cultures that are high in positive and negative ethnocentrism are the ones that prosper and succeed. You have also said many times that multiculturalism and therefore inevitably by extension multiracialism make societies low in trust. You recently made a video drawing attention to Nihal Arthanayake's comments and how the state of his mental health was predictable and inevitable.
I have good friends I met at University who were of different races, they no longer live in the UK, but I still stay in contact with them. Why is it unethical to say they shouldn't have the right to permanent residence in England when they already have residence in de facto ethno-states of their own?
I can see why you have no wish to live in an ethno state due to you having friends of different races but would you say that a racially diverse state is a strength or a weakness? And if it's a weakness, wouldn't you advocate for ethno states?
How can you not be a white-nationalist if you know all the downsides of multiculturalism? ED you are virtue signalling non-racism
In my opinion it is sad that white nationalism/ethnonationalism is such a minority. But each to their own I guess, or not as some liberals would have it.
Voting with their feet, for sure.
The most clear case that wealthy while liberals need a foil over racism was the 50 migrants sent to Martha's Vineyard then quickly escorted out. Houses there commonly have yard signs with multiple left wing slogans like Black Live Matter, We stand with out LGBTQ Community Members, We Stand With Immigrants, with Refugees ..., and so on. It's a little fraud the left plays.
They live there because it is mostly white except for the people who clean their houses and mow their lawns. All perfectly reasonable. No one wants to live around third world immigrants and refugees. But it can be costly to admit that. So they launder their "white nationalism" by accusing the right of racism and making a show of being advocates for the unfortunate.
There is a real fear of getting tagged as right wing and the damage that can do to careers and social standing. Those yard signs are totems to ward off bad spirits even though everyone knows it's fake.
Typical N Carl argument. He always gets his politics wrong.
It may be his way of pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. When someone says, "I’m not trying to suggest that white liberals are just repressing their latent white nationalism", that is exactly what they are suggesting.
He's a gifted intellectual but he's known on Twitter for milquetoast political takes that never quite hit the mark. He's like a parody of conservative in that regard or maybe even a distillation of the conservative. This case in particular, e.g., may contain kernels of truth but at the end of the day it doesn't amount to anything more than impotent conservative posturing: Does the ultimate message of it actually amount to him being morally superior to everyone else because conservatives aren't the real racists? (A: Yes.) No one cares. It's intellectual fart sniffing. A subjective "checkmate." It offers no real insight, nor does it solve any problems. Did he give himself a congratulatory handjob after writing it? We can't say for certain but it's hard to doubt.
Everyone knows that leftists are hypocrites, it's old news; but their rhetoric is objectively superior to this limpwristed conservative soyslop which is why they keep winning. -- And conservatives wonder why they can never conserve anything! The political position of the true loser. Yesteryear it was whining in a concerned way over immigration, tomorrow they'll be "conserving" transgender rights (just as long as they aren't offending pedophiles!!!). Their activities never amount to anything more than standing with their hands on their hips while wagging their fingers at their future conservation stack.
Well, reading it again it certainly isn't a policy paper. No serious person would entertain the idea of a white ethnostate inside the US. The article is a thought experiment, with several rhetorical gimmicks that betray what this guy Noah Carl is really up to.
He sets up his argument on the, I'm one of you trick: "So, yes, we should be far more concerned about [violent] white nationalism than about radical left-wing movements". Hey guys, I'm down with the cause, just tossing out an idea.
Just as you say, limpwristed soyslop: "(and in case there were any doubt, I’m not a white nationalist myself)". And he doesn't say it just once parenthetically, but 5 times by my count and a few more obliquely: "Again, I’m not saying I support it", "I know many non-white people and have no desire to be separate from them", "Now, there are objections one can make to secession in general", "doesn’t reflect my own view".
A white ethostate isn't a real thing, it's more akin to someone saying they want a Viking funeral at sea. It's a gross exaggeration of the musings of a few race kooks. The left needs their boogiemen. So it's not a serious piece, rather a guy trying to be clever and edgy on a taboo subject.
Particularly dishonest is putting out Orania, SA as an example. Those people have segregated themselves for outright survival.
Fair enough. I'm surprised you actually bothered reading it. Such nonsense should be contained at Tweet-length for the mental health of the readers. Almost makes one wonder if so called (liberal) conservatives are more aligned with the left than they are with the right (yes!).
And won't bother again. Two thirds of the article is hedging and pandering to the left. If it wasn't clear enough he refers to white mass shooters as terrorists, a lefty invention to smear whites as enemies of the state by association when it suits them.
N. Carl is a milquetoast version of former Slate columnist William Saletan, a shapeshifting wordsmith and child-eating Satan worshiper in print. Saletan is the Grandmaster of using slick word skills for evil. He was far too good at it.
--------------------------------
You summed up Carl pretty well. There's not much more to add on the subject. But thinking about William Saletan and seeing the same elements with Carl, this article is as good example as any for anyone interested in the dark art of writing. Here's just one example.
Carl does not say straight out that white mass murders are terrorists, he says, "there have been a number of deadly terrorist attacks by individuals who could reasonably be described as white nationalists", with "terrorist attacks" a hyperlink. Real people who are white (Carl sloppily conflates white nationalists with white supremacists throughout)
It's the first part of a both-sides argument. The other side is, "By the same token, there have been terrorist attacks by opponents of the Republican Party and by supporters of Black Lives Matter", again with "terrorist attacks" a hyperlink. No real people just "opponents" who are never defined, a false equivalency in favor of white people are bad.
Now to the links. The first is to an article titled, "Why white nationalist terrorism is a global threat". Real white people and they are a global threat, removing any doubt who he's talking about.
The second link, the one about opponents of the Republican Part and supporters of Black Lives Matter, is to one of Carl's own articles, "Mass murder and censorship", about the WHITE MASS SHOOTER who gunned down 10 blacks in Buffalo, New York!
Do you think that was a mistake? He just overlooked the fact? Maybe so, I don't think he's that clever, maybe it's just out of habit from years writing in a predominately liberal environment.
He offers a rebuttal in defense of --- the academic papers cited in the shooter's manifesto! This is the crap that passes for intellectual writing if you don't pay close attention. And most people don't. I'd bet not one in a thousand caught that. That is how they get away with it.
Wouldn't it be interesting to have journalists, after writing an online article about the speaker of the article's content, name the nearest intersection closest to the speaker's home address and then detail the demographics of that area? No house numbers or street names, but a close-by general area.
Like Gavin Newsome's general San Fran neighborhood, for instance? And offer Gavin's vague areas where he lived prior, such as in, Olympic Valley, CA 96146, and Fair Oaks, CA 95628 and in Greenbrae, CA 94904?
How much diversity in those neighborhoods -- across several categories -- would you assume to be the case?
My working theory is that nature doesn't make mistakes. If that is the case, in evolutionary terms, what purpose do liberals serve?
My own thoughts would be that perhaps they concentrate their degenerate genes in a minority group and minimise the impact on the non-liberal majority.